#totally /not/ ignoring my stockpile of drafts ... totally ..

[aaternum-a]

GET TO KNOW THE BLOGGER.

can be used for rp & non-rp blogs to get to know a bit about the person behind the screen !

1. FIRST NAME  ⇢  cherub

2. STRANGE FACT ABOUT YOURSELF ⇢ hmm, not sure if this is strange, but i’ve never traveled outside the east-coast .. so i dunno what jet lag and allat other stuff is like!

3. TOP 3 PHYSICAL THINGS YOU FIND ATTRACTIVE ON A PERSON  ⇢  ummmm, eyes, smile, and uhhhhhhhhhhh--

4. A FOOD YOU COULD EAT FOREVER AND NOT GET BORED OF  ⇢  this is gonna sound like the real struggle lmao but bear with me, i really love a spam and cheese sandwich. it’s saturated in sodium, i know, but growing up i had it a lot. issa real struggle meal, i know.

5. A FOOD YOU HATE ⇢ spaghetti squash. 0/10 would not recommend. 

6. GUILTY PLEASURE ⇢ lol i like watching house hunters: renovation on hgtv, knowing most of it is fake and still being like ‘wow i want that’.

7. WHAT DO YOU SLEEP IN ⇢ big t-shirts, sweatpants or pajama bottoms, nuffin’ special.

8. SERIOUS RELATIONSHIPS OR FLINGS ⇢ i’m married, so serious relationships. c:

9. IF YOU COULD GO BACK IN THE PAST AND CHANGE ONE THING ABOUT YOUR LIFE, WOULD YOU AND WHAT WOULD IT BE ⇢ man, unless i had a guarantee that i’d still have my kids, nothing. i could say i wished i started school sooner, but at the same time, i don’t think i would have done as well as i’ve done now. so .. yeah, maybe study better in high school. that’s about it!

10. ARE YOU AN AFFECTIONATE PERSON ⇢  with my kids, yes. with other people, not really. at least not physically. i’ll spam you with verbal love tho!!!! 

11. A MOVIE YOU COULD WATCH OVER AND OVER AGAIN ⇢ dragon ball super broly ... i’ve watched it more times than i care to admit. but i love it. i need more bardock and gine. pls.

12. FAVORITE BOOK ⇢ uhMMMMMM, i don’t know! it’s been a while since i’ve really sat down to read. probably over 5 years (aside from self-help books). and lol .. all i ready were .. young adult dystopian, romance novels. like the shit you’d find on the episode app sjkfnjkasnfka but the last one i remember really enjoying was eve by anna carey. think handmaidens tale? it was really enjoyable, idk. maybe i won’t think so now since that was a while ago!

13. YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO KEEP ANY ANIMAL AS A PET, WHAT DO YOU CHOOSE ⇢ i live with my in-laws and they have a lot of animals .. 20? (snakes, bearded dragons, dogs, cats, birds  ...) we don’t need more. 

14. TOP FIVE FICTIONAL SHIPS [IF YOU ARE AN RP BLOG, YOU CAN USE YOUR OWN SHIPS AS WELL] ⇢ kanda/lenalee (d.gray man), kiba/hinata (naruto), sion/nezumi (no.6), superboy/miss martian(young justice) ( tbh i ship most things that aren’t canon so ye)

15. PIE OR CAKE ⇢ mmmm, i used to be cake, but now i think i’m a pie kinda gal.

16. FAVORITE SCENT ⇢ i love the scent of new books lmfao and laundromats.

17. CELEBRITY CRUSH ⇢ don’t have one! 

18. IF YOU COULD TRAVEL ANYWHERE, WHERE WOULD YOU GO ⇢ japan! dream trip is to go to disneyland there and then do some exploring.

19. INTROVERT OR EXTROVERT ⇢ introvert!

20. DO YOU SCARE EASILY ⇢ i do. but i love horror movies and indulge in scary things, so :shrug emoji:

21. IPHONE OR ANDROID ⇢ iphone!

22. DO YOU PLAY ANY VIDEO GAMES ⇢ i play animal crossing, but i don’t have a switch so rip to me getting the new one.

23. DREAM JOB ⇢ CRNA! i’m working on my RN right now, but i hope to work on an ICU unit next year. c:

24. WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITH A MILLION DOLLARS ⇢ lmaoooo pay off my education, get a nice house, invest, and treat myself and my family.

25. FICTIONAL CHARACTER YOU HATE ⇢ oof uhh .. i’m all aboard the muzan hate train and malcom lvellie hate train. but i can’t think of any others at this very moment.

26. FANDOM THAT YOU WERE ONCE A PART OF BUT AREN’T ANY LONGER ⇢ oof uh young justice i think! i still watch, but i don’t participate in the fandom anymore!

tagged by: @kyoanikis​ ( aaaa thank you!! ) tagging: @altaindustries​​, @craneguard​, @bombolear​, @kleinemeine​, @vespyren​ @multismashed​

[unfair-sports]

2019 OSG Report Week 1

The 2019 NFL season kicks off Sunday, and fantasy football season does as well. It’s very important to know the types of contests or season long formats you’re competing in to have true success. DFS wise, multipliers, and head to head contests calls for safe yet good plays that may be a little chalky across the industry. Big tournaments where finishing in the top 10 is the goal, calls for deep plays at times, and game stacking where you go with guts mixed with some form of research. Cash games or multipliers and head to heads, go for players with good floors with ceiling mixed in. In tournaments, chase the ceiling plays.

Chiefs -3.5 at Jags (52.5)

As always, the Chiefs are in a high total game. The Jags were one of the league’s best secondaries last season and if we go off that and last year’s KC performance this would not be a spot to pay up for the likes of Tyreek Hill. Though his performance vs Jax was subpar last year as well, I’m more inclined to roster Kelce over Hill to be different at TE. Until McCoy was signed, I was all in on Damien Williams week 1 to pair with Mahomes and not heavily target the receivers and hope all TDS thru air and ground comes thru Mahomes and Williams. Will it be a 60/40 split or more in the backfield? Andy Reid did not bring McCoy in just to sit. But I may still take some shots on Williams. His price is still down across the industry. The best value play will be Mecole Hardman in the slot. He’s dirt cheap on all sites and could have the better matchup with Hill and Watkins locked up on the outside by two of the best returning CBs in the NFL

-If we believe the total and the close game theory, you definitely want to run back the stack with some Jags players. I have been leery on rostering or drafting the oft injured Fournette. Maybe with a better passing game it takes some work load off? Nick Foles was the WRs QB in Philly as oppose to Wentz the TE/Ertz whisperer. If true, this will go well for the explosive Dede Westbrook who hasn’t shown his potential yet in a stagnant offense. Westbrook will be a popular choice across all sites. He’s cheap and he’s the #1 WR on a team involved with a 52.5 total. If the Jags defense shows up and slows down KC in any way, they will be a great defensive leverage play in tournaments where a lot of ownership could fall on Kansas City.

Rams -3 at Panthers (50.5)

What to do with the Rams. Do they have Super Bowl loss hangover? Is Gurley healthy? Will his load be lighter to start the season, and save he for the long haul? Last year I believe he was just running so hard the first 14 weeks of the season that he was just banged up to finish. Will he and Malcom Brown split time? If he has a great game, then this will be his cheapest price of the season. If you are looking for a game to stack, then here is one. Cam/Goff, McCaffrey/Gurley and/or WR of choice you like out of Woods, Cooks, and Kupp. Big strong physical receivers like Woods has had success against the smaller CB core of Carolina. DJ Moore is getting a lot of hype, but I never favor WRs of Cam Newton. He’s not predictable. He uses his legs to escape, which turns it into a “throw it to whoever looks open” scenario. So, between his rushing upside, and C-Mac I think those two players get you all of the Carolina TDs.

49ers+1 at Buccaneers (50).

If you’re looking for another stacking option game, then here we go. I do favor the Bucs side of the ball for many many reasons. I’m still not sold on the 49er offense outside of George Kittle who this week could be a top play at TE. Tampa Bay has always including last season been a prime defense to target with TEs. Aside from Kittle, I’m having a hard time clicking on players from teams no matter the over/under who I think are not good teams or players. Matt Breida and Tevin Coleman are splitting the backfield, Jimmy G remains a question mark. Against this Tampa defense however is a good spot to target. I’m just maybe going to miss out. I do think Winston will stockpile targets to Mike Evans for PPR leagues/sites, but TD equity will be a tossup between Peyton Barber, Chris Godwin (who should take a big leap this season, and OJ Howard. Winston as most young QBs loves his TE.

Falcons +3.5 at Vikings (47.5)

I was a little surprised to see the Vikings favored by over a field goal. Yes, Atlanta is on the road but still a dome setting. Xavier Rhodes wasn’t his usual self last season or the preseason, which bodes well for the Atlanta WR core. Particularly Julio Jones whom as of Friday “should play” despite contract negotiations. Matt Ryan is a classic spread it out in the red zone type of QB. While Freeman is Coleman-less in the backfield, I fear the Ito Smith vulture line of 5 rushes 11 yards, 2Td game. Ridley is not a target monster but is a TD machine vs the 0 red zone looks Julio for reasons unknown gets. Sanu is the alter ego of Julio because of his size and strength. My favorite pass catcher will be Hooper at TE who caught on late in the season as is a perfect funnel if the outside corners for Minnesota are doing well.

-Kirk cousins is still at the helm but it’s hard to ignore the concentrated targets of Adam Thielen and Stefon Diggs. Thielen is the safe play while Diggs is the tournament, dart, high upside play. My favorite play is Dalvin Cook. He’s at home✅. Favored✅. Used in the red zone✅. Could touch the ball 20 times✅. For several seasons we have picked on Atlanta with RBs, especially ones who catch passes. Kyle Rudolph seems to score a TD every other game and could be a pivot off Hunter Henry for a cheap TE.

Lions -2.5 at Cardinals (47.5)

Here is a game where I am having trouble with. At first, I skipped over it but think it could deserve some mention. Matt Stafford is underpriced and could go overlooked. The Arizona secondary has only been good in names on jerseys. Mix in a rookie QB who is making his coach feel like “teeth pulling” and the Lions route could be on. Stafford to Golloday or Marvin Jones Jr. could go under owned in tournaments and win a heavy tournament. Kerryon Johnson is also great in stacks with Stafford. If you don’t believe in Murray out the gate, the Lions defense could be sneaky here.

-The Christian Kirk/Kyler Murray train will begin steam and besides a flyer in a Million-dollar tournament stack I’m not sure if I’m heavy on Murray out the gate. He does offer rushing ability but on Fanduel he’s priced $700 more than Stafford. No way! I do think David Johnson returns somewhat to an easy 20 point/game fantasy producer this season. Just remember the Lions slow games down and their stacks are often frustrating to watch play out. I am stacking 2-3 lineups in large field tournaments just in case though.

Redskins +8.5 at Eagles (46)

This game has fade all over it. Large spread. Divisional game (I hate division games). So, with that said Jordan Howard is favored✅. At home✅. And is playable with the defense. Not optimal but if he carries 15-20 times and hits the end zone vs a shaky Washington team, he hits value. Wentz does tend to throw 2-3 TDS a game. He loves Ertz and he is a great pivot off of Kelce in the high priced TE range. He also has favored Alshon Jeffrey and D-Jack is always good for the long ball. But again, never a fan of stock piling divisional games.

Titans +5.5 at Browns (45.5).

Is Tennessee good? No. Do they suck? Yes. Can they go into Cleveland and shock us all and win? Not sure, but I’m willing to say they will cover the 5.5 underdog tag they have. They slow down and muddy up games. They make them real ugly. If Beckham is slowed down by his hip in any way, isn’t the team a lot the same on offense? Again, we are just talking about this week. I don’t favor any Tennessee offensive player but if you think they show up, Derrick Henry or Corey Davis is your guy. Two seasons ago, I would say play Delanie Walker because I have for several seasons successfully played talented TEs vs Cleveland. But are he and Mariota talented together? Maybe not.

-With that said I do like to avoid offenses vs Tennessee and this opening week will probably be no different. The only safe play in my opinion whom also offers upside is Nick Chubb at RB and maybe paired with the Cleveland defense who should be good. I do think we see Baker throw a lot of balls with Todd Monken at offensive coordinator. This is of special interest because Monken was the OC in Tampa and the combined numbers of Winston and FitzMagic, if were one player would have been the #2 scoring fantasy QB in the NFL. I hate being a week late, but I wonder if THIS is the matchup because in fantasy and DFS this game is all we care about for now. Plus, I’m interested to see how Baker distributes the ball. Which pass catcher is most viable? Is OBJ worth the price tag if limited in anyway. Can you trust Higgins or Callaway? I will focus most exposure personally on Nick Chubb and the defense here. He fits the bill. At home✅. Favored✅. Could touch the ball 20 times✅. Usually used in the red zone✅.

Chargers -6.5 at Colts (45)

I do feel I am a fish for it, but I do like the Chargers defense. Maybe Brissett is better than we anticipate, but we know what we are getting here. Austin Eckler’s buzz is growing and rightfully so. He should garner the majority of the rushes and should be involved in the passing game for a team who despite being on the road is favored and playing in a dome. The next fish play is site dependent, but Hunter Henry with no Antonio Gates is in play as is the Rivers/Allen or Rivers/Williams stack.

-I’m not in favor of tournament fliers on Brissett, Marlon Mack, and Eric Ebron. Those would be the only players I would consider but it’s a full fade for me.

Bills + 3 at Jets (40.5)

Why is a 40.5 over/under relevant? The prices. Is Josh Allen one of the best NFL qbs? No! Does he provide fantasy football value because of his legs? Yes.

-Is Sam Darnold the best QB? No. But at home, favored, and pricing, he and Bell could provide the TD equity in this game easy and this game will either fall under 40.5 or go way over and hit 50. I could easily see long TDs from Darnold to Anderson and could allow you to fit any RBs, WRs or defenses you want in lineup construction.

Bengals +10 at Seahawks (44). Chris Carson plus Seattle defense is the play here. Don’t fall for the Tyler Boyd with no AJ Green trap. Mixon could score but this is not an optimal spot.

Ravens -5 at Dolphins (37.5). As much as we may like Baltimore defense, how about the Dolphins defense for dirt cheap and just play all of the offense you want? Are they under dogs? Yes! But they are at home. And Lamar Jason could easily throw a pick six. That mixed with not allowing Baltimore to score 28-31 is good enough at their price. However, Jackson, Mark Ingram, and the Baltimore (an expensive defense) is still in play despite such a low total game. I think the Bills/Jets are more likely to go over their game total than this one. Young QBs like their TEs so Andrews is firmly in play as well.

QB

Jameis Winston

Matt Stafford

Lamar Jackson

Phillip Rivers

Pat Mahomes

Sam Darnold

Josh Allen

Carson Wentz

RB

Christian McCaffrey

Todd Gurley/Malcom Brown

Pollard if Zeek is limited in anyway (Giants/Cowboys not mentioned in article)

Saquan Barkley and his floor (Giants/Cowboys not mentioned in article. Barkley has a safe floor and potential ceiling, BUT it is a division game vs a good Cowboys defense)

Dalvin Cook

Mark Ingram

Peyton Barber

Jordan Howard

Nick Chubb

Chris Carson

Austin Eckler

Damien Williams/Lesean McCoy

WR

Rams (3). Robert Woods. Cooper Kupp. Brandin Cooks

Mike Evans/Chris Godwin

Adam Thielen

Calvin Ridley

Alshon Jeffrey

Kenny Golloday/Marvin Jones

Keenan Allen/Mike Williams

TE

Travis Kelce

Zach Ertz

George Kittle

Austin Hooper

OJ Howard

Kyle Rudolph

Hunter Henry

Mark Andrews

Defense

Chargers

Eagles

Browns

Detroit

Baltimore

Seattle

[ava-rosier]

Mr Right Swipe (preview)

IDK how I feel about this rough, rough draft. I just think I had a video of this concept playing in my head, but the style of what I’ve written kinda clashes with that video? Anyways, I’m probably going to hardcore regret putting up this version, but whatever. Have a peek at my modern AU Jonsa fic with supernatural creatures and Tinder.

Rated Explicit for mentions of exuberant dicks and butt stuff.

His nose itched.

That was the thing that dragged Jon from the murky depths of unconsciousness. He'd had no dreams, which, for his kind, was unusual enough to alarm him. He reached up to scratch the side of his nose, only to come up short. Frowning, he blinked his eyes faster to clear his vision as he simultaneously checked the status of the rest of his limbs and grasped at the frayed threads of his memory in an attempt to figure out what in all seven hells had happened the night before.

In quick succession he came to the following conclusions:

One: both his wrists and his ankles were currently bound by manacles to an ornate and black-painted bed frame. Two: from the darkness outside the window it wasn't properly morning yet- an old-fashioned pendulum clock in the far corner declared it just after one. Three: he was starkers, with not even a measly fitted sheet to cover his hips. Four....four was...oh yeah: hadn't he gone on another Tinder date earlier that night?

As if summoned by the clanging of metal, a redheaded woman strolled into the bedroom, humming softly and holding a tray in her hands. Her hair, which in the dim light of her profile picture had appeared dark brown, was actually a dark red that, if she weren't a witch, he would think unnatural. So much for avoiding redheads after Ros and Ygritte, neither of whom had appreciated his stockpiling of kitchen devices.

Melisandre was in her mid-thirties (maybe) and that had been part of the reason Jon swiped right on her- he was looking for something serious and so was she. Though it was becoming increasingly evident she might have a different definition of 'serious' than he did. They'd met at a trendy restaurant with some kind of postmodern approach to food, which pretty much meant Deconstruct Everything. The food had sucked and Melisandre had waxed philosophical on every damn subject.

Jon hated philosophy- he'd barely passed the 100-level course back in undergrad. But the combination of his frustration with the dating scene and the lousy food had driven him to drink too much. Hence why he'd gone back to Melisandre's place with her and drank even more... Based on the pounding headache he had, the residual sluggishness in his limbs, and the way his heart raced, Jon would hazard a guess he'd been slipped some kind of drug in the wine she'd given him.

“Uh...if you wanted to do bondage play, you could've asked me, you know?” He said, trying to sound nonchalant and not at all like a prey in a hunter's crosshairs. He shook one arm, making the chains rattle. She had definitely been coming onto him earlier and even though Jon had no intentions of going on another date with her again, he- like the damned masochist he was- was down for  a fuck, especially one with a woman whose body language said she knew what she wanted.

Melisandre frowned. “You weren't supposed to wake up this quickly. I must have made a mistake in the calculations.” She set down the tray and now Jon could see that instead of food, or even sex toys, the tray held an array of apothecary ingredients.

He was never using Tinder again.

“Wait, wait, hold up!” He called out when Melisandre turned to go, probably to check out said calculations and maybe knock him out again. She paused and turned back. “Just what were you planning on doing with me?” He definitely sounded more than a little panicked then.

“Your dragonseed would be the perfect contribution to a spell I devised to create a shadow baby,” she stated simply, as if that were all the information he would need.

“...say what?”

Clearly she had Googled him. That was the only explanation. Melisandre must have looked him up and figured out he was the son of Rhaegar Targaryen. However, he decided not to correct her on his species classification. Yes, his father was dragonkind, that much was true. But Jon had taken after his mother's side of the family, who were werewolves. And thank the fucking gods, both old and new, that he had. Especially now.

Melisandre smiled, her blood-red lipstick giving her a terrible sort of beauty.  “You are flame and I am shadow- together we could create the most perfect, powerful child who isn't bound to the physics of this realm.” Her chest rose and fell as she delivered what had to be the worst elevator pitch Jon had ever heard. “Alas, it won't work if I've made a mistake in the calculations, which I must go check right now. It wouldn't do to have you awake during the weaving of the spell,” her lips turned down in a pouty moue. “All that thrashing around in agony might prevent the reception of your seed.”

The recep- his seed- no, just no. No. Fucking. Way.

Jon watched her waltz out of the room, mouth agape for all of five seconds before he yanked with all his strength on the manacles. A dragon-shifter in human form was no stronger or faster than the average human. A werewolf, on the other hand, could call upon greater strength as well as sharper senses. Melisandre had probably coated the manacles in some kind of specific inhibition spell to prevent her dragonkind victim from shifting and breaking the metal.

It took several tries before Jon tore the pillars out of the bed-frame and, nose open, started to track down his belongings. Mercifully, she had left his clothing, wallet, and phone on a chair in the corner. He didn't even bother to redress and instead clutched the bundle to his chest before taking a running leap through what turned out to be a second-floor window. Broken glass rained down onto the lawn as his ankles took the brunt of his momentum and weight. The cuts would heal, though he really hoped none of the drunk undergrads staring at him and his wildly-swinging cock with wide eyes from their position on the sidewalk would end up being in one of the classes he TA'd for.

He was definitely never, ever using Tinder again. No more redheads. No more witches. No more redheaded witches.

This is absolutely the last time I use that bloody app!

“Teach me your ways. I'm ready.”

Sansa's proclamation was met with silence from the other four women sat in a corner of VinTerAge, one of their favorite nighttime haunts. Their table was a veritable littoral drift of empty glasses as well as the half-full ones they were currently nursing.

Margaery and Myranda turned to stare wide-eyed at each other, fists vibrating in the air as they emitted twin squeals.

“Is she asking what I think she's asking?” The first asked the latter in a stage whisper.

“I think she is!” Myranda gasped. “The blessed day has come!”

They fake sobbed together.

Sansa sighed and stacked her arms on top of the table, watching her friends' antics with pursed lips. “Are you two done?”

“I doubt they're done, but I'm lost,” Missandei interjected, frowning at Myranda and Margaery's histronics. Sansa could practically see the linguist in her struggling to parse some meaning from the context of their outburst.

The final woman at their table, both older and taller than the rest of them, raised a single eyebrow, her attention sufficiently torn away from the conversation she'd been having via thumbs on her phone. “Don't ask. You'll probably regret knowing the answer to that question.”

Sansa had met Brienne when the other woman had been the TA in her 'Chivalry In The Age of the Five Kings and Three Queens' course and the two had struck up a friendship after the term was over and Sansa had expressed an interest in continuing on for her Master's after she finished undergrad. Missandei she had met in a Valyrian language course, and by the time they'd been reunited in 'The Old Tongue in Literature' and 'Rhoynish Branch Languages', they were fast friends. Sansa was well aware that there was a division between the two women and her other friends, Margaery and Myranda, who were a great deal more caustic and free-spirited. But they were all here for her, which she appreciated.

For Brienne and Missandei's benefits, she explained: “I've decided I'm done looking for love. Right now, I just want to get laid. Forget commitment, I’m in the market for multiple orgasms.”

(“YAS QUEEN!” Myranda mock-sobbed.)

“Look, I don't even care if we're being OTT,” Margaery declared, flipping the long, expertly-blown honey brown layers of her hair over her shoulder as she directed her next comment to the confused women. “You have no idea how long we've waited for this one to develop her Inner Hoe.”

“I'm sure you mean well, but that sounds terribly speciest, and chock full of stereotyping,” Brienne argued, sitting up straighter in her seat.

Sansa stabbed her straw into the slush of her lemonade margarita, well aware of the plethora of issues she had with sex and sexuality. She didn't have to be a shrink to know said issues were rooted in the fact she was a sex witch.

Myranda ignored the tension between Brienne and Margaery, grinning at Sansa as she rooted around in the massive, ridiculously expensive handbag she'd gotten as a gift from one of her sugar daddies. “Don't worry, sweetie, we'll find you plenty of willing victims in no time.” She pulled out her phone and began tapping at the keys.

Sansa groaned. “For the hundredth time, Randa, I don't suck men's life force out through their dicks! I'm not a succubus- totally different classification.” For good measure, she took a deep breath before adding, “And besides, if Marg is still alive and talking after that one time we had sex, I think you're well aware of this.”

She shared a commiserative smirk with her oldest friend in the city.

First things first: Sansa Stark wasn't a nymphomaniac. She wanted to be clear on that. Not that she had any problem with women who enjoyed sex frequently and in varied forms.  It was just that she was the tiniest bit oversensitive to people assuming she had a pathological addiction to sex simply because she was a witch who used sexual magic. People tended to get weird about it- there were no shortage of stereotypes and assumptions about 'sex witches'...namely that they would cheat on you and were uncontrollable nymphomaniacs.

Which made it harder for her to find someone long-term. That had been a difficult reality to come to terms with since Sansa's fantasies usually ran along the lines of vaguely erotic domestic scenes. Alas, despite her drastic attempts to suppress the source of her magic, her partners had a tendency to either be creeped out and want to put a quick end to things or they thought they'd be getting sex whenever they wanted like a 24/7 porn film.

It wasn't an overstatement to say that Sansa'd had lousy luck with romantic partners.

Almost as soon as her prepubescent body was awash in hormones, Sansa had been dreaming of falling in love with a gorgeous boy or girl who would give her flowers, take her out to dinner at the place for teenagers to be seen in Wintertown, and basically give her the fantasy of every teen romantic movie.

Then she’d turned sixteen and the urges started. At first, she’d dismissed them as the normal hormonal surges of a teenage girl. That had been before she climbed on top of Cley Cerwyn in the back of his new-used car and fucked him silly. That, while a lapse in judgment, in itself wouldn’t have been a problem. But he’d been passively-aggressively treating her like shit at dinner for going to a Model UN meeting instead of his hockey game, so when Sansa felt her body become downright electrified in the car, she’d lashed out at him with that power.

Having your first sexual encounter become a police matter and too much of the details known by your parents had been pretty awkward. At least she hadn’t killed him? Anyways. School had been downright unbearable after that, with Cley and his hockey buddies making sure she became a pariah. Robb had graduated the year before so he couldn't be there to threaten his former teammates into keeping their mouths shut.

What had followed was months of therapy to help her acclimate to the idea of being a witch that fed off of sexual energy. Frankly, Sansa thought her parents could have used those therapy sessions more than she did. Her father was a werewolf, as were three of her siblings. Only she and Bran took after their mother, a witch who drew her power from the water. None of them really understood Sansa.

But. Here she was in Oldtown, studying Westerosi History Before 500. Every so often she tried the relationship thing and got laid, using the energy for her magic. Which wasn't to say she had completely accepted this part of herself- that was a work in progress.

“Are you sure this is the approach you want to take?” Brienne asked her, concern etched into her forehead as she reached out to place a hand on Sansa's forearm. “Just because you ran into a few bad apples doesn't mean you should give up on the kind of love story you want.”

Before Sansa could reply, Margaery interjected: “To be fair, that's easy for you to say- you're mated to a lion-shifter who probably kisses the very ground you walk upon.”

This was a fair description- for all he was cynical and sarcastic, Jaime Lannister had never made any bones about how much he adored the human woman who was taller than he, wore her platinum hair short, and who faithfully clung to old-fashioned principles that he claimed to eschew. Yes, they sniped back and forth at one other, but Sansa shipped it. Hard.

Missandei exhaled before playing devil's advocate. “She has a point. I mean, besides Sansa, we're all getting frequent orgasms. Marg and Randa have a rotation of men-”

“-and a few women,” Margaery made sure to add.

“-and then there's you and I, who get quote, dicked on the regular, unquote.” She had a faraway look in her brown eyes. “Though to be fair, I'm lucky to have found a man who doesn't lead with his dick, but rather his mouth and fingers.”

Margaery's eyes flashed with interest. “Oooh, I feel like there's a fingerbanging story in there somewhere.”

“Does Grey excel at Sothoryosi kisses?” Myranda's eyebrows wraggled.

Sansa, however, was entirely absorbed in her abject envy. “Gods I do want that so bad. But Harry never even made me come.”

All cross-conversation screeched to a halt at the table. Sansa could've sworn the two middle-aged women at the next table were listening intently.

“WHAT?” Myranda and Missandei exclaimed.

“At all?” Margaery asked, brows furrowed as she tried to understand that concept.

Sansa shrugged. “Me rubbing my clit while doing all the work on top of him doesn't count.”

“That sheep's dung!” Brienne cursed.

“Look, in a perfect world I'd find someone who likes my bossiness, who wants to go on bookstore dates, and also eat me out at least twice a week, but this isn't a perfect world. So I thought you could give me some pointers and tomorrow night we could go out clubbing...why are you shaking your head at me like that?” she asked Missandei.

“My sweet girl, it's the tenth century. Modern women don't go to clubs to get laid, unless they're kink clubs, they-”

“And how would you know about kink clubs, Missy?” Margaery asked, crossing her arms and narrowing her eyes.

Sansa resolutely ignored the interruption. “Who cares? Tell me, where do modern women go? I'll try anything.”

“I doubt you could understand the intricacies of rope-play or upending gender norms during sex, Margie.” Missandei took a slow sip of her wine.

“Is this a reference to pegging? Because I've drilled men up the ass, okay?” Margaery announced, her voice increasing in pitch towards the end of that sentence. Yep, the middle-aged ladies and the two men at the next table were definitely listening to them now.

Sansa felt the conversation getting away from her. Desperately, she tried tapping Missandei's arm to get her attention. “Missandei. Miss- just tell me-”

A snort came from Brienne. “Jaime practically handed me a strap-on harness our first time. That's nothing. You?” She turned to Myranda who nodded.

“Bitches, please. Do you have any idea how much money I've made off of men's intrinsic need to have their asses owned? So much, that's what.”

“TELL ME WHERE I CAN GET LAID!” Sansa all but screeched, causing conversation in the bar to come to a grinding halt. She gulped, cheeks flaming as all eyes swung to her. If there ever was a moment for the floor to open up and swallow her- this was it.

“Well, not here after that outburst, I can tell you.” Margaery pointed out, grinning at her friend's humiliation. Sansa gave her a withering glare.

“Anyways, as I was saying,” Missandei rolled her eyes, turning back to Sansa, “you're not going to find what you want by grinding into the crotch of some sweaty freshman. What you need is to get on Tinder.”

“Tinder.” Sansa repeated dumbly.

“It's an app you download on your phone-” Myranda tried to explain.

“I know what Tinder is. But...I mean...isn't it full of gross guys sending you dick pics?”

[to be continued in some manner, shape, or form]

[hellofastestnewsfan]

The World War III memes are here, bursting onto the shores of TikTok and Twitter after American forces assassinated the Iranian major general Qasem Soleimani this week. “Me and the boys on missile duty during #WWIII,” one reads, illustrated by a gif of two soldiers failing running from a misfired mortar. “Me chilling at home after ignoring my draft notice #WWIII,” says another, illustrated with a Spider-Man clip in which the hero’s aunt is interrupted during a prayer by the Green Goblin exploding through her window.

Along with the memes came the counter-memes, chiding people for joking about war, or smarming at them over how little their comfortable lives would be impacted by a new war in Iran.

World War III is not actually upon us, of course, but just hashtag-World War III—a container for content. In that role, these memes fulfill the internet’s ability to fashion endless turtles of content about anything. On TikTok, someone feigns illegally disposing of a draft notice set to Britney Spears’s “Criminal,” which someone else collates in a thread on Twitter, which gets rolled up into Buzzfeed metacontent about World War III memes.

@sarahfaithxx

#wwiii #ThatsWhatILike #turnitup #gymrush #BreakupWithBottled #fyp

♬ original sound - sarahfaithxx

But World War is not just a hashtag, either. It’s also a symbol. And it’s notable that young people are mustering that old emblem to express their unconscious fears about the present. In doing this, they are reviving a received notion of “world war,” one mostly expended by the generations that precede them.  

For three decades or more, World War III has been an anxious fantasy. During the Cold War, it became a shorthand for a very specific kind of doom: global nuclear destruction. After the blasts comes the fallout, the depthless smoke of nuclear winter, the ensuing end of the crops that sustain our mortal bodies, and the certain starvation of those too unlucky to have survived the war.

Those who lived through this period can still feel how real the threat was. That has not changed: Global nuclear stockpiles have been cut by 75 percent since their peak between 1965 and 1985, but there are still thousands of nuclear warheads spread all around the globe, each between tens and thousands of times more destructive than the Fat Man and Little Boy bombs detonated over Japan in 1945. Iran is not believed to have nuclear weapons, although its ambitions to develop or acquire them have been at the heart of the American conflict with the country.

Even so, the fantasy of World War III helped hide the reality of what war had become: a tangled mess of statecraft, profiteering, and politicking. In the moment, tidy narratives often made conflicts seem straightforward, but history has unraveled their knotty strands. During the Cold War, hot tensions became hopeless moils, conducted for political benefit as much as (and, over time, more than) moral right. Vietnam braided opposition to communism, itself a tenet of Cold War conflict, with democratic state-building in a decolonizing region. Proxy wars became common, such as the United States’s support of the Afghani mujahideen to destabilize the Soviet Union rather than to support a Muslim revolution. The Gulf War braided up the emerging 24/7 media ecosystem with the oil economy. The Iraq and Afghan wars, it now seems clear, were manufactured for political and commercial gain, and at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives.

And those are just some of the “normal” wars—the military ones entwined with nation-states rather than cartels like Los Zetas in Mexico, militias like the Sudanese Janjawid, and paramilitary groups like ISIS. Then there are the corporations. Mercenary data brokerage by Cambridge Analytica put useful information extracted from Facebook into service for misinformation campaigns. Via social media, organizations like the Russian Internet Research Association weaponized information, on the cheap, to disrupt the operation of the nation-states that might yet wage conventional or nuclear war. Services like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram provide easy, global reach for all the non-state actors that have proliferated to further destabilize their opponents.

In the face of all this chaos, is it any wonder that young people might see the relatively conventional act of assassinating an Iranian military commander as an oasis of political clarity? The memes help amplify a moment that fits into a straightforward narrative.

The deluge of draft-related memes that flowed from the news of  Soleimani’s execution exemplify the mental comfort such clarity brings. The idea of a normal war—an organized military front where national armies face off—became so piquant that it crashed the website for the Selective Service System, the government agency where men over 18 must still register in case of a draft. Even though a U.S. military draft hasn’t taken place since 1973, some of the memes feign comfort in evading conscription, citing hypothetical age, sex, or medical reasons why their authors might be disqualified.

There’s just tons of content about potentially getting drafted pic.twitter.com/4Zwjk57E0L

— Ryan Brooks (@ryanbrooks) January 3, 2020

At Insider, Andria Moore wrote that young people are using the wry humor of memes to cope with uncertainty. And at Buzzfeed News, Otilla Steadman and Ryan C. Brooks portrayed the practice as an expression of fear, carried out on the media formats like Instagram or TikTok that have become native environments for Gen Z.  

But the 18-to-24 set might have no idea what they are thinking or feeling when they create or share these posts. “Nobody is aware of what’s going on,” my Gen Z son texted me from his group of friends. (He’s 20 years old.) “It’s not coping because there’s nothing to cope over,” he theorized, adding that his crew wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of the people posting these memes don’t have the faintest idea about the geopolitical circumstances to which they are supposedly responding.

That’s probably the case for people of all ages, thanks in part to the frenetic pace at which everyone produces and consumes information online. “Buckle up, nerds,” the Arc Digital editor Berny Belvedere began in a hilarious viral tweet. “After discovering the existence of Quasar Sailemun thirty minutes ago, I am now ready to explain how, being three trillion times more significant than Bin Laden, his assassination means we will have to forfeit the Louisiana Purchase.”

Instinct and habit rule online, and online life is just life now. The instincts and habits everyone has developed over the past 20 years of forever war involve reacting first, and thinking later—if at all. The news is so ubiquitous that its coverage—from Soleimani’s assassination to all these memes supposedly comforting people in its aftermath—evades more meaning than it elucidates.  

Absent knowledge and intention, the best and most generous way to interpret these World War III memes is to try to understand how they surface the ideology of contemporary life. Memory of the experience of world war is disappearing, as the last of the generation who survived conventional, global warfare pass away. At the same time, conventional war itself became too constant to take notice of; today’s 18 year olds have never taken a breath at a time when the United States wasn’t embroiled in combat in the Middle East.

For GenXers like me, the fear of nuclear annihilation made the end of the world a dark but deviously appealing fantasy. It seemed natural for humankind to dream about witnessing our collective end. No matter your scientific suppositions or religious beliefs about life or afterlife, the glory of human existence became even more bewitching in the event that total annihilation might insure that you would not have missed out on its future, beyond the grasp of your own lifespan.

For many of today’s youths, however, a mortgaged future can already feel likely, if not certain, for much more concrete reasons—from economic inequality to climate-caused extinction. It’s no wonder that their fantasies would look toward the past instead. It is strangely comforting to imagine a conventional war of the 20th-century variety, mated to the risks of nuclear escalation, because it represents a return to a well-worn period of history.

The two World Wars produced horrific atrocities. But they also tipped out into a long period of prosperity and comfort, especially in America. That connects the idea of a world war with other matters: the Greatest Generation, and the idea that military service is noble, thanks to the unvarnished clarity of good and evil; a time when patriotism in general and the war effort in particular was nonpartisan; the social services, tax base, and economic circumstances that produced the middle class and all its benefits, from stable jobs to cheap homeownership.

But that reality is no more. So now what? To fear world war is also to dream of it, and to dream of world war is also to indulge the nostalgia of the mid-century, that great refuge between two gilded ages, when ordinary people thrived.

from The Atlantic https://ift.tt/2sQuZqC

[flauntpage]

Let ’em Off the Hook – Observations from Celtics 108, Sixers 103

Blown lead? Check. 

Highly questionable coaching decisions? Check.

Struggles from a superstar player? Check.

Game two was an archetypal Philadelphia sporting experience, a collection of only the most bitter ingredients, pestled into slop and added to the worst mixed drink of all time. It starts smooth and then gives you a repulsive aftertaste, one that I think will probably last until Saturday night for most Sixers fans.

There’s a lot to unpack after last night, so let’s just take it one step at a time.

Why no timeout?

Twitter went off the rails during the Celtics’ 2nd quarter run, wondering why Brett Brown didn’t call time to stop the bleeding.

Brown explained post game that he trusted his team to stay organized. He’d “do it again,” if the same situation came up.

Here’s the full quote:

“I trust my players that they have shown that they can hold on to stuff, that they can stay organized. And they’ve shown that over the past third of the season. As we study this – and it’s easy for us to say, ‘oh shoot, they went on that run, do you burn a timeout?’ When we study it and we discuss it on the bench, we wanna have – I wish I had more (timeouts) at the end of a game as well. So I feel like, when you started subbing, that we were gonna be able to hold the fort. In retrospect, we didn’t. Would a timeout have fixed it? I don’t think so. We can maybe second guess that. But by and large it’s going into the game and trying to make sure that you have enough (timeouts) at the end of the game also to manage it. You knew it was going to be a close game. The notion that we were gonna maintain a 20 point lead and walk out of the Boston Garden wasn’t on my mind. I felt like what we did to them, they were going to do to us. Runs were going to be had. When you bring Joel Embiid and JJ Redick back into the game, and you’ve got a stockpile of timeouts to use, that was my decision (not to use one). As I said, I’d do it again. I’ll go back and look at the tape and if it’s something I’ll pivot out of, I’ll share it with everybody when I see you next.”

My first reaction is that I’m not surprised. This is how Brett Brown has coached all season long. He’s said 100 times before that he’s not gonna change how his team plays or “walk the ball up the floor” to address the turnover issue, preferring to let his team figure it out on their own. It seems like that same mentality is applied when opponents go on runs, and I can understand, based on his DNA, why he coached that second quarter the way he did.

That said, he has to consider the other five guys on the floor. Whether you believe in YOUR team or not, using a timeout there can break the OTHER team’s rhythm and put a halt to the action. It’s one thing to think your squad can play their way out of it, and maybe they would have if one of those three-straight three point attempts had gone in, but they didn’t. They missed. So do the simple thing, call the timeout to slow Boston’s momentum and have a talk with your team.

Brett’s pattern has been to call timeout usually after the second or third shot a team makes to begin a run, typically when he sees a mistake on defense. It’s a “nip it in the bud” type of approach that he began to use in December and January, and I think it helped correct some of the blown lead problems they were experiencing during the first half of the season. And while he’s correct that basketball is a game of runs, he could have helped his team out by settling things down and at least breaking up the opponent’s rhythm.

It felt very similar to the London game in this regard, where the Sixers started out strong then found themselves totally lost in the moment.

Ben Simmons

One point on 0-4 shooting with 7 assists, five turnovers, and a -23 rating.

He was again ineffective due to Boston’s defensive scheme, which I’ll explain a bit later.

Brown made a shrewd decision to take Simmons out of the game in the third quarter and put in T.J. McConnell, who finished 4-4 for 8 points, adding 5 rebounds, 0 turnovers, and a ending the game at +16. McConnell showed Boston a completely different look, explored different spots on the floor, and established an offensive fluidity that had been missing since the 1st quarter.

With 5:29 remaining in the fourth, with the Sixers leading 93-91, Brown inexplicably went back to Simmons and put McConnell on the bench. His team was outscored 17-10 from that point and ultimately lost the game.

Brown’s explanation:

“I mean, It’s a tough decision, I admit it. This whole playoff experience is something I want our young guys and our star players to learn from and grow. The decision, do you go with T.J. still or come back to Ben Simmons, I’m coming back to Ben Simmons. I’m coming back to Ben. He’s had a hell of a year. I think he’s the rookie of the year. I think he’s going to have to learn how to play in these environments and I’m going back with Ben Simmons.”

I understand that.

I don’t think anyone disputes the idea that your starting rookie point guard should get as much experience as possible, especially in challenging, high stakes situations. If that’s the idea though, then Markelle Fultz should be playing in this series.

Why? Because McConnell gave the Sixers the best chance to win that game last night, and Brown claiming that Ben has to “learn how to play in these environments” is basically an admission that winning right now isn’t priority number one.

Seriously.  How else do you parse that quote? Everybody knows that Simmons should have stayed on the bench, but Brown went back to his worst player on the night with the game on the line.

You can give me some push back about Markelle Fultz not being ready for this stage or whatever, and maybe you’re right, but Fultz is the #1 draft pick. He’s available. Put him in the game. Is he going to look more lost than game two Simmons?

It’s hypocritical to bench the better player on the night (McConnell) for the future of the franchise (Simmons) while completely ignoring the guy you traded up to select #1 overall. If the Sixers feel like they’re playing with house money, and everybody is just happy to be here, which is the vibe I’m getting, then put Markelle in the game, give him this experience, and move on to next year knowing a little bit more about what you have.

I wanted to give Brett a lot of credit for sitting down Simmons, and I think we can still do that, but he completely expunged his best coaching move of the series by going back to Ben down the stretch instead of staying with T.J.

Walled off

Boston attacked Simmons the same way they did in game one, meeting him with a second defender in transition and walling him off near the free throw line.

The issue is that he’s too shallow to kick out to the perimeter but also too deep to take a shot. The Celtics are doing a nice job of trapping him in that purgatory type of area where he’s caught in two mindsets.

One of the issues is that Ben is trying to push in transition before Joel Embiid makes his way up the court. In those cases, Aron Baynes, or whomever is guarding Embiid, simply just slides to double Simmons because there’s nobody else to guard. The best option is to leave the ball for Embiid for a trailing three, but he’s not shooting well from the perimeter in this series.

Even in the half court, you see similar things. Here, Al Horford sags, Baynes is there for the pickup, and if Embiid wants to stand on the three point line, Boston will live with that all day long:

Horford also kills the entry pass to Saric there, because he essentially guards two guys at once by sagging off a non-shooter.

Simmons can’t figure it out and the Sixers staff needs to coach him through it. For what it’s worth, he put it on himself after the game:

"It was mainly what I did to myself. I think mentally, I was thinking too much."

Ben Simmons on his struggles in Game 2.#GameTime pic.twitter.com/xPgzKo7mTd

— NBA TV (@NBATV) May 4, 2018

I think the “thinking too much” concept was exemplified on the 4th quarter play where he got Aron Baynes on the switch and didn’t take him to the rack:

This is why Ben Simmons isn’t the rookie of the year. He’s incapable of scoring on One of the slowest guys in the NBA. Any elite player goes to the basket here. Donovan Mitchell is ROY. Simmons with 1 point, 3 assists and 4 TO halfway though Q3 pic.twitter.com/TVn41ukTik

— Curtis (@CJKnh) May 4, 2018

I don’t necessaril agree or disagree with “Curtis” here, I was just looking for the video on Twitter and this is what came up.

Other observations

They took JJ Redick off Jayson Tatum, starting him on Marcus Smart instead. Robert Covington picked up Tatum while Simmons was Terry Rozier’s primary defender.

Horford at the five is causing all sorts of defensive issues for Joel Embiid, who is being dragged to the perimeter and forced away from the rim.

I didn’t see a ton of tweaks to combat Boston’s perimeter pressure, but Redick and Marco Belinelli did have a couple of made shots at the rim. Belinelli I think had two successful backdoor cuts. That’s something I need to check out when I rewatch the game.

Jaylen Brown came off the bench to make his series debut. He had 13 points on 5-12 shooting. You can live with that, considering he had a pair of 30 point games against Milwaukee.

Uncontested field goals: 46.4%, 26-56. They just made more of their open shots this time around.

Amir Johnson had a clean block whistled as a foul in the 1st quarter

I’m not sure what Dario was doing on that play where Jaylen Brown picked up a loose ball near half court and finished at the other end.

16 offensive rebounds and 18 second chance points. Only 12 total turnovers. Again they did fine in auxiliary categories.

Only 14 free throw attempts, compared to 26 in game one. They did a poor job of getting to the line.

There was a late game possession, at 104-97, when the Sixers didn’t know what they were supposed to run. Saric went to screen for Redick, who looked like he wasn’t expecting it. Covinton put his arms up after the play as if to say, “what was that?”

Let ’em Off the Hook – Observations from Celtics 108, Sixers 103 published first on https://footballhighlightseurope.tumblr.com/

[derechointernacionalpublico]

The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

On July 7, 2017 a vote was held by a United Nations treaty conference to adopt the final text of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). Of the 124 states participating in the conference, 122 states voted for adoption, one state (the Netherlands) voted against adoption, and one state (Singapore) abstained. This vote brought to a successful close the second and final negotiating session for a United Nations nuclear weapons prohibition convention, the mandate for which had been given by the General Assembly in December 2016. The treaty will now be opened for signature by states on September 20, 2017, and will come into force 90 days after its 50th ratification.

The TPNW provides for a complete ban on development, possession, and use of nuclear weapons by its parties. It is difficult to overstate the significance of the TPNW within the framework of treaties on nuclear nonproliferation. It is the first multilateral nuclear weapons disarmament treaty to be adopted since the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) in 1968. So we are witnessing a generational event of significance.

The essential obligations of the TPNW for any state that becomes a party thereto, are listed in Article 1, which provides as follows:

Each State Party undertakes never under any circumstances to:

(a) Develop, test, produce, manufacture, otherwise acquire, possess or stockpile nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices;

(b) Transfer to any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or control over such weapons or explosive devices directly or indirectly;

(c) Receive the transfer of or control over nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices directly or indirectly;

(d) Use or threaten to use nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices;

(e) Assist, encourage or induce, in any way, anyone to engage in any activity prohibited to a State Party under this Treaty;

(f) Seek or receive any assistance, in any way, from anyone to engage in any activity prohibited to a State Party under this Treaty;

(g) Allow any stationing, installation or deployment of any nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices in its territory or at any place under its jurisdiction or control.

The TPNW is the ultimate product of two main trends in international relations that, to the surprise of many observers, came together successfully within just the past few years. The first trend is the longstanding frustration of most of the states parties to the NPT with the noncompliance of nuclear-weapon-possessing states with the NPT’s disarmament provisions, located in Article VI.

The second, and more recent trend, is what has been dubbed the humanitarian initiative; an effort that took shape in 2012, and that brought together more than 150 states and myriad civil society groups to focus on the unacceptable harm to human life, health, and environment that would be caused by any use of nuclear weapons.

These two trends coalesced in August, 2016 at a special United Nations working group on nuclear disarmament, held in Geneva. This working group recommended the negotiation of a treaty comprehensively banning nuclear weapons. That Autumn, the First Committee of the General Assembly adopted a resolution approving the mandate for such a conference, leading to the December 16, 2016 General Assembly resolution.

Noticeably absent throughout the negotiations on the TPNW – including in General Assembly debates, the formal treaty negotiation sessions, and the voting on the final treaty text – have been all nine states known to possess nuclear weapons (the United States, the United Kingdom, France, China, Russia, Israel, India, Pakistan, and North Korea). These states, and a number of others, boycotted the negotiating process entirely. As Niki Haley, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, explained: “In this day and time we can’t honestly say that we can protect our people by allowing the bad actors to have [nuclear weapons] and those of us that are good, trying to keep peace and safety, not to have them.” Similarly, the British Ambassador to the United Nations, Matthew Rycroft has stated: “The UK is not attending the negotiations on a treaty to prohibit nuclear weapons because we do not believe that those negotiations will lead to effective progress on global nuclear disarmament.”

Notwithstanding the non-participation of the nuclear-weapons-possessing states, the states negotiating the TPNW have expressed the view that the possession and potential use of nuclear weapons is an existential threat to humanity, and one that cannot be ignored simply because the few states that possess nuclear weapons are not yet ready to take meaningful steps to disarm themselves. They also see the TPNW as an important normative statement, by a supermajority of the states in the world, that the development, possession and use of nuclear weapons is immoral and must be prohibited, just as other weapons of mass destruction including chemical and biological weapons have been the subject of comprehensive prohibition treaties. And some states have expressed hope that this normative statement might contribute to the development of parallel customary international law.

Critics of the treaty, however, contend that without the participation and buy-in of the nuclear weapons states, the TPNW is little more than an idealistic statement of disapproval by states that do not themselves possess nuclear weapons. They argue that the TPNW will not be effective in convincing states that possess nuclear weapons to disarm, and that it may in fact do harm to the existing legal framework governing nuclear weapons proliferation, by undermining the centrality of the NPT as the nearly-universally-subscribed-to cornerstone of the regime.

The hope of states supporting the TPNW is that the treaty will constitute a normative nucleus around which efforts may be made by both states parties and international civil society to persuade nuclear-weapons-possessing states to join the treaty. The issue of verification of a former nuclear armed state’s implementation of the treaty’s disarmament provisions, once it becomes a party to the treaty, was one of the issues subject to heavy negotiation. The resulting provisions of Article 4 of the TPNW allow for former nuclear-weapons-possessing states to join the treaty as parties either after they have fully disarmed, or while still in possession of nuclear weapons, subject to a “legally binding, time-bound” plan for their destruction by a deadline to be determined by a meeting of the states parties.

From a legal perspective, there are many issues of analysis and interpretation that will keep scholars – well, me anyway – busy writing about the TPNW for years to come. These include the tension that will exist between the obligations of the TPNW, and the nuclear weapons commitments of NATO members. This, by the way, explains the Netherlands’ rather uncharacteristic vote against a nuclear disarmament treaty. NATO defense policy includes a longstanding commitment to nuclear weapons sharing agreements. At present, five NATO countries have such agreements with the United States, pursuant to which U.S. nuclear weapons are stationed on the territory of the host state, and are to be used by the host state’s military in the event of an armed conflict. The Netherlands is one of those states, along with Belgium, Germany, Italy, and Turkey. It is estimated that a total of 180 U.S. B-61 thermonuclear weapons are currently stationed on the territory of these five NATO host countries, the largest number of which are stationed at Aviano air base in Italy, and Incirlik air base in Turkey

But recall that Article 1(g) of the TPNW provides that no state party shall “Allow any stationing, installation or deployment of any nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices in its territory or at any place under its jurisdiction or control.” This paragraph was very intentionally added to the TPNW in order to close a controversial loophole in Article II of the NPT, that NATO has long argued allows for such nuclear sharing agreements. So what happens if any member of NATO joins the TPNW? Can this provision of the TPNW be reconciled with the nuclear weapons sharing commitments of NATO members? Most NATO countries, clearly including the Netherlands, appear to think that it cannot be.

Other issues that require careful interpretation and analysis include the relationship between the TPNW and the NPT on matters such as safeguards of nuclear materials and facilities, and the role of the International Atomic Energy Agency. This is a subject that was contentious during the drafting of the treaty, and one on which I have already provided some preliminary commentary over at my blog.

From a political perspective, even without the buy-in of the nuclear armed states – and indeed precisely because of it – the TPNW will undoubtedly have an impact on nuclear weapons diplomacy going forward, particularly in the context of diplomacy surrounding the NPT. The next NPT Review Conference is scheduled for 2020, and the Preparatory Committee meetings for that conference have already begun. It will be important to see how the states parties to the TPNW seek to bring the treaty’s existence and implications into those already highly fraught negotiations about the health and relevance of the NPT. Many states parties to the TPNW see the new treaty as an implementation of Article VI of the NPT on nuclear disarmament, and will seek to have it acknowledged as such in the Review Conference’s final document. This will be heavily opposed by the nuclear armed states and those under their “umbrella” of nuclear protection. But negotiations on a consensus Review Conference final document are always unpredictable, and if some acknowledgment of the TPNW can be worked into it, that will represent a major political and potentially legal coup for the TPNW parties.

While much remains to be addressed both legally and politically concerning the TPNW, my own view is that the adoption of the TPNW is an event to be welcomed. It is a very useful legal supplement to the increasingly marginalized NPT, and represents a welcome shakeup of stagnant NPT politics. It very forcefully puts the issue of disarmament front and center in international nuclear weapons diplomacy. The nuclear-weapons-possessing-states can of course avoid signing the treaty. But it is now much more difficult for them to avoid seriously addressing the expressed will of the international community that nuclear weapons should be understood to be just as immoral as any other banned weaponry, and that as such their development, possession, and use should be prohibited in international law.

  [via EJIL: Talk!]

https://www.dipublico.org/106758/the-treaty-on-the-prohibition-of-nuclear-weapons/