Book like this except about a masculine man and not a cuck?

Probably A Farewell to Arms but it kind of sucks

He was okay with that crippled faggot kissing his wife and found it natural. He's a literal cuck.

Hey now, he got off that cuck shit towards the end.

you are the antithesis to literature

I agree he's soft, but he's still pretty masculine. His life is a lesson on why people who want things to be the way they should, must constantly struggle against the way they truly are. A mother should be selfless for her family. A school's administration should not be a popularity contest.

I also agree with the posters who say you should return to /pol/.

>His life is a lesson on why people who want things to be the way they should, must constantly struggle against the way they truly are.
Were he masculine, he'd try to create change instead of becoming what he hates.

>soft
>masculine

Pick one.

>literature means accepting cuck characters

Well, it's not like he had a choice. Death means getting off of every ride, including the cuck one.

kek

Stoner was hardly a cuck desu. I suspect that it takes a huge amount of courage and strength to live a life that he did which was one of a stoic stuck between cruel women and other sadists. To acquiesce and accept whatever befalls you takes courage and to resist the grief that he did requires a lot of patience and will. Stoner was an amazing character senpai. Just because he wasn't temperamental or impulsive does not take away from his masculinity.

Also, you might have to understand that your notion of masculinity might be different than someone else's. The book itself had nothing to do with masculinity. It was about the life of a stoic plagued with failure and disappointment who sometimes found refuge in literature and his life in the university until there was nothing left but his book at the end. A man who was broken and fragmented and cut into by everyone around him until he realized that there was very little that was left of him which would survive in that book.

It is a beautiful story user. Not sure why you feel the need to search for "more masculine" characters.

>Also, you might have to understand that your notion of masculinity might be different than someone else's.

I can see you are a nu-male cuck.

>Someone who spends their time calling made up people silly names on the internet thinks he has any grasp of what masculinity is
Hate this meme.

Lacking in one masculine quality of many does not disqualify you from being masculine. This fatalistic, defeatist, all-or-nothing way of judging people is what /polbots/ use to beat themselves up with and stay weak and miserable.

Except it does when the quality in question is necessary to define someone as masculine, though.

Op here. Stoner is a very beautiful book, I agree. But It was a tad frustrating at times. Stoner is just such a cuck. He let people walk over him like a sad puppy. I would like to see a similarly written book, only from the perspective of a man with some self-respect because it'd not only be more relatable, but it would also make for a more interesting story in my opinion.

Alright. It's good to know that you're willing to have a proper dialogue by properly articulating why you asked the question that you did.

You're right. It is frustrating that he lets people walk over him. In fact that's what almost everyone around him does. And the frustration that he feels begins to envelop you too.

But I feel that it was totally in character. He was plain and simple farmer's boy with a ridiculously simple upbringing. Until the age of 18 or 20 he never had to deal with people who have the potential to be vicious. Remember his first encounter with the lit professor (his mentor Sloane). He was frozen in terror at being confronted by someone with such a strong will of someone else impinging on him. That stayed with him his entire life. He was a humble man who was too tender to retaliate in the vicious ways others messed with him. It fit perfectly with the character.

It's not as if he didn't have self respect. He did and he always knew when he was right and when he was wrong. When he had failed and made a mistake (with his wife) and when he stood in the right (with lomax's student). He did respect himself. But he just could not be as cruel as those around him.

As for relatability, if he was a man who was more vehement against the will of the people around him then the story wouldn't be as beautiful and elegant. It's beautiful because of the tragedy that is his life which is one defeat after another. If he were replaced by a normal/average man, you'd just be seeing the life of an average professor which would mean that it wouldn't be a book worth reading at all. Just go to a college and ask a prof about his life and you'll see how terribly mundane and boring you might find the triviality of fights that people pick. If stoner fought back the book would be terribly average and just the mundane story of a layman.

Stoner's failures and defeats and unwillingness to be cruel is what draws the reader to feel for him.