Does a sexual relationship infer a contract or commitment? I don' believe Dagny saw it that way. A contract would require a commitment by both parties.

I think that the word deserve is one of the most dangerous words in our vocabulary. .

Does anyone really deserve anyone? Is deserving someone an implication of ownership? Can a person love more than one person? Just something to think about.

I don't recall any of these men making a contract with Dagny. Did they? Why is she expected to commit when the men are not committed? You need to look at the relationships for what they are and not your biased perception of the situation.

I will turn over Rearden for the Railroad Queen

Quite simply, yes, Dagny made the right choice. Galt was HER ideal man. One way to look at him is a combination of Francisco and Hank. Who would I have chosen? They are fictional characters in a novel disconnected from my life. There is no choice for me to make.

I responded to this critique of the novel in the thread you started about it.

I agree completely. She wasn't a tramp at all. We've all moved on from previous relationships- even ones that were very passionate at the time. People change and that's ok. I loved Dagny. I thought she made the right decisions at the right times.

I think she made the right choice in the end. I don't think she "settled" for Galt. (I'm sure you didn't mean it that way.) I don't know how she could go wrong. She was choosing from the top three! Personally, I really liked Rearden. I had a tough time getting over that, but she made the right choice for her.

Now, if I could just find out where Rearden is hiding. Lol.

Dagny was fine with submitting herself to their wills. She was almost proud that she was able to satisfy Rearden's urges. Rearden, on the other hand, absolutely despised that side of himself.

The intimacy that he enjoyed with her was working together not the traditional "intimacy"

I do remember this scene and remember losing a great deal of respect for Rearden. This is a man who risked his marriage in being with Dagny, spent night and day flying a plane over the trees trying to find her, had built strong intimate connections with her as she had with him. I would not have been so willing to just be o.k. with things simply by knowing she had moved on.

That is true, in her reflections on the affairs, she sees herself as the trophy to the MOST powerful men in the world. Her significant other is her work. Her company. She believed that those men deserved to be treated like Kings, so she submitted herself to their wills. To her it was no adultery. I would dare to take a challenge from anyone who doesn't believe that Dagny's love was her work AND that Rearden hated himself for having to submit to sexual urges.

it is one thing to turn your back on an already broken contract; quite another to turn your back on a good contract as Dagny consistently does with the good men in her life. She is not very consistent in my opinion in her philosophy.

However, I'll never forget Rearden's reaction after he professes his love to her and at the same time knows she has moved on from him. He is fine with it & respects her decision. It even sounded like he moved on, simply by knowing she had.

I chose Dagny because I am a man. That was the humor of the first part of the comment. I agree with you and would never encourage an adulterous relationship. Perhaps she sees relationships as a business agreement. Everything is nice at the beginning, but then the Ms Rearden's of the world fail to live up to the contract.

For someone who puts such high value on commitment and integrity in work ethic, contracts, business agreements, and ambition, Ayn Rand is very hypocritical when it comes commitment to relationships. What I mean to say is that Rand seems to advise zero commitment in relationships as long as you want something better. Yes: the point is that she goes for what she wants, but that is the problem because once she gets what she wants ( to say nothing of how men are objectified in her behavior) she is not satisfied, and she seems to have a clear conscience in so easily betraying the men in her life that she apparently loves, which is the real tragedy.

You may have chosen Dagny, but, my friend, don't be so sure that she would have chosen you, or even stayed committed to you.

That was exactly the message! Through the course of the book she seemed to be head over heels for each of these three men, all at different points in her life. As she grew and changed with the environment so did the passion she felt for each of these men.

I would have chosen Dagny. She is not a tramp. She is a person who goes for what she wants. Isn't that the message?

Agreed.

quite frankly I found Dagny to be a bit of a tramp in the way she so easily jumped from one man to the next. This was a very low point for me in reading the book. I don't think she deserves any of them.