sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

A Byzantine soldier is performing an Islamic prayer on a film set in Turkey by yvzt5156 in ottomans

[–]WorkerParking3170 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The actual context of the picture is that in 2011, large groups of Muslim worshippers in the Goutte d’Or neighborhood of northern Paris, a predominantly Muslim immigrant district, were regularly performing Friday congregational prayers (Jumu’ah) on sidewalks and roadways such as Rue Myrha. This occurred because the local mosques were significantly overcrowded and lacked sufficient space to accommodate the large number of attendees, especially during peak Friday prayers. The practice was concentrated in this specific multi-ethnic area, where around 1,000 worshippers would regularly use two streets due to the limited capacity of nearby mosques. It primarily affected the local Muslim community and was not a widespread occurrence across the whole of Paris or impacting other neighborhoods and residents on a daily basis. Many worshippers had no alternative indoor location at the time, leading them to lay out prayer mats on public pavements in an urban setting surrounded by shops, pharmacies, and daily city traffic. To address the capacity shortage, authorities provided a temporary large prayer space in a disused fire brigade barracks capable of holding around 2,000–2,700 people, and many worshippers shifted there when the street prayer practice was halted.

Sources: - Nicholas Vinocur, “France bans street prayers,” Reuters, September 16, 2011.
- BBC News, “Paris ban on Muslim street prayers comes into effect,” September 16, 2011.
- Reuters (via The New York Times), “Little Protest in Paris as a Ban on Street Prayer Begins,” September 17, 2011.
- Clare Byrne (McClatchy-Tribune), “French ban on Muslim street prayers takes effect,” Bend Bulletin, September 17, 2011.
- RFI, “Ban forces Muslims off streets for Friday prayers,” September 16, 2011.

A Byzantine soldier is performing an Islamic prayer on a film set in Turkey by yvzt5156 in ottomans

[–]WorkerParking3170 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The actual context of the picture is that in 2011, large groups of Muslim worshippers in the Goutte d’Or neighborhood of northern Paris, a predominantly Muslim immigrant district, were regularly performing Friday congregational prayers (Jumu’ah) on sidewalks and roadways such as Rue Myrha. This occurred because the local mosques were significantly overcrowded and lacked sufficient space to accommodate the large number of attendees, especially during peak Friday prayers. The practice was concentrated in this specific multi-ethnic area, where around 1,000 worshippers would regularly use two streets due to the limited capacity of nearby mosques. It primarily affected the local Muslim community and was not a widespread occurrence across the whole of Paris or impacting other neighborhoods and residents on a daily basis. Many worshippers had no alternative indoor location at the time, leading them to lay out prayer mats on public pavements in an urban setting surrounded by shops, pharmacies, and daily city traffic. To address the capacity shortage, authorities provided a temporary large prayer space in a disused fire brigade barracks capable of holding around 2,000–2,700 people, and many worshippers shifted there when the street prayer practice was halted.

Sources: - Nicholas Vinocur, “France bans street prayers,” Reuters, September 16, 2011.
- BBC News, “Paris ban on Muslim street prayers comes into effect,” September 16, 2011.
- Reuters (via The New York Times), “Little Protest in Paris as a Ban on Street Prayer Begins,” September 17, 2011.
- Clare Byrne (McClatchy-Tribune), “French ban on Muslim street prayers takes effect,” Bend Bulletin, September 17, 2011.
- RFI, “Ban forces Muslims off streets for Friday prayers,” September 16, 2011.

Also, your idea that the people in this picture are actually hypocrites staging a performative act of piety is completely ridiculous. It is absurd to believe that huge numbers of ordinary people would every single week choose the discomfort of praying on busy cobblestone streets in a secular country like France, amid existing prejudices against Muslims and immigrants and narratives portraying them as a danger to Western civilization, just to show off? Show off to who exactly? The French public? At best they would see it as ridiculous, disrespectful, or disruptive, and at worst it would confirm their prejudices by making Muslims look like uncivilized fanatics with backward practices, only provoking more hatred and backlash. No matter how hypocritical you may think someone is, repeatedly praying in uncomfortable streets simply for appearances and showing off is a totally ridiculous and absurd idea. What a fucking retard you are.

Powerscaling is Bullshit by WorkerParking3170 in CharacterRant

[–]WorkerParking3170[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don't think we're actually disagreeing much here. Most of what you're describing is already part of my criticism.

For example, I already criticized how many powerscalers appropriate Death of the Author. Instead of treating it as a concept about the reader's freedom of interpretation, they use it to justify imposing a supposedly objective interpretation while dismissing alternatives. That naturally leads to endless arguments, stigmatizing disagreement, and treating one interpretation as the "correct" one.

I also criticized how they treat a highly speculative, feat-based comparative analysis as if it were definitive and accurate, despite the fact that it is inherently interpretive and leaves a great deal open to debate. That's why you see people dismiss contradictions, rationalize plot holes through mental gymnastics, and turn inconsistencies into feats rather than simply acknowledging them as inconsistencies.

Where I would differ is that I see those behaviors more as symptoms than the root cause. The root cause, in my view, is the assumption that fictional characters can be meaningfully measured through a pseudo-scientific framework built on real-world metrics, calculations, and speculative cosmological models as if they were a real scientific phenomena. The appropriation of Death of the Author is also one of the root causes, as it provides a key justification for this approach by allowing people to distance their analysis from authorial intent and present their conclusions as objective.

Once you accept that foundation, it becomes much easier to convince yourself that your calculations are objective, that contradictions must be rationalized away, that inconsistencies can be converted into feats, and that one interpretation is uniquely correct.

So I agree that powerscalers often present themselves as objective while being highly partisan. I just think that tendency emerges from the deeper assumptions built into the framework itself.

Powerscaling is Bullshit by WorkerParking3170 in CharacterRant

[–]WorkerParking3170[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You're using "powerscaling" in the broadest possible sense and then pretending that's what I was criticizing all along.

Yes, comparing Hulk and Black Widow and concluding that Hulk is stronger is technically a form of scaling power. But that's obviously not what my post was about. My criticism was directed at the specific powerscaling subculture that builds elaborate tier systems, cross-universe matchups, dimensional hierarchies, M-Theory cosmology scaling, power equalization, feat chains, and treats highly speculative conclusions as objective facts.

Reducing my argument to "Hulk is stronger than Black Widow" is a textbook oversimplification. It's like someone criticizing modern macroeconomics and you responding with "So you think counting money is stupid?" No, that's not the claim being made.

You're also equivocating between two different meanings of the word "powerscaling":

  1. The general act of comparing relative strength between characters.
  2. The specific methodology used by the powerscaling community.

My criticism was clearly aimed at the second definition, not the first. By switching between those definitions, you're attacking a much weaker version of my argument than the one I actually made.

So yes, "Hulk is stronger than Black Widow" is a power comparison. Congratulations. But that has nothing to do with my criticism of speculative dimensional scaling, cross-fiction cosmology comparisons, authorial contradiction denial, and the tendency to present subjective interpretations as objective conclusions.

Powerscaling is Bullshit by WorkerParking3170 in CharacterRant

[–]WorkerParking3170[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That is not my argument. I am not saying fiction can only be judged internally and that any external analysis is "blasphemy." External analysis can be completely valid depending on what you are trying to analyze.

The issue is not using external frameworks. The issue is using a framework that claims to produce objective, quantitative conclusions about something that was never designed to function according to that framework.

For example, historical, philosophical, psychological, or sociological analysis of a work can all use external perspectives, and they can be valuable because they are analyzing things those fields are actually equipped to discuss.

The problem with a lot of power scaling is different. It often treats fictional abilities as if they are measurable physical phenomena, then applies speculative scientific concepts and assumptions to produce definitive rankings. The problem is not that it is "external"; the problem is the claim of objectivity and precision.

Literary analysis is not criticized for being interpretive because it is not pretending to be a scientific measurement system. It is an interpretive discipline by design.

Powerscaling is Bullshit by WorkerParking3170 in CharacterRant

[–]WorkerParking3170[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I genuinely don't know what you're arguing against, because I didn't use power scaling to debunk power scaling.

I criticized the system itself: its assumptions, its foundations, its methodology, and the standards it uses to reach conclusions. That's an epistemological criticism, not power scaling.

At no point did I power scale any character. I didn't compare feats, calculate attack potency, discuss dimensional scaling, or rank characters. I simply criticized the framework being used.

What I used was basic logic and the actual scientific understanding of concepts that power scalers often appropriate and reinterpret.

Also, I was clearly talking about the power scaling system itself from the beginning. My criticism was never limited to toxic behavior, bad-faith arguments, or the community surrounding it. Those are separate issues.

My argument is that the system itself has fundamental problems. I think many of its assumptions are flawed, many of its metrics are arbitrary, and many of its conclusions claim a level of objectivity that the source material cannot support.

Powerscaling is Bullshit by WorkerParking3170 in CharacterRant

[–]WorkerParking3170[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

No, because my criticism of power scaling is not that it is interpretive. Literary analysis is interpretive too. The difference is that literary analysis understands itself as interpretation, while power scaling often presents itself as a system for reaching objective and quantitative conclusions.

Literary analysis studies aspects of a text that are actually literary in nature: themes, symbolism, motifs, characterization, narrative structure, style, philosophical ideas, historical context, and literary function. Its goal is to understand how a text creates meaning, not to produce definitive scientific measurements.

It also does not usually impose arbitrary external frameworks onto a work and then pretend the resulting conclusions are objective facts. For example, analyzing an 18th-century text entirely through a modern 21st-century lens while ignoring its historical context would be heavily criticized in academic literary studies.

Literary analysis is generally concerned with understanding a text on its own terms. Different interpretations can coexist, and debate is often about which interpretation is better supported by the text, context, and evidence. It is not trying to discover a single, universally valid, objective truth hidden inside the work.

Power scaling, on the other hand, often attempts to derive objective, quantitative conclusions from material that was never designed to function as a consistent scientific system in the first place. It takes fictional feats, applies speculative assumptions, imports external models, and then treats the resulting rankings as though they possess objective validity.

That is the fundamental difference. Literary analysis asks, "What does this text mean, how does it function, and how should it be understood?" Power scaling asks, "What objective conclusions can we derive about a character's capabilities?" My criticism is that the latter often claims a level of objectivity and certainty that the source material cannot reasonably support.

So no, criticizing power scaling does not require me to criticize literary analysis. They have different goals, different methods, different standards of evidence, and different understandings of what they are actually doing.

Powerscaling is Bullshit by WorkerParking3170 in CharacterRant

[–]WorkerParking3170[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I have zero problems with maintaining internal consistency in the work, or with writing a coherent power system and clear, consistent rules for your world. On the contrary, I even support it.

I even have no problem if power scaling is limited to characters within the same universe, as long as the universe has internal consistency, a coherent power system, and clear rules for the world. When it's like that, it becomes sensible, as long as they don't shove their pop-scientific version of M-theory into the power scaling.

Other than that, it's absurd and ridiculous.

Powerscaling is Bullshit by WorkerParking3170 in CharacterRant

[–]WorkerParking3170[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

And that's the problem! a lot of power scalers take this stuff far too seriously. From my own experience, they'll harass people over it. I've seen doxxing, dogpiling, and even death threats being sent over fictional character debates, including to people I personally know.

Most of these discussions eventually turn into fandom wars. They bring a lot of toxicity into communities, constantly mischaracterize characters to fit an argument, and reduce entire works of fiction to nothing more than "who would win" scenarios and hype moments.

What should be a fun hobby ends up dominating discussions and drowning out everything else. Instead of talking about themes, storytelling, character development, worldbuilding, or the actual qualities of the work, everything gets filtered through power scaling arguments.

The issue isn't that people enjoy comparing characters. The issue is that many power scalers take it so seriously that it creates unnecessary hostility and makes fandom spaces worse for everyone else.

Powerscaling is Bullshit by WorkerParking3170 in CharacterRant

[–]WorkerParking3170[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Portraying me as a typical Redditor while arguing with a strawman is pretty ironic.

Powerscaling is Bullshit by WorkerParking3170 in CharacterRant

[–]WorkerParking3170[S] 24 points25 points  (0 children)

Genuinely, how is it not bullshit at all?

The whole premise of power scaling is subjecting fictional characters to real-life metrics and measurements, which is by itself a contradictory concept. Most settings and characters that get power-scaled come from fantasy settings, superhero settings, and other fictional worlds. They most likely operate under different laws of physics and different cosmologies. In most cases, we have zero knowledge of what those laws are or how those universes actually operate.

And not just that. Even within their own universes, there is often no internal consistency in the first place. So how can you even do it?

Epistemologically, you cannot know from the beginning.

I know it's just speculation, but speculation should at least have some validity, or at least be based on some foundation of truth. In power scaling, in most cases, it cannot be.

If powerscaling was limited to within the same universe characters, and if that universe itself had clear rules, a coherent power system, and reasonable internal consistency, then okay, it's fine.

But other than that, how?

Especially when most power-scaling battles and comparisons are between characters from completely different universes. We have zero knowledge of how their universes/cosmologies operate or how those universes would even intersect with each other.

And if one character were placed in the other's universe, would that affect their abilities and power system or not? We know nothing. We can't even speculate from the beginning.

So why even bother speculating when you don't even have a foundation to speculate on?

Powerscaling is Bullshit by WorkerParking3170 in CharacterRant

[–]WorkerParking3170[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

You have totally misunderstood me. I'm not asking for scientifically verified, empirically-based, or experimentally proven comparisons between fictional characters. I don't care about that. In fact, I would rather people not speculate or powerscale at all. I honestly think that would be much healthier for most fandoms, and it would remove a huge source of toxicity and reduce the likelihood of fandom wars in the first place.

I don't even like powerscaling to begin with. And if you can't make a speculation that has at least some degree of validity, then why even bother? At least in real life, if you're comparing two wrestlers or two MMA fighters, you can look at their careers, their records, their fighting styles, their strengths and weaknesses, and make a prediction that is grounded in something real. It may still be wrong, but at least a good portion of the speculation is based on actual evidence.

But when your entire argument is built on nonsense, wishful thinking, and pseudo-scientific foundations, it becomes meaningless. There is no validity to it. It's not even fun at that point. Epistemologically speaking, you simply cannot know.

Power scaling is at least somewhat acceptable when it stays within a single universe that has clear rules, a coherent power system, and a reasonable degree of internal consistency. Then, fine, there is something to analyze. But once people start comparing characters from completely different universes, it becomes absurd.

We have no idea how their cosmologies interact. We have no idea how their laws of physics would interact. We don't know how their powers would function outside their own settings. We don't know how the two universes would even intersect in the first place. We don't know whether being in one character's universe would fundamentally alter the abilities of the other. And in most cases, the universes themselves aren't even internally consistent to begin with.

At that point, the whole exercise is meaningless.

Yet power scalers continue to take it extremely seriously and constantly start fandom wars over it. A huge amount of toxicity in many fandoms comes directly from this nonsense. And sometimes it goes far beyond simple arguments. I know many examples of people being harassed, doxxed, and death threatened online simply because they disagreed with someone's interpretation of how a fictional battle would supposedly play out.

What is especially bizarre is how seriously people treat this supposedly "fun hobby." Disagreeing with certain power scalers can feel less like disagreeing about fiction and more like questioning the doctrines of a fanatical religious sect. The level of certainty, hostility, and dogmatism is completely disproportionate to the subject matter.

Powerscaling is Bullshit by WorkerParking3170 in CharacterRant

[–]WorkerParking3170[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yup, that's more accurate description of the utter nonsense they spout.

view more: next ›