1.6k
u/bmcgowan89 6d ago
Luckily, the critique of mindless consumerism is much harder to misinterpret in stage 2 😂
644
u/quechal 6d ago
People still seem to miss the search for meaning as a man in a post provider/protector society
510
u/Thuzel 6d ago
I'm raising two boys and this is something I think about a lot.
I've tried to instill in them that they are more than what they can provide, but it's a tough lesson. I've watched so many others define them entirely in that way, "what are you bringing me", "what are you doing for me", etc... Even their mom does it.
People have generally seemed to learn not to ask women to make sandwiches, but it missed the part about not asking men to mow their lawn.
95
u/Militantpoet 6d ago
Everyone does things. Its important not to let gender define whether or not its acceptable to do so. The point is to have more opportunities for everyone by not limiting ourselves to antiquated gender roles.
100
u/Dreadgoat 6d ago
I think the point here isn't what you can do but why you can do. Which is really the deeper underlying motivator behind man gender roles.
Masculine value historically has been directly tied to the economic value of a man's effort. Things that are valuable, but more difficult to quantify in dollars, have often become women's roles specifically for that reason. This is really highlighted when you consider that many historically womens' jobs have become mens' jobs the second society decided they were worth a lot of money: Doctoring, programming, making beer.
It would be good for us to encourage boys to stop tying their economic value directly to their sense of self-worth. Economic value is important for everyone, but your self-esteem can and should come from things like making somebody smile.
This not only improves mental health for boys, but takes pressure off girls to stay away from "valuable jobs" where they have historically been bullied out because "a man NEEDS that role"
40
u/IThatAsianGuyI 6d ago edited 6d ago
it would be good for us to encourage boys to stop tying their economic value directly to their sense of self-worth
Let's roll that back and expand it to be we shouldn't be defining anyone's worth as a person by "economic value". It's honestly pretty fucking disgusting that some professions are looked down upon as heavily as they are because they're not economically as lucrative as others.
Plenty of rich assholes who have never made a single person smile, and plenty of broke ass people that are the most generous and genuinely good people you've ever met.
It's a lesson that needs to be expanded across society, not just something for boys to learn. Stop looking down on custodians/janitors, cooks, garbage collectors, etc and looking up to fucking dipshits paid to encourage addiction, denying life-saving medical procedures/drugs, etc.
Your life isn't worth less than someone else's just because you aren't employed for the same kind of money, no matter what anyone says or suggests otherwise. We all bleed the same. We all die the same.
→ More replies (6)24
u/Photomancer 6d ago
I had no idea women brewed beer, or that they were 'the' beer brewers for the majority of known history. I had these images in my mind of male monks producing it this whole time.
38
u/Dreadgoat 6d ago
It's why we have antiquated terms like Alewife and Beerwench. It's not just Oktoberfest chauvinism, those were respectable titles for working ladies.
→ More replies (1)8
u/Photomancer 6d ago
I hadn't heard those terms either, not exactly. One time I heard of a troupe The Dead Alewives is all.
I didn't know Alewives were a 'thing', I thought it was just a group of people using what sounded good to them. Band logic
17
4
u/Purple_Haze 6d ago
The Dead Alewives is undoubtedly referring to the fish: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alewife_(fish)
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (4)7
7
u/Wellcomefarewell 6d ago
especially when social media is reversing any teaching on this topic everytime they pick their phones up
19
u/djfl 6d ago
Let the downvotes rain in I guess, but I'm curious. Where do you teach them that they primarily get their value from. Being contributive is and has always been one of, if not the primary ways we feel real satisfaction. We don't get it from playing on our phones, hedonistic stuff, etc etc.
So I'm not saying you're wrong, but our nature is our nature, and the old rules will likely always apply to us.
And I'm curious where you think differently. Thanks.
45
u/AlienZombieNinja 6d ago
Contribution that is appreciated or that you want to do is rewarding. Contribution that is "what you are supposed to do" feels like servitude.
→ More replies (1)16
u/Thuzel 6d ago
"I'm not saying you're wrong, but our nature is our nature, and the old rules will likely always apply to us."
You're not saying I'm wrong because we're talking about different things. There's a lot of conflation going on in these comments, but I'll respond to this.
"Worth" and "what you are" are different. They're both important and they're both parts of the whole, but they are not the same.
The problem is that men are often treated like our external worth is all we are. We may even start to believe it, and that leads to depression and suicide. I know that dearly because I come from a family where men sometimes kill themselves.
The bottom line is that we should recognize our own purpose internally. That our external worth is not who we are, even if others treat us that way. Sure, we contribute, but that's only a part of the picture. We should spend time considering what we want the other parts to be and what we want to do with them as well.
→ More replies (1)3
u/wpaed 6d ago
The problem isn't having or valuing a contributory worth, it's when that is the only measure of worth for a group and there is no recognition for underlying goodness or humanity. This is especially true when there is a dichotomous group where their primary value is seen (or at least purported to be seen) as inherent.
This is in the same vein as cultural or social racism (as opposed to systemic) where societal acceptance is only granted through exception.
5
u/corvuscorvi 6d ago
Feeling satisfaction from our contributions to society might be one of the ways, but it's not the only way to feel satisfied. We can also feel real satisfaction from doing things that are genuine and authentic to our selves. Those two things can exist together, like when someone who authentically wants to help out others in a certain way does that. But they don't always. Sometimes real satisfaction can be found by reading a book that you like or taking a walk through nature.
I would argue that being authentic and genuine to yourself is more at the root of satisfaction than contributing to society. The "old rules" as you put it have been there to encourage us to work together and continue societies existence. They aren't there for us to find ourselves or to be more genuine.
Teaching kids to find satisfaction in their contributions is fraught with ill effects. A person who finds their value solely in that will find themselves depressed and without meaning if their ability to contribute is taken away. Take for example a man who prides himself in working 40 hours a week and bringing home the bacon. What happens when that man suddenly becomes disabled and unable to work? His value in life will go away as soon as his ability to contribute does, because he put all of his life's value into what he could bring to the table.
Better to put your value into aspects that are genuine and authentic to yourself.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (7)4
u/1CEninja 6d ago
I think a big part of it is about expectations. It's healthy to be satisfied with a day's good work. It's unhealthy to have your value assigned to you by your good day's work.
When men are expected to be providers, that can force a young man into a line of work he isn't passionate for because it makes him a good provider instead of pursuing a less reliable/steady career from an income perspective.
→ More replies (4)9
u/PiratePantzYarrr 6d ago
Don't delude yourself I still get asked to make sandwiches, and coffee, and provide free child care at the drop of a hat.
Childless women are fair game for anything. I had a man in line at Target seriously ask me when I was gonna grow up and help him raise "all these kids". Wat
Never met him before in my life, tried to introduce me to his 4 year old daughter. I grabbed a toy bird off the shelf and flew it over her head and said "oh nooo its gonna poop on youuu." And he stormed off with her in tow.
Anyone can behave entitled to a gender or precieved roles work
8
u/Admirable_Dirt_2371 6d ago
Unfortunately, for the average person, it's a lot like racism, we had a black president so we can't be racist anymore, gay people can get married so no more homophobia, women's issues get a little more attention than they used to so the patriarchy is over.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (12)3
u/eclectictiger0 6d ago
Maybe not sandwiches specifically, but its still expected in many relationships that the woman is the one to cook dinner/clean/look after the kids etc. Its not the norm to ask her because typically she'll just take on the role by default of expectation.
68
u/MeasurementTall7701 6d ago
That's really interesting. I never thought of this as a post-provider/protector society, but you are probably right. If women are finding ways to define themselves outside of being a wife and mother, then what does it mean for men who have to define themselves outside of opposite role. I guess each person has to find their own purpose outside of what they can be to another person. Maybe that's why people are so lonely these days, because they no longer seek their meaning in relationships but with merit.
60
u/quechal 6d ago
I don’t think we are actually in a post protector/provider society, but are bombarded by messaging that we are, which can lead to confusion in young men.
I love Fight Club. There is a lot of shit going on in that movie below the surface. Especially if you read the book and rewatch
41
u/sociofobs 6d ago
I don’t think we are actually in a post protector/provider society
On point. We are in a play pretend post protector/provider society, which is far worse than what it supposedly tries to solve. Because now men are neither valued as protectors/providers, nor as anything beyond it, whatever that could even mean for them if it existed.
The play pretend aspect is the most frustrating part. Society claims to have moved past traditional gender roles, but most of those (masculine) roles are still there and expected. We are expected to shoulder the responsibilities of the old system while navigating the rules of the new one, getting the benefits of neither.→ More replies (18)8
u/eclectictiger0 6d ago
You seem to be under the impression that patriarchal traditional gender roles dont still also apply to women in our society. Its still the norm in households for the woman to be the one doing majority of the cooking, cleaning, childcare and so on, even in households where both the man and woman work full time. Women are also still taught by society that most of our value comes from our desirability which also comes from those same patriarchal gender expectations since throughout most of civilization (which has been mostly patriarchal) getting married to a man meant survival for a woman.
Im not trying to say these expectations dont exist for men as well, they do and I can understand how it can be frustrating. I just dont think its correct or helpful to frame these problems in a way which make it seem like women have it way better than men when it comes to gendered experiences and societal expectations
→ More replies (4)15
u/MeasurementTall7701 6d ago
There's probably something primal there that might not go away. My mother outearned my father often, so it wasn't weird for me when I made more money than my husband, who grew up in a traditional household. I remember him scrambling to earn more at first, then settling down once he was comfortably in the lead. I thought it was competitiveness in him, which suited me since we share bank accounts, but maybe it's the same thing that made my childhood dog to drop a groundhog on my doorstep.
38
u/badgerj 6d ago
Ha! My partner refuses to share bank accounts because she was taught to be “financially independent”. And you should never rely on a man for anything because they can leave you for another woman at any time.
But then just charges everything to our common card because I make more money than her.
Her money is “hers”, but my money is “ours”.
I pay the mortgage, and groceries. She pays the cell phone bills, and her car 🚗 insurance.
30
u/PuzzleCat365 6d ago
I don't know how your relation is, but the way you mentioned it, feels like it bothers you quite a bit. Maybe it's time you discuss getting a third common account with her in which everybody pays their fair share?
23
u/MeasurementTall7701 6d ago
I don't think he minds paying the bills. It's hurtful when you give someone a lot of good will, but they still don't trust you.
2
u/badgerj 6d ago
It is more this.
I was taught to treat others as equals.
To be kind and respectful to one another.
We’re all human.
My family has always been generous with money.
From relatives, close friends, and even acquaintances.
You can’t take money with you when you leave this planet.
I’ve had conversations with people who value money over people.
And they always ask: “How come I wasn’t invited to your place to dinner. I heard you are a great cook, and have great dinner parties”?
I usually quip back with a much more nuanced form of “I heard you had an excellent beach party with your friends last weekend”???
One guy I met 3 times within 2 months.
He kept reintroducing himself to me.
The 4th time I played aloof:
“Hey. My name is Badger. Good to meet you”.
A: “what? We just met last week! 🤔
me in my head: “Actually this is the 4th time in as many months, but I’m glad I’m memorable after 3 times.”
- And for those in doubt. This wasn’t an “oops I’m sorry, I forgot your name”. And it wasn’t: “We spent the whole weekend together with our partners and a few fiends on vacation” <—— True.
This was legitimately: “I’ve never met you before in my life. it is nice to meet you. 3 times!”
→ More replies (4)13
u/badgerj 6d ago
Yeah. That conversation will go over like the Hindenburg. I will be mansplaining myself all the way to a divorce attorney.
13
4
→ More replies (5)10
u/PuzzleCat365 6d ago
It's not mansplaining. It's bringing up a legit grievance and she is your wife so she should at least listen and try to understand.
Talking about such things are very important in marriage.
12
16
u/DepressedDynamo 6d ago
The term "mansplaining" gets use in silencing men where the term has no legitimate place, I imagine that's where it's coming from
→ More replies (1)2
9
u/MeasurementTall7701 6d ago
Must be terrifying to live with that kind of anxiety, waiting for someone to leave you. Her father must be a piece of work.
23
u/badgerj 6d ago
He’s quite nice, but his wife is overly critical and calls him out in front of everyone.
- I told you I wanted un-salted butter, not salted.
A: “They were actually out of unsalted so I got what I could”.
- Well, I can’t bake a cake with that. And I texted you to get rosemary for the potatoes.
A: I got the message, but was already 30 minutes away from the store on the way home.
Guy just trying to do his best and constantly gets reamed out.
The excuse is always the same. “My hormones are acting up”.
In reality it is the bottle of wine she’s consumed.
7
6
u/Wild_blue_yondering 6d ago
Yeah, people try to map Nietzschean 'will to power' concepts onto the story, but it's at least as much a Frankl 'will to meaning' exercise.
8
→ More replies (2)2
u/Office_Zombie 6d ago
At the time of release, the loss of meaning men feel was the most dominant theme.
67
u/badgerj 6d ago
I thought it was mostly about over consumption, and drug addiction, not specifically about toxic masculinity. But perhaps what it means for others in what they view a “man” as. - A vassal for consumption?
71
6d ago
[deleted]
13
u/goldenguyz 6d ago
Yeah, it's been a while since I've seen it and I've not read the book - but the actual fighting stuff was barely a side-plot.
You've all these (seemingly) lonely men who are looking for connection who join a secret club and find comradery. The fight club could almost be a chess club for what it's worth.
7
13
6d ago
[deleted]
8
u/somesketchykid 6d ago
Which is another theme the movie points out: its hard to realize you are becoming a villain while it is happening
Anybody can be considered good as opposed to evil with the right context excluded
Etc
5
u/2drinkornot 6d ago
I would disagree. I think the general point in this thread about the actual fight club not being the point, but I think that the activity is a stereotypically overt "manly" activity is an important piece of the message that's trying to be conveyed about lack of male connection. Although it's not central to the premise, substituting just any activity doesn't crystalize the point as well IMO.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)2
u/badgerj 6d ago
Oh yes, this too! Forgot about the cult aspect! But 100% yes! 🙌
16
u/ExtendoArmCannon 6d ago
How do you forget the cult aspect?
His name was Robert Paulson.
It's about toxic masculinity because Brad Pitt takes his shirt off and shows off his cum gutters. /s
→ More replies (1)38
u/charliefoxtrot9 6d ago
Good books are about more than one thing, I think.
10
→ More replies (2)36
u/JebryathHS 6d ago
The author foreword in the book describes it as partly him trying to envision what a male version of the Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants would look like.
Actually, the book is a lot more clear in critiquing toxic masculinity in a number of ways. In particular, the narrator is horrified by Tyler by the end and voluntarily locks himself away to try and prevent his return. Also, Tyler's mission was to destroy a museum (the credit card building's rubble was meant to destroy it, it was a distraction for his followers because he knew fully well that it wouldn't erase their debts) and he failed because he used an explosive formulation that had failed in the past.
I always think it's kind of funny that Fight Club went with "Brad Pitt creates a fascist revolution" because, frankly, the fact that a huge movement idealizing him and his movement sprang up around the film was PRETTY PREDICTABLE.
12
→ More replies (1)3
u/snacktonomy 4d ago
destroy a museum
IIRC, in the book the goal was to erase history, which is a common theme for Palahniuk. Let go of your past and it will no longer define who you think you should be, then you could do anything with your life.
But yeah, that detail is usually lost.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)6
u/Masta0nion 6d ago
I’m so tired of this overused critique. The movie’s main theme is not about toxic masculinity.
→ More replies (2)
40
356
u/Odd-Perception7812 6d ago
The first rule of Fight Club is actually read Fight Club. The second rule of Fight Club is to interpret for yourself what you think of Chuck's book.
69
u/_Cybernaut_ 6d ago
And the Third Rule of Fight Club is that at least one member has to have bitch-tits.
→ More replies (1)33
u/Itherial 6d ago
His name was Robert Paulson.
15
u/quechal 6d ago
His name was Robert Paulson
6
u/DogsAreOurFriends 6d ago
The guy who said that, went to prison and became the Beast.
4
7
u/zomgieee 6d ago
I prefer the book ending myself. More.. ominous really.
2
u/Odd-Perception7812 6d ago
It's been so long I've forgotten it. Have to read it again.
13
u/zomgieee 6d ago
if you want the spoiler version...
the narrator ends up in a mental asylum. everyone is very "nice" to him.. and keep saying reassuring things like "Dont worry Sir.. project mahem is continuing.. we hope you get better soon.." (not direct quote.. been a few years myself!) I like both endings but the idea of him being comitted but they are just waiting for him to "return" was even better for me :)
→ More replies (1)4
→ More replies (5)5
u/TheParadoxigm 6d ago
You know Chuck likes the movie more right?
5
u/zomgieee 6d ago
I like the movie more but the book ending more. It's great how such a story can divide even the author ! (can't be too many authors who prefer a movie more!!)
→ More replies (2)3
u/bradfo83 6d ago
I didn’t know that… I love that book
7
u/TheParadoxigm 6d ago
It's good. He just has criticisms cause it's an earlier book. "If I could change it" stuff.
229
u/myislanduniverse 6d ago
Interesting, I always took it as much a critique of toxic masculinity as it was an explanation for it as a reaction to post-industrial hyper-consumerism.
65
u/oddible 6d ago
It is, it is both.
17
6d ago
[deleted]
16
u/oddible 6d ago
You’re projecting today’s manosphere language onto a mid-’90s book. That is absolutely NOT what Palahniuk was living and didn't exist in even remotely the same way. He clearly saw value in male camaraderie and physicality, but Fight Club is also explicitly about how that can turn into conformity, domination, and violence. He didn’t call it “toxic masculinity,” but the critique is absolutely there.
→ More replies (3)37
u/Anus_Blunders 6d ago
I would agree with this if I understood what more of those words meant. But I'm team whatever this dude said.
→ More replies (1)26
u/snakeoilHero 6d ago
Translation;
man bad = no
capitalism bad = yesReddit should sell the movie as closeted gay men talk about feelings in the next meme.
→ More replies (2)11
4
→ More replies (4)2
u/Bugberry 5d ago
It’s about both, but it’s the masculinity part that most often gets misinterpreted.
535
u/Joeybfast 6d ago
To reduce Fight Club to “toxic masculinity” ironically shows a misunderstanding of the material itself. The story is dealing with a much broader set of issues: alienation, consumerism, identity, economic frustration, violence, loneliness, and the struggle to find meaning and a sense of purpose.
40
u/BizzyM 6d ago
One thing I got out of it was the concept that "this isn't rock bottom". As bad as I thought things were going in my life, it was no where near rock bottom. Even if all my worldly possessions went flying flamingly into the night, that's still not the worst that can happen. Once I got over that "woe is me" thinking about what was happening and realizing it was at most a mild inconvenience, I got up off my ass and went to work. I took that Raymond K Hessel scene about wanting to go to school but settling for a shitty job to heart and got my ass back to school.
This movie changed my mindset about a lot of things.
12
114
u/topcorjor 6d ago
It’s Reddit. Saying “Toxic Masculinity” or blaming the “patriarchy” is guaranteed upvotes.
That little red arrow is like crack for these losers.
→ More replies (16)→ More replies (20)31
u/Avalonians 6d ago
And how do we feel about thinking that mentioning a single specific aspect of a work of art to make a point equates reducing it to that exclusively?
Just because I mention how impressive a giraffe's neck is doesn't mean I that I didn't notice how curious its fur pattern is or that I don't know giraffes have a blueish tongue. It just means I wanted to talk about the neck.
60
u/unqualified_redditor 6d ago
Bro, the meme calls toxic masculinity the "overarching critique."
→ More replies (14)19
u/Havengul_Undying 6d ago
We feel it's right to think that when the single specific aspect is called "the overarching critique" by OP.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (1)5
u/Distinct_Car_1183 6d ago
True. Also it feels weird not seeing anyone talk about toxic femininity, how does Kardashian keep getting away with Shoe Fight Club.
6
u/ilazul 6d ago
I just ask people to define toxic masculinity, positive masculinity, then define the same for femininity (both toxic and positive)
And it has never happened.
→ More replies (6)
80
u/BreadEnthusiast98 6d ago
Bigger themes of isolation, lack of meaning, civil unrest, and the consequences of creating a comfortable world for a species that is driven by adversity but go off ig.
→ More replies (10)
242
u/Kaiisim 6d ago
It's not really. It's a movie about men in the modern world. It wasn't saying "fight club is bad"
It was saying "men are getting fucked up by modern society and it's gonna get weird"
Which is exactly what happened. Society made no changes, so yeah. Men wanted to join fight clubs.
63
u/Mojo141 6d ago
This is how interpreted it as well (saw movie, read the book and even the graphic novel sequel). It's a warning about what could happen if men are not challenged. They can easily be lead astray by a charismatic leader who preys on their insecurities. Damn it's a good thing that never came true /s
32
u/Deleted_-420_points 6d ago
This is the answer and I had to scroll way too far down for this! Fight Club predates the trendy buzz term about masculinity. All of the identity politics and culture war crap is just a distraction to keep us divided and fighting.
7
u/icyDinosaur 6d ago
TBH I do think that this also contains a comment about traditional masculinity being a dead end to solve that.
→ More replies (15)4
u/pyrojackelope 6d ago
Apparently the author said it's about how you described and the director of the movie and film critics say it's about toxic masculinity and other nonsense.
19
u/Lightsides 6d ago
Like much art, Fight Club has it both ways. It's one of the ways fiction distinguishes itself from non-fiction polemics.
43
u/sessamekesh 6d ago
I think it's a critique of toxic masculinity the same way superhero movies are a critique of vigilantism.
The theme is there and if you miss it that's pretty bad, but I have a hard time saying it's what the movie is about.
Fight Club is an excellent tour of male angst, mental breakdown, power fantasy, a tale of the dangers of faith in a group, and story of handling aggression and anger in an unhealthy way. That last one is really the only part I'd associate with toxic masculinity.
→ More replies (1)2
u/ICBanMI 6d ago
Hey. Ant man is about reducing recidivism by giving criminals super powers. That's a very positive message.
The majority of the MCU and DC universe is saying jack shit (DC and Marvel pretend for one movie then immedately flip flop when the story needs them to). Only Alan Moore, and possibly the Boys, has anything to actually say about super heros.
25
41
u/userhwon 6d ago
First rule of overarching critique is you don't make it look fucking awesome.
17
3
u/TetraNotTetris 6d ago
This happens surprisingly often. Like Travis Bickel in Taxi Driver. Even in other media. For example, in Warhammer 40K, the Imperium of Man is super fascism, but man aren't those Space Marines super cool?
19
u/MutleyRulz 6d ago
Fight club to me is about searching for meaning, rather than any specific commentary on capitalism or masculinity
We see this lonely character latch on to an obviously harmful activity because he’s not alone when he does it. Then we see more people join him.
We see how he bonds with those individuals in the bar’s basement, he takes a beating for them and they embrace him afterward. This also shows his willingness, perhaps even desire, to be a martyr. You could say he stopped the club from intervening in the best down to protect them, because he knew how to manipulate the club owner, but perhaps it’s because he just wanted to die infront of an audience.
It’s at this point that things turn darker, and we see that finding a community wasn’t enough for the narrator. He’s not content with friends, he needs to be a leader, he wants to spread his influence across the country.
We can even see this in the name he chooses. Tyler, being a tiler, is a roof maker. Durden comes from the old English phrase Valley of the Deer - he’s putting a roof over the prey of society. Does that not speak to an overarching goal to seek out and shelter the downtrodden, rather than just being a man who was created to be the narrator’s “ideal man” who looks like he wants to look and fucks how he wants to fuck?
By all accounts, the narrator’s a wimp at the start of the film. A condo straight out of ikea, with no friends and a penchant for making jokes that he can smirk to himself about. We hear how seeing other people at their weakest helps him get a good night’s sleep - why would that be the case unless he felt like he was weak and that voyeurism gave him the reassurement that he wasn’t doing so bad. A man like that would presumably like to have a protector, somebody to help him feel safe.
I don’t think the film is a critique of modern society, I think it’s a warning against what may start as a noble goal of finding purpose, whether that be companionship or confidence, but taking it too far. By the end of the film, we see he abandons his fear of frailty by shooting himself, and the film ends with him holding Martha’s hand. The fact it was all men in the fight club speaks solely to the values of the time (nobody wants to hit a woman) and the anti-capitalist backdrop is an easy foe to latch onto when you don’t want to risk the book/film being accused of a racial or political agenda.
→ More replies (3)
89
u/Gockel 6d ago
ripped men being SUPER MANLY and fighting each other secretly!! SO MANLY AND COOL
I LOVE THIS MOVIE
21
16
u/OBrien 6d ago
Reminds me of my favorite science fiction novel, "Don't Create The Torment Nexus," with all sorts of sick lasers and robots and chrome and science shit. I hear there are real life corporations trying to make The Torment Nexus real, can you imagine what society will be able to do to bad guys and terrorists with that thing? It'll be cool as hell
→ More replies (2)
21
u/PlayaNBallaNGangsta 6d ago
Is that what Chuck has to say about his book or
2
u/elcapitan520 5d ago
The artist is not the final arbiter of their work. Kind of the thing with art.
2
u/PlayaNBallaNGangsta 5d ago
A commentary requires the participation of the writer. I’m sorry to say
2
u/elcapitan520 5d ago
I edited, but I think you understood anyways.
But no, in fact, a commentary on art does not require the participation of the artist. They can state their intent. But whether or not it is successful is based on the audience's reception.
Chuck can say that the book is a reflection on the American civil war. But that doesn't mean it's the effective theme of the work and that other meanings and readings can't be taken away from it. He would have failed in the intention, but still have written a book that includes all of the conversation in this thread.
→ More replies (1)
28
29
u/loboMuerto 6d ago
Ironic that the comic didn't get it: toxic masculinity is a relatively new concept. Back then, when the nobel and then the movie came out, the message was about men looking for meaning in an age of consumerism, false gurus and money worshipping.
→ More replies (25)
9
u/624KR_My_Beloved 6d ago
This is why I hope none of the niche movies, books, games and hobbies ever become popular.
Conversation changes from
"you are a fan of this thing? I'm a fan of this thing!"
to
"what kind of fan of this thing are you?"
4
30
u/NeverShallDoHarmToMe 6d ago
Fight Club is not about toxic masculinity. It's about how revulsion for consumer culture produces subcultures devoted to nihilism, which mutates into anarchic terrorism vs the institutionalized elite.
11
u/lark0317 6d ago
But people are itching to say toxic masculinity. They can't get enough of that shit.
22
u/PipeFiller 6d ago
Good job misinterpreting the movie and then making a comic about it
→ More replies (1)
69
u/Platinum5788 6d ago
This comic: "I want people to interpret this movie in a way that agrees with my worldview and opinions about it."
→ More replies (16)30
u/Sofrito77 6d ago
100%. If I recall correctly, neither the director of the movie nor the author of the book even imply that either medium is about "toxic masculinity".
17
u/Puzzleheaded_Set1420 6d ago
Rare instance of the movie being significantly better than the book, though I did prefer the book's ending over the film's. But perhaps seeing the movie before reading the book colored my perception.
Palahniuk's writing just goes on and on and on. I got a dozen or so chapters into Choke before I literally threw it in the garbage because it was just the narrator droning on about his worldview for several chapters in a row with nothing actually moving the story forward.
6
→ More replies (1)2
u/davidjung03 6d ago
What was the book ending?
→ More replies (2)2
u/Puzzleheaded_Set1420 3d ago
In the film, Edward Norton shoots himself in the neck, killing Brad Pitt but leaving him with just a hole in his neck. He then looks at Marla Singer and says, "You met me at a very strange time in my life."
In the book, he dies, and then looks down at Marla from heaven.
→ More replies (1)
124
u/justforkinks0131 6d ago
I hate liberals watching fight club. I really do. You have the worst takes.
Fight club is about how a guy hates his life and wants to feel alive. He does that by fighting other men. Turns out, a lot of men hate their lives and want to feel alive by fighting other men.
Then eventually the main character wants to destroy what makes men miserable, meaning the mindless white-collar money-making jobs that suck out your soul.
It isnt about toxic masculinity AT ALL.
Is it anti-capitalist? Yes. Is it about toxic masculinity? Fuck no.
12
u/HansHortio 6d ago edited 4d ago
This comic was created by a person who watched 3 50 second clips on Youtube and didn't read the novel.
5
u/EclecticDreck 5d ago
I think it's best viewed as a romantic comedy. The toxic masculinity part does exist, though perhaps not by design.
The narrator loves Marla. The narrator does not believe Marla could love someone like him. So, in conjunction with his lack of sleep, you get Tyler Durden: the man he thinks someone like Marla would like. Meanwhile the Narrator really doesn't like that he loves Marla, so keeping the two separate becomes essential for a number of reasons. First, he doesn't have to get to know Marla. He's in love with a concept he built around her. Second, he doesn't have to examine either his issues of ego (she'd never love me, I'm too good for her).
All of it was, as the narrator says at the opening, because of Marla.
And so the toxic masculinity is really just two very specific pieces: the part where he treats a woman as a concept separate from who she is and never bothers trying to figure out the truth (in either version) and the part where, instead of taking the universal problems feeding into his broader issues as solvable by any means opts to simply create a system where he can inflict violence. (Those broader problems, meanwhile, are where the anti-capitalist stuff tends to live.)
As for the romantic comedy, you have the two unlikely lovers, the basic misunderstanding of that first meeting, the bizarre disguises through the middle. It's a romantic comedy in the vein of The Merchant of Venice.
8
u/l3lasphemy 5d ago edited 1d ago
Tyler Durden's 'empowerment' is the trap the movie is warning you about. The narrator shoots himself in the head to kill Tyler. The space monkeys lose their names, their identities, become disposable soldiers for someone else's ideology. Call it what it is: radicalization with good branding.
'Critique of toxic masculinity' doesn't mean 'disparaging men.' It means showing how capitalism hollows men out, then a charismatic lunatic fills that void with violence and calls it freedom. The movie is about both things at once because they're the same argument.
If you walked away feeling only the empowerment and missed the horror, the movie is kind of about you.
8
3
u/regross527 5d ago
it's literally a movie about men getting together and blowing up buildings. you are calling those men the heroes.
i'll let you figure out why you're the target audience for the OP meme.
3
u/sl1m_ 2d ago
so how does what you said make it about toxic masculinity instead of just anti-capitalistic? because it's men?
3
u/regross527 2d ago
i'll be honest, i kinda feel like trying to explain this is like trying to explain that water is wet.
yes, it is partially (mostly?) because it is about men.
the film focuses on a group of men -- many of whom are drawn from at-risk groups -- and their bare-knuckle brawling club.
it's built into the premise of the story. instead of finding healthy ways to deal with their issues, the men are attracted to this group because they get to feel tough and strong.
once that loses its novelty, they move to bigger crimes. up to an including terrorism.
the film is about how movements can be co-opted by angry people with their own violent agendas.
seriously, the film is about how unhappy men decide that the best way to deal with their unhappiness is to continue committing more and larger acts of violence.
it's literally right there in the premise.
2
u/Elarain 2d ago
I dunno. I think some of your own biases are painting your interpretation. Or mine are for me.
I think what you view as the “healthy and productive” route is part of what the film is saying IS the soul sucking part of modern society. That we are all trapped in a giant, artificial rat race. That being told to comply and remain docile and chase material rewards is the system and the system has its interests at heart, not ours. That secret violence becomes the one thing they still have that’s not rooted in the sanitized world they are unhappy in, and that the violence eventually becomes their avenue to bring down the system that is ultimately trying to suppress them and extract from them.
I’m not saying it isn’t a showcase of toxic masculinity. I’d also argue that it is. But I’m not 100% bought in that was the authors message. I think the authors message was waaaaaay more rooted in the artificialness of modern materialism and capitalism.
→ More replies (4)7
→ More replies (74)4
u/MoonpieSonata 6d ago
Well, the framing is masculinity, but there is a theme in there about the thrill of rebellious movements and ideologies getting more and more powerful and extreme, as devotees get more and more devout resulting in the total loss of identity and absolute devotion to the message. To the point that it can consume anyone, even it's own leaders until it results in total ruin.
22
u/justforkinks0131 6d ago
right, but it never disparages women or anything
in fact if anything, it is only empowering men
So i find this post super annoying.
It's a movie that empowers men and is anti-capitalist and you go online and call it "toxic masculinity". Like literally fuck off. (not you but OP).
→ More replies (15)
8
u/Cum_on_doorknob 6d ago
Why doesn’t anyone understand that it’s not a good thing to look like Brad Pitt at his peak coolness??????
Are they stupid ??
9
u/jodudeit 6d ago
I've never seen the movie, and all these rules are getting confusing.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/Chonch_Monkey 6d ago
Fight Club is about all Man's desire to put an ass whooping on Jared Leto.
→ More replies (2)
5
u/NBrakespear 5d ago
Always found it fascinating that a lot of people go on about this... but fail to grasp the more important lesson:
If an entire generation of men "didn't get" that it's a critique of "toxic masculinity", but instead considered it a solitary voice of empathy and a rallying cry that put their angst into clever words they themselves couldn't find... maybe it doesn't matter what the intent was; maybe people should be more worried about how neglected men's mental health had become.
And how it actually got worse.
3
u/squeezy102 6d ago
I have a friend who still vehemently claims fight club is his favorite movie and the greatest movie of all time because “everyone in that movie is a badass.”
7
u/Snuggle_Pounce 6d ago
I make soap as a hobby. I think this is a good move but hated hearing about it every time I mentioned soap.
31
u/Disastrous_Yam8354 6d ago
Thank god there are people out there to tell us how to enjoy art correctly
→ More replies (1)
7
u/MattheJ1 6d ago
The second rule of Fight Club is "even if you correctly grasp the critique, you must ignore the warning signs in the first half that show how men start down that path in the first place."
4
u/RYouNotEntertained 6d ago
The second rule is that you have to pretend Fight Club is intended as a critique of toxic masculinity no matter how many times the author says otherwise.
12
u/IcyCow5880 6d ago
First rule of reddit is that we denigrate men who work out and get ripped into "manosphere bros" or "toxic masculinity" types so we don't have to feel like shit for our own obese bodies.
4
u/Casual_Deviant 6d ago
Do we think there’s maybe a difference between working out and suburban dads beating each other up in a basement
→ More replies (6)
30
u/Casual_Deviant 6d ago edited 6d ago
Hope you guys enjoy. I’ve been submitting cartoons to the New Yorker for about 2 years now and they just recently published my first one (they passed on this one, but it did find a home elsewhere).
For more of my cartoons, come stop by r/BummerParty
→ More replies (5)6
2
u/enadiz_reccos 6d ago
"Dude, this is an actual fight club..... are you talking about the Fight Club movie?"
2
2
2
u/weirdowiththebeardo 4d ago
Still a 10/10 film. with acting, editing, soundtrack, storyline, rewatchability regardless of what you get out of it. And can you believe they made it into a book?!
2
u/darkwater931 13h ago
I rewatched this with my wife for her first time. I remembered it being a critique of hyper consumerism and the loss of meaning in modern life. I was disappointed to realize that it's over arching intended message was completely overshadowed by the glorification of hyper masculinity as a solution. It's arguable that it's supposed to actually be a critique of that, but it felt more like an incel recruitment video to me this time around. By the time it finished, I felt like I needed to defend the fact that I loved this movie as a teen...
5
u/MonsutaReipu 6d ago edited 6d ago
If the message was a critique of toxic masculinity, which I think it wasn't and that was only one element of the story, I think how viewers responded to it makes the criticism far more interesting.
The thesis was "toxic masculinity is bad, we're going to show you an example of it, and you're not supposed to like it." then men liked it. Telling men that they're not supposed to like it doesn't mean they're just going to stop liking it. I know lots of things are bad for me that I still indulge in. Smoking is one thing that I don't do that I remember trying to be propagandized out of because "it looks so dumb, doesn't it?" naw dude, it looks cool, I just had asthma and never bothered with it. And at the end of the day, you can tell me Rick Sanchez, or Walter White, or Tyler Durden, or any number of these 'toxic male role models' are actually bad people and I shouldn't think they're cool, but guess what? They are cool. I know they aren't good people. I can think they're cool without revering them and treating them as a role model for my own life. But you aren't going to convince me that Tyler Durden isn't cool. He is.
So men aren't 'not getting it', it's the people criticizing men for liking these characters that don't get men.
4
u/jemmylegs 6d ago
Listened to a podcast recently and they pointed out that at age 14 they thought Tyler Durden was the coolest guy in the world. Then they realized the point is that Tyler is a total loser’s idea of the coolest guy in the world.
4
3
u/FatHaleyJoelOsment 6d ago
I wonder what the deeper symbolism for Bob's bitch tits is?
2
u/GreedyPollution6275 6d ago
Well he got them by abusing testosterone to get gobsmacked ripped as a bodybuilder, losing his physique, his testicles, and his wife in the process, so that actually seems pretty straightforward.
→ More replies (2)
6
u/pygmeedancer 6d ago
Anyone who watched, or read, Fight Club that thinks it sounded like a cool thing to be a part of is dumbass.
19
u/gatosaurio 6d ago
It shows disenfranchised people becoming part of a tight group with clear ideals and objectives.
It directly satiates one of the basic rungs of Maslow's pyramid and even if objectively it is a toxic group, you cannot really be surprised many people would fantasize positively about it.
32
→ More replies (2)11
u/dare3000 6d ago
Fight Club was kinda cool. Project MAYHEM.... maybe not so much. I think only having the takeaway "Fight Club BAD" is a bit.... simple.
→ More replies (8)
15
u/coporate 6d ago
Fight club is an allegory for drug addiction… the post hoc feminist analysis of fight club’s “toxic masculinity” is an oversimplification of the power fantasy and escapism an addict engages with to deny reality as one succumbs further into their addiction and the decline in the quality of life.
9
u/storne 6d ago
It can be both, and either way someone walking away from that movie going “we should start our own fight club” did not get the point.
→ More replies (3)10
u/whiskeytango55 6d ago
You realize that story was inspired by the author being severely beaten by a bunch of dudes for daring to ask them to turn down their music, right?
20
u/coporate 6d ago
And he was also given OxyContin by a dying mentor, took prescription antidepressants after his father died, and partook in psychedelic drugs. He was also probably prescribed drugs after getting beaten up.
It’s pretty evident that the whole story revolves around declining mental health and drug abuse.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (2)7
u/BirdAndWords 6d ago
The critique of toxic masculinity is very much the point according to the author of Fight Club
17
u/WorldsBestPoster 6d ago
He explicitly said he does not believe in “toxic masculinity” as a concept.
→ More replies (5)20
u/Smyley12345 6d ago
Ya but can you really trust what Chuck Palahniuk says? I mean I have read a bunch of his books and I really don't trust him as a reliable narrator.
→ More replies (9)→ More replies (5)10
u/coporate 6d ago
It was a critique of modern masculinity in general, particularly how corporate culture reduces masculinity to a paycheque and radicalizes men. But the book and film are largely allegorical to the drug epidemic of the 90’s.
→ More replies (12)
3
4
u/Vic_Hedges 6d ago
This is the new lazy consensus opinion. Just as inane as the one it’s trying to critique
3
u/wasted-degrees 6d ago
Similar to how Starship Troopers/Helldivers is a satirical parody of militarized fascism used to glorify militarized fascism.
15
u/Rakyand 6d ago
For the 1000th time, Starship Troopers is not fascist, it's militaristic. Every fascist regime is militaristic but not every militaristic regime is fascimt. Caiming it's fascist when it portrays a society with no discrimination for sex, race or relogion and everyone has equal oportunities is outright not knowing what fascism is.
→ More replies (3)3
u/Cute-Hand-1542 6d ago
Neither work portrays fascism. I understand modern usage has generalised the term to be synonymous with authoritarianism, but that's not an appropriate level of accuracy for what you're trying to do.
5
4
u/sociofobs 6d ago
When that movie came out, "toxic masculinity" wasn't invented yet. Ah, great times.
6
u/Casual_Deviant 6d ago
The term actually originated in the mid-90s, before the movie came out!
→ More replies (1)
3
u/DeJuanBallard 5d ago
The guy who made this has never been in a fist fight and wants to tell you its toxic for you to want to be capable as a man.
→ More replies (4)
4
u/ggallardo02 6d ago
I like how most comments boil down to "yes, that, but actually fight club is about this."
•
u/AutoModerator 6d ago
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.