I guess I didn't make myself clear. I'm not concealing a fundamental concern for my neighbor's well being. I have it, and I think Stirner does too, despite his disingenuous denial here. Hence my comment that he writes, at least in part, out of love for some men.

Stirner, The Ego and It's Own:

I love men, too, not merely individuals, but every one. But I love them with the consciousness of my egoism; I love them because love makes me happy, I love because loving is natural to me, it pleases me. I know no 'commandment of love'. I have a fellow-feeling with every feeling being, and their torment torments, their refreshment refreshes me too

It's the commandment of love he rejects, not his own love.

Loving other men is no more unselfish than loving your car. You like it shiny and running well, maybe even after you sell it to someone else.

It is perfectly selfish to love what you love, and hate what you hate. To care about what you care about. Why should I limit my concerns to what lies in a 1 inch bubble around myself? It's not what concerns you that makes you an egoist, it's whether you bow to an ideological compulsion to serve an alien concern over your own.

My own take on Stirner's Egoism is that it is best distinguished as the antidote to various forms of Moral Objectivism, not Altruism.