The retort seems to completely overlook the fact that the original essay was highlighting the positive aspects of objectifying women based on their intelligence. Sure, objectifying women as a practice is wrong, but that isn't what Nikhil's essay was advocating. Nikhil was pointing out how impressive and awe-inspiring it can be when two minds collide and connect in a meaningful way over an intellectual subject. Far from disregarding a woman's autonomy or reducing her to an object, Nikhil made clear that he appreciated her skills, talents and achievements for what they were - impressive.
To be sure, the essay does not argue that objectifying women based on their intelligence is acceptable. Simply that in this instance, it provided a unique and valuable experience. In the essay, Nikhil made it clear that he recognized his five to her seventeen on the intelligence scale, a level of self-awareness that flies in the face of the retort's claims that he felt entitled to objectify her because he deemed her to be in his intellectual "league".
Objectification of women should not be condoned in any circumstance, however, this does not mean that we should disregard or devalue those moments where two people can engage in an intellectual exchange. Such moments should be celebrated and treasured. The essay highlights how not only was Nikhil deeply impressed by the woman's intellect, he was also eager to learn from her and humbly accepted her superior knowledge in the exchange - no entitlement involved. UrRong to suggest otherwise!
It is true that everyone deserves to be seen and treated as an individual, however, that does not mean we cannot appreciate and admire each other for our talents and skills - especially in cases such as this where one's admiration for another is so clearly genuine. It's a lesson we could all do well to remember - appreciate each other for what we bring to the table!