One of the biggest criticisms of Objectivism is that it leaves no room for charity. If everyone is committed to rational self-interest, i.e. selfishness, then surely there's no room for compassion for others. Objectivists are all greedy money mongers who don't care about others. It's all me me me.
This is a skewed perception of the philosophy. Yes, Objectivism is based on selfishness and does not permit sacrificing oneself to others. But that doesn't mean that helping another person can't fit into rational self-interest. Charity is not considered a necessary part of one's life in Objectivism, because it is not a major virtue. However, the philosophy doesn't condemn charity in worthy cases. Objectivism would support helping a man rebuild his house if it burned down through no fault of his own. It would not condone charity if the man was an arsonist who destroyed his own home. Bad things happen in life, and sometime they happen to good people. Because Objectivists value human life, it would be perfectly appropriate to help those good people.
For example, recently Jennifer Iannolo of Food Philosophy had her apartment broke into. Her laptop was stolen. Jenn is a good person. She's built a business from the ground up and spends everyday of her life pursuing her values and sharing her passions. And through no fault of her own she was robbed. How do Objectivists react? They didn't snub her. They didn't say, "Tough shit," and move on. Instead, Shea Levy set up a Paypal donation fund to buy Jenn a new laptop. And through the magic of Twitter, the word spread and the fund grew. Last time I checked, the fund was over $245. He did it because he values Jenn and the work she's doing. It's why other people donated money. None of it was at odds with Objectivism because seeing Jenn recover what was stolen from her, making her feel better, and helping her continue her work is a value for each person who donated. And pursuing one's values is selfishness.
Remember this whenever someone says Objectivists are unfeeling jerks.