...is always broken.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/29/fight.club.ap/index.html

That is absolutely scary. Seriously.

Fight Club was a good movie, but it is just a movie.

Dud had a fight club. He talked about it in #teapot a looooooooong while back.

[quote=The Article]Men involved in fight clubs often carry bottled-up violent impulses learned in childhood from video games,[/quote]
They just had to get that in somewhere.

Thats awesome.

It was also a political and social satire.

I'd probably do it for the hell of it.

I can see it being pretty fun. I'd rather just wrestle though.

Pots and pans? That's not a fight club. If it were a real fight club, it'd be fists-only.

Seriously... WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE KIDS? IS IT THE BRAIN DAMAGE? CAN IT BE FIXED?



A real fight? Thats a fair fight. BIG difference. If you can have a leverage in a fight, you take it, thats what I've learned on the streets.

That's not how street fights work. Street fights are brawls with wild punches being thrown.

Either you watch too much movies, you're too rich or in a good neighboorhood, or have never seen a real street fight. I've been in those type of fights, in good neighborhoods, but in the bad ones, I was dodging bottles.

Obviously. Dodging bottles has nothing to do with leverage. And in the bad neighborhoods, chances are the fight is going to be a gang fight where anything goes. leverage is the least of your concerns.

Yes, but thats a real fight. If you put rules in a fight like, only fists, you are merely making it even so one guy can't get a bottle and the other a 2x4.

aaaaaaaaand FIGHT!
*steps back quickly*

Fighting is wrong. Let's start a friend club instead.

My knee agrees.

Well, time to go to bed. Later homies.

I'm not homely.

And even then, people still swing for the fences.

He said real fight club. Club. Real fight club. RFC.

I don't know what's so scary about a group of men agreeing to hit each other. My friends and I spar all the time, and between and two of them we occationally do things in a padded room and just go until it hurts too much to continue. It's a nice release.

I've never been in a fight.

I don't see anything wrong with a fight club as long as they don't go to far. That brain hemmorhage kid is sad.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Yes. SF_Gold's experience in gang warfare.

MONKEY!!! KNIFE!!! FIGHT!!!

"Men involved in fight clubs often carry bottled-up violent impulses learned in childhood from video games, cartoons and movies, said Michael Messner, a University of Southern California sociology and gender studies professor."

I stopped reading after that paragraph.

I PLAYED MARIO, AND NOW I WANT TO JUMP ON YOUR FACE LOL.


I always hated Fight Club, the book and then the movie. And I really can't stand all the people that are just so fixated on it.

I was in a "Fight Club," in highschool for about a day. But they're pretty lame.

Waa waa waa... I don't quite understand how he could think the pervasiveness of advertising drives him to want the "freedom" to pummel people for hours...

If he hates the system, why not try to DO something about it instead of going to a hidden place to beat people up? I think that behavior is being more of a wimp than anything else.

kyle90: you officially rock. There should be an SF_GoldG comic gallery.

my friends have been beating the **** out of each other since they were 12, now some of them are 24 and they still do it, big deal.

WTF? So its only a fight if you maim or kill the other person?

You have to consider your motivation for fighting. I think the most typical reasons are:

1. You are defending your honor or that of someone close to you from insult or betrayal.
This includes chasing down adultery. This can be one of the most violent and rage-filled situations, and someone's emotions may lead them to want to seriously injure of kill his or her adversary. I wouldn't put it beyond someone to use whatever means are available to finish the job.

2. You are defending yourself from attack or violation.
The measures you take are usually based on what you're up against. There's a big difference in what kind of force you should use when defending yourself from a couple of kids who want your lunch money versus a serial killer who wants to eat you alive.

3. You are trying to rob someone and their personal harm is secondary. As long as they don't resist and you get what you want, you're happy.
You'll beat someone up if they resist handing over their wallet or whatever and rough them up to teach them a lesson, but beyond that, if they don't fight back, there shouldn't be much trouble here.

4. You are fighting for training, fun, or to let off some aggression.
This is what the thread began about, and I assume that the limit would either be a participant's pain/vanity tolerance or their serious injury, at which point the fight would end with few hard feelings.

5. You hate a certain group/person/intruder and want only to cause them woe.
Definitely no holds barred. Killing/maiming may very well be the object of the fight. This may be what GoldG is talking about. (people wanting to only cause him woe, that is :S)

I was in a fight with a friend who thought it was a "4" when I definitely thought it was a "1". He was just wrestling; I stepped on his face and chipped his tooth. It's best to be on the same page as to what kind of fight you're in.

Thank you for this fine piece of comedy. I hadn't had a good chuckle in hours.

I had a buddy from work who was in/helped organize a fight club with a bunch of his friends. It was all very tight-lipped, only reason I knew about it, was that I worked with the guy, and he showed up to work every monday morning sporting a black eye and/or a cut lip/eyebrow/cheek, etc.

His friends would come in to visit and were always in a similar state.

They had a good time, I guess.

We had a self defense group at school, which started off as creating another sports option for ourselves in the 6th form. It mostly consisted of us teaching each other stuff from our own respective martial arts eventually it devolved into an informal fight club. It was loads of fun even if I did get my arse kicked most of the time.

This is actually kind of the point of the movie. It's a satire against people who drive themselves to rebel against conformity, and end up conforming themselves. Most people, however, don't catch this.


Actually, if you'd really read the book or watched the movie, I'm sure you'd like it. But I'm also fairly sure you caught 30 minutes of the movie, read an excerpt from the book, considered yourself educated, and decided you hated the concept of a fight club thus hated the book/movie. When in reality, you have no idea what they're about.

[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]This is actually kind of the point of the movie. It's a satire against people who drive themselves to rebel against conformity, and end up conforming themselves. Most people, however, don't catch this.[/QUOTE]

Are you talking about the absolute conformity that surrounded Project Mayhem?

[quote=Interview with Chuck Palahniuk]
What is the one thing you truly want people to get out of Fight Club and your other books?

That we need to be more comfortable and more accepting of chaos, and things that we see as disastrous. Because it is only through those things we can be redeemed and change. We should welcome disaster, we should welcome things that we generally run away from. There is a redemption available in those things that is available nowhere else.
[/quote]
Embracing disaster, however, does not entail shutting yourself off from others. Another of his books, "Stranger than Fiction" deals with how once people have achieved the dream of being almost entirely alone, they get lonely and that people need to share their experiences with others. A fight club is such a way to do that. Certainly there's conformity in joining a group like that... but then so too is there a conformity to using fingers to brush your hair or driving a car to work or even going to work. The message of "Fight Club" isn't as universally anti-conformist, nor do its creators (I think, from what I've read in interviews and director commentaries) view this as an axis of irony, so much as anti-conformist in terms of our materialistic and superficial society.

The franchise of the film, as David Fincher implied, is ironic in that it's selling the anti-corporate/organized/etc. idea on a corporate medium. And I can see where you're coming from in that sense. Fight Club T-Shirts, collector's edition DVDs, posters of Brad Pitt (not in a fight, but just standing there) for girls, a Fight Club videogame... these all run contrary to the message conveyed in the book/film; however, if you're dull enough, didn't get anything out of the film except some cool scenes of violence/sex/profanity, or genuinely buy into corporate schemes, by all means buy the accessories. You're just making the overman money.

I argue that it's not the point of the movie, but am curious as to how you did and wouldn't mind knowing more about your view on it.

The way I see it when "Tyler" met "Tyler" he was trying to convince him that he didn't need all the things he thought he did to fit in. He was convincing him that he didn't need to conform to society's views to make himself feel better. He then went to live in the crappy house and gave up everything to find himself. Eventually, though, the house mutated into a microcosm, a mini-society of "space monkeys" who all conformed to the same idea extremely, and he led them. I figured that was intended irony. I guess I could be wrong, but Palahniuk is the kind of guy I would expect to make a book like that.

If I were a mod, I would ban you.

Don't talk about it.

I could see that. Tyler is sort of a modern nihilist-anarchist, someone who conforms to the idea that they must destroy society in order to allow for rebirth.

Nietzsche wrote of the overman overcoming the herd... well in movements like this, there are often the few clearheaded social revolutionaries, and then all the tag-alongs. The rank and file of a movement. For nihilism to succeed in a society and notion of reality as deeply entrenched as ours, it has to pervert social structures to its own ends. But: The difference between what Project Mayhem was fighting against and what Project Mayhem was falls along the lines of selflessness versus selfishness. In 'enslaving' themselves as totally loyal space monkies, the Project Mayhem people were giving up their freedom in order to shake the foundations of society so people wouldn't have to deal with today's BS in the future. Unlike the 'corporate world', they aren't making money and they aren't advertising. It was all word-of-mouth, but, like real fight-clubs today, it spread like wildfire.

In Turgenev's "Fathers and Sons" the uncle guy who represents the old society of frivolity and classes asks the young nihilist friend of the protagonist why he does all he can to destroy any sense of tradition or manners... the friend responds to the effect, "I am a force of change. There is no reason."

Bad. ***.

I actually follow the rule, man. I'm not joining in on your conversation. :em321: