#case of imprisonment

[detainedstaffday]

Convention on the safety of the United Nations and Associated personnel.

This Convention applies in respect of United Nations and associated personnel and United Nations operations, as defined in article 1. This Convention shall not apply to a United Nations operation authorized by the United Nations Security Council as an enforcement action under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations in which any of the personnel are engaged as combatants against organized armed forces and to which the law of international armed conflict applies. Article 3 -Identification

The military and police components of a United Nations operation and their vehicles, vessels and aircraft shall bear distinctive identification. Other personnel, vehicles, vessels and aircraft involved in the United Nations operation shall be appropriately identified unless otherwise decided by the Secretary-General of the United Nation; All United Nations and associated personnel shall carry appropriate identification documents. Article 4 - Agreements on the status of the operation The host State and the United Nations shall conclude as soon as possible an agreement on the status of the United Nations operation and all personnel engaged in the operation including, inter alia, provisions on privileges and immunities for military and police components of the operation. Article 5 - Transit A transit State shall facilitate the unimpeded transit of United Nations and associated personnel and their equipment to and from the host State. Article 6 - Respect for laws and regulations

Without prejudice to such privileges and immunities as they may enjoy or to the requirements of their duties, United Nations and associated personnel shall: (a) Respect the laws and regulations of the host State and the transit State; and (b) Refrain from any action or activity incompatible with the impartial and international nature of their duties. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall take all appropriate measures to ensure the observance of these obligations. Article 7 - Duty to ensure the safety and security of United Nations and associated personnel

United Nations and associated personnel, their equipment and premises shall not be made the object of attack or of any action that prevents them from discharging their mandate. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure the safety and security of United Nations and associated personnel. In particular, States Parties shall take all appropriate steps to protect United Nations and associated personnel who are deployed in their territory from the crimes set out in article 9. States Parties shall cooperate with the United Nations and other States Parties, as appropriate, in the implementation of this Convention, particularly in any case where the host State is unable itself to take the required measures. Article 8 - Duty to release or return

United Nations and associated personnel captured or detained Except as otherwise provided in an applicable status-of-forces agreement, if United Nations or associated personnel are captured or detained in the course of the performance of their duties and their identification has been established, they shall not be subjected to interrogation and they shall be promptly released and returned to United Nations or other appropriate authorities. Pending their release such personnel shall be treated in accordance with universally recognized standards of human rights and the principles and spirit of the Geneva Conventions of 1949. Article 9 - Crimes against United Nations and associated personnel

The intentional commission of: (a) A murder, kidnapping or other attack upon the person or liberty of any United Nations or associated personnel; (b) A violent attack upon the official premises, the private accommodation or the means of transportation of any United Nations or associated personnel likely to endanger his or her person or liberty; (c) A threat to commit any such attack with the objective of compelling a physical or juridical person to do or to refrain from doing any act; (d) An attempt to commit any such attack; and (e) An act constituting participation as an accomplice in any such attack, or in an attempt to commit such attack, or in organizing or ordering others to commit such attack, shall be made by each State Party a crime under its national law. Each State Party shall make the crimes set out in paragraph 1 punishable by appropriate penalties which shall take into account their grave nature. Article 10 - Establishment of jurisdiction

Each State Party shall take such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the crimes set out in article 9 in the following cases: (a) When the crime is committed in the territory of that State or on board a ship or aircraft registered in that State; (b) When the alleged offender is a national of that State. A State Party may also establish its jurisdiction over any such crime when it is committed: (a) By a stateless person whose habitual residence is in that State; or (b) With respect to a national of that State; or (c) In an attempt to compel that State to do or to abstain from doing any act. Any State Party which has established jurisdiction as mentioned in paragraph 2 shall notify the Secretary-General of the United Nations. If such State Party subsequently rescinds that jurisdiction, it shall notify the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Each State Party shall take such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the crimes set out in article 9 in cases where the alleged offender is present in its territory and it does not extradite such person pursuant to article 15 to any of the States Parties which have established their jurisdiction in accordance with paragraph 1 or 2. This Convention does not exclude any criminal jurisdiction exercised in accordance with national law. Article 11 - Prevention of crimes against United Nations and associated personnel

States Parties shall cooperate in the prevention of the crimes set out in article 9, particularly by: (a) Taking all practicable measures to prevent preparations in their respective territories for the commission of those crimes within or outside their territories; and (b) Exchanging information in accordance with their national law and coordinating the taking of administrative and other measures as appropriate to prevent the commission of those crimes. Article 12 - Communication of information

Under the conditions provided for in its national law, the State Party in whose territory a crime set out in article 9 has been committed shall, if it has reason to believe that an alleged offender has fled from its territory, communicate to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and, directly or through the Secretary-General, to the State or States concerned all the pertinent facts regarding the crime committed and all available information regarding the identity of the alleged offender. Whenever a crime set out in article 9 has been committed, any State Party which has information concerning the victim and circumstances of the crime shall endeavour to transmit such information, under the conditions provided for in its national law, fully and promptly to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the State or States concerned. Article 13 - Measures to ensure prosecution or extradition

Where the circumstances so warrant, the State Party in whose territory the alleged offender is present shall take the appropriate measures under its national law to ensure that person’s presence for the purpose of prosecution or extradition.

Measures taken in accordance with paragraph 1 shall be notified, in conformity with national law and without delay, to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and, either directly or through the Secretary-General, to: (a) The State where the crime was committed; (b) The State or States of which the alleged offender is a national or, if such person is a stateless person, in whose territory that person has his or her habitual residence; (c) The State or States of which the victim is a national; and (d) Other interested States. Article 14 - Prosecution of alleged offenders The State Party in whose territory the alleged offender is present shall, if it does not extradite that person, submit, without exception whatsoever and without undue delay, the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution, through proceedings in accordance with the law of that State. Those authorities shall take their decision in the same manner as in the case of an ordinary offence of a grave nature under the law of that State. Article 15 - Extradition of alleged offenders

To the extent that the crimes set out in article 9 are not extraditable offences in any extradition treaty existing between States Parties, they shall be deemed to be included as such therein. States Parties undertake to include those crimes as extraditable offences in every extradition treaty to be concluded between them. If a State Party which makes extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty receives a request for extradition from another State Party with which it has no extradition treaty, it may at its option consider this Convention as the legal basis for extradition in respect of those crimes. Extradition shall be subject to the conditions provided in the law of the requested State. States Parties which do not make extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty shall recognize those crimes as extraditable offences between themselves subject to the conditions provided in the law of the requested State. Each of those crimes shall be treated, for the purposes of extradition between States Parties, as if it had been committed not only in the place in which it occurred but also in the territories of the States Parties which have established their jurisdiction in accordance with paragraph 1 or 2 of article 10. Article 16 - Mutual assistance in criminal matters

States Parties shall afford one another the greatest measure of assistance in connection with criminal proceedings brought in respect of the crimes set out in article 9, including assistance in obtaining evidence at their disposal necessary for the proceedings. The law of the requested State shall apply in all cases.

The provisions of paragraph 1 shall not affect obligations concerning mutual assistance embodied in any other treaty. Article 17- Fair treatment

Any person regarding whom investigations or proceedings are being carried out in connection with any of the crimes set out in article 9 shall be guaranteed fair treatment, a fair trial and full protection of his or her rights at all stages of the investigations or proceedings. Any alleged offender shall be entitled: (a) To communicate without delay with the nearest appropriate representative of the State or States of which such person is a national or which is otherwise entitled to protect that person’s rights or, if such person is a stateless person, of the State which, at that person’s request, is willing to protect that person’s rights; and (b) To be visited by a representative of that State or those States. Article 18 - Notification of outcome of proceedings The State Party where an alleged offender is prosecuted shall communicate the final outcome of the proceedings to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall transmit the information to other States Parties. Article 19 - Dissemination The States Parties undertake to disseminate this Convention as widely as possible and, in particular, to include the study thereof, as well as relevant provisions of international humanitarian law, in their programmes of military instruction. Article 20 - Savings clauses Nothing in this Convention shall affect: (a) The applicability of international humanitarian law and universally recognized standards of human rights as contained in international instruments in relation to the protection of United Nations operations and United Nations and associated personnel or the responsibility of such personnel to respect such law and standards; (b) The rights and obligations of States, consistent with the Charter of the United Nations, regarding the consent to entry of persons into their territories; (c) The obligation of United Nations and associated personnel to act in accordance with the terms of the mandate of a United Nations operation; (d) The right of States which voluntarily contribute personnel to a United Nations operation to withdraw their personnel from participation in such operation; or (e) The entitlement to appropriate compensation payable in the event of death, disability, injury or illness attributable to peace-keeping service by persons voluntarily contributed by States to United Nations operations. Article 21 - Right of self-defence Nothing in this Convention shall be construed so as to derogate from the right to act in self-defence. Article 22 - Dispute settlement

Any dispute between two or more States Parties concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention which is not settled by negotiation shall, at the request of one of them, be submitted to arbitration. If within six months from the date of the request for arbitration the parties are unable to agree on the organization of the arbitration, any one of those parties may refer the dispute to the International Court of Justice by application in conformity with the Statute of the Court. Each State Party may at the time of signature, ratification, acceptance or approval of this Convention or accession thereto declare that it does not consider itself bound by all or part of paragraph 1. The other States Parties shall not be bound by paragraph 1 or the relevant part thereof with respect to any State Party which has made such a reservation. Any State Party which has made a reservation in accordance with paragraph 2 may at any time withdraw that reservation by notification to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Article 23 - Review meetings At the request of one or more States Parties, and if approved by a majority of States Parties, the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall convene a meeting of the States Parties to review the implementation of the Convention, and any problems encountered with regard to its application. Article 24 - Signature This Convention shall be open for signature by all States, until 31 December 1995, at United Nations Headquarters in New York. Article 25 - Ratification, acceptance or approval This Convention is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval. Instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Article 26 Accession This Convention shall be open for accession by any State. The instruments of accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Article 27 -Entry into force

This Convention shall enter into force thirty days after twenty-two instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession have been deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. For each State ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to the Convention after the deposit of the twenty-second instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, the Convention shall enter into force on the thirtieth day after the deposit by such State of its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Article 28 - Denunciation

A State Party may denounce this Convention by written notification to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Denunciation shall take effect one year following the date on which notification is received by the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Article 29 - Authentic texts The original of this Convention, of which the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall send certified copies thereof to all States.

[destielmemenews]

The five men claim in a federal lawsuit that Trump knew he was acting with “reckless disregard” for the truth when he said during the September debate with Vice President Kamala Harris that they pleaded guilty to crimes connected to the beating and raping a woman in New York City, and that the five teenagers “badly hurt a person, killed a person” in the attack.

“Defendant Trump’s statements were false and defamatory in numerous respects,” attorneys for the men, now all in their 50s, wrote in the lawsuit filed in federal court in Philadelphia. “Plaintiffs never pled guilty to the Central Park assaults. Plaintiffs all pled not guilty and maintained their innocence throughout their trial and incarceration, as well as after they were released from prison.”

“None of the victims of the Central Park assaults were killed,” the lawyers for Yusef Salaam, Raymond Santana, Kevin Richardson, Antron Brown and Korey Wise wrote.

source 1

source 2

source 3

The Central Park Five and Trump, Explained by NPR

[st-hedge]

It wasn’t on my 2024 bingo card that I’d draw V again. Anyway I’ll go ahead ramble in the tags

[painandmovies]

Casey Anthony getting off for the m_rder!ng of her child and the Mendedez brothers still being in prison for finally snapping at their ab_sive parents is what's wrong with the world and the justice system.

[rawliverandgoronspice]

The Dondon Post (or: the bizarre TotK's side content counterpoints to its main quest's immuable binary morality)

Speaking of strange TotK Choices, I think I have one singe post left in me about this game; and it's about the Dondon quest, "The Beast and the Princess".

(and about other stuff too, you'll see, we'll get to them)

More specifically: about how... strange of a thematic point it feebly attemps to make in the larger context of the storyline, and how it seems to be yet another mark of a world that, perhaps, once tried to be more morally complex that it ended up becoming.

Buckle up: it's a long one, and it gets pretty conceptual.

(good gem boys notwhistanding)

The Princess and the Beast

So, a couple of things about the setup. We are investigating potential Princess sightings; but at this point, either because we have already completed a bunch and know the general gib, because we have met a couple of wild Fake Zelda shenanigans, or through the simple fact that we are completing a side quest, we know there's a good chance it won't lead to an actual Zelda information. So when we ask Penn about what is going on and he replies with the ominous "we saw the Princess riding some kind of beast --a frightening one with huge, brutal tusks-- that the princess seemed to control", we get Ideas. Then the sidequest is registered: "The Princess and the Beast".

So. You know me. And if you don't know me, here's what you should know: my brain immediately flared up with the thought there was no way in hell this wasn't some kind of wink towards Ganondorf's renowned boarish beast form, especially given tusks were given so much focus.

My first assumption was: that's a miniboss right? I will get to fight some small boar-like thing that Fake Zelda rides sometimes. Cool! I didn't hold too hard onto my hope that the relationship of Zelda and/or Ganondorf to the natural world, or to each other would be expanded upon, since I had already been burned before, but my interest was piqued.

You have to understand how starved I was for any hint of complexity or mystery or ambiguity at this point. I was extremely eager for the game to throw anything at me that would surprise me, enlighten something pre-established, make the exploration lead to a meaningful discovery or deepening of characters, world or themes (and not just slightly cooler loot, or a bossfight, or a puzzle devoid of emotional context --cohesion and depth is what motivates my play sessions, especially in an open world game that I want to believe is worth losing oneself into). This was about the most intriguing task on my to do list at the moment, and so I plunged in immediately.

After really REALLY misunderstanding what I was supposed to do (I stalked every corner of every forest surrounding the tropical area at night or during blood moons in hope to see something --which was very much the wrong call), I arrived to the other stable, then was guided to the other side of the river where Cima awaits and explains that these creatures are actually a new species discovered by Zelda; that they are gentle and kind and not at all scary ("Dondons aren't beastly, they're adorable!"), and even somehow digest luminous stones into gemstones. They like the company of people and liked Zelda in particular.

I was... I felt two different ways about this conclusion, and I think it's worth to explore both: disappointment and some sort of... "huh!" Hard to describe this emotion otherwise.

I'll get the disappointment out of the way first, because it's the least interesting of the two. While I think the little emotional arc I was taken on was not devoid of interest --I was indeed taken on by the rumor and intrigued by its implications-- I wanted, well. A little bit more. And if the creatures were to be Zelda's pet project, I would have loved for them to be actually terrifying and feisty, and for her to develop an interest for these creatures in particular regardless. It could have been very interesting characterization that veered out of the perfect princess loving the perfect world floundering around her, always bringing her clear, practical benefits from the interaction.

(I have made another post that speaks of my discomfort that Zelda does everything everywhere and everyone loves her for it --I get what they were trying to go for, but it either lacks conflict for me to buy into that dynamic at the scale of several regions, or they went on too hard for my taste, as she is, at once and in the span of a couple of years at most: a schoolteacher, a gardener, an animal researcher, a scholar, a traveler, a military expert, a knower of landscape, a painter, a horse rider, an infrastructure planner, a [...] princess --at some point it begins to sound made up, "Little Father of the people"-esque to rattle the hornet's nest a little bit, especially if it's not shown as either a clearly godly characteristic or, even more necessary imo, a negative trait; another expression of her killing herself at work to compensate for a perceived flaw she's trying to earn forgiveness for, like she did in BotW. But that's another topic, and the clumsiness of her character arc has been well threaded by basically everybody disappointed in the story already.)

But, if I decide to be a little graceful, I'd like to explore my "huh!" emotion, and take it apart a little bit.

I think there's something interesting to have such strong parallels to setting up a story about the relationship between Zelda and Ganondorf ("The Princess and the Beast", like come on guys that's the conflict of over half the series), or at least Zelda and the concept of Evil since Ganondorf pretty much represents it in this game, and then have it go: actually, there was a horrible monster that everyone was afraid of, but Zelda was wise and patient enough to approach it and realize its potential beyond the tusks, what beauty can be brought upon the world if one makes the effort to look for what exists underneath. It says something a bit deeper about the world and about Zelda in particular. It intrigues, at the very least.

Is it a reach? Probably! Is my first interpretation that the quest is actually about "eww you thought Zelda would be interested in *disgusting vile monsters* and not sweet and gentle and human-loving animals that literally shit jewlery when cared for? jokes on you, she never would feel any ounce of sympathy for anything that isn't Good and Deserving" uhhh definitively truer? Probably! But I also don't want to dismiss that the quest made me think about it. If I had completed it earlier, I might have even felt like it was (very clumsy, not gonna lie) setup about the main conflict.

But that's also a good segway into my next section: the arbitrary limitations between the animal and the creature, the monstrous and the human.

And the fact that TotK points directly at it.

A Monstrous Collection

(these two guys are just. doing So Much and being So Valid despite being massive weirdos the game wants us to be slightly repelled by. I, for one, respect the Monster kinning grind and their general Twilight Princess energy.)

So. These two guys. There is so much to say about these two guys. I don't think I have seen the Trans Perspective on Kolton on tumblr, and I would love to get it because. I feel like it's a worthwhile discussion (just, how gender and identity is handled in TotK overall, I feel like it's a very complicated conversation and I have not seen super deep dives and I'd be very interested in hearing more).

Beyond the throughline of voluntary consumption of magical objects to turn into less human creatures being a weirdly prevalent plot point in TotK (Zelda, Kolton and Ganondorf casually transing their entire species for funsies --Ganondorf being particularly relentless with Fake Zelda, mummy/phantom shenanigans, Demon King and then literal dragon), I want to focus on Kilton a little bit.

Kilton is genuinely the only NPC in the game willing to acknowledge the inherent personhood that monsters have (the game does showcase them picking up fruits, mourning their boss if you kill them, being cutesy and happy to identify you as one of their own if you wear the appropriate mask --and that's not even getting into creatures like the Lynels, who seem to really edge on the limit of being a conscious creature with a system of honor and property and many other things). He does encourage us to think of monsters as more than a species whose only worth lie in how fun it is to eradicate them; even more, gameplay-wise, he does give us a reason to interact with them in other ways than just our sword with his museum. He does encourage us to see that beauty for ourselves and then select what we think is coolest/most intimidating/cutest/eight billion ganondorfs in every pose imaginable

The fact that Ganondorf is considered a monster was a great win for this feature in particular, and is very funny, but it's also... A lot, if we dig at it a little more than warranted. Beyond all of the Implications and all of the things of representation and political conflict and values already discussed ad nauseum: when did he stop being considered a human? What does that mean about the flimsiness of what is a monster and what is a creature and what is an animal and what is a person and what is even a hylian, as sheikahs got absorbed into the definition in this game? Especially with the stones taken into account, how profound changes in nature are a huge part of the plot (even when reversed and ultimately pretty meaningless): how easy it is, to make that slip? Who decides when that slip has been made? What is acceptable to hurt without remorse? What is beautiful and worth preserving? What is both at once? What is neither?

And again, in a classic Zelda conundrum (appreciative(?)): who the fuck gets to decide that, when, and why?

The Bargainers and the Horned God

(major shoutout to these big guys for being the sole and only providers of actual depth to the Depths, and for looking cool as heck)

So. Let's move the conversation to the Depths.

Conceptually: what an interesting idea!! And so well executed (initially)!! A mirror world to the surface, dark and hushed and full of unknown creatures; haunted by gloom and sickness and the unknown. Not a first in the series, far from it: from ALTTP to ALBW, and even taking the Twilight world of TP into account, this idea of a Dark World acting as a deforming mirror to Hyrule and revealing many interesting aspects as we get to explore both is always a very interesting take on corruption and envy and fear/weakness and/or some sense of darkness looming under the perfect exterior. I'd argue even the Lens of Truth of both OoT and MM's serve a similar function, both gameplay-wise, but also in terms of theme: not everything is as it seems. In the world of Light, darkness must hide itself; but darkness also possess its own beauty, its own hardships, and will stare back at you without blinking if you go seek for it. It's, in my opinion, one of the series' most compelling conversation about the cyclical nature of fate, the coldness of godhood, and how small one feels in the face of a universe that is more complicated than it initially appears --which is why Courage must be invoked to push forward regardless.

The Depth's otherworldly ambiance is truy wonderful, whether in the plays of light and shadows, the creatures native to the environment we meet there (wish we met more!), the soundtrack, the strange aquatic/primordial plants, the fact that the dragons visit this place and connect them to the outside --invoking ideas of balance and interconnectivity, that the tree branches look like veins. The coliseums, the mines, the zonai facilities and the prisons do seem to poke at many things about what the relationship to the past was to this place; was it ever truly a place? Did it look like this back then? Why was it buried? Why did it come back? But in spite of it all, I think the Depths struggle overall to question or reveal anything about the surface that we couldn't already assume going in (that the only thing congealing there is Ganondorf's gloom, his lonely domain of Wrongness, only shared by Kohga and the yiga --the only naysayers of Goodness and Light, contemptful and blinded by self-importance and rage). The zonite is mined by gloomy monsters --why, what for?-- so any notion of greed and over-expansion that could have been associated to the zonai is now reabsorbed into Ganondorf's general evilness, since it needs to be reminded he is everything and anything bad with the world: darkness and conquest and greed and capitalism and pollution and bad weather and sickness and darkness and violence and war and death and betrayal and fakeness and lies and patriarchy and exploitation. No matter that he never does a single thing with zonite in the game; rather set up elements of conflict that never go anywhere than, for a second, let the foundations of absolute goodness and absolute evil risk becoming shaky --and you coming to this unwelcoming dark place that hates you, killing the miners and taking their resources for yourself is, on the other holy, royal fur-covered hand, utterly legitimate. The resources were once Rauru's after all, were they not?

And this is what I would say, except... except for the dead. The fallen warriors, the poes, and, most important of all: the Bargainer statues.

The Bargainers are, in-universe, godly creatures guiding the fallen to a place of final respite, regardless of moral alignment. The poes are all, fundamentally, cleansed of judgement: they are lost souls whose past reality does not matter anymore, and all deserve that peace regardless. In spite of the heavy paradise/hell parallels drawn in that game, with Rauru/Zelda/Sonia as the guardians of Light where Ganondorf gets to become a Devil-like figure, it is confirmed here that no such thing exists when you actually die in this universe.

It almost feels as if the fabric of Hyrule itself, in a brief moment that refuses to elaborate on its own point, goes: "yeah, whatever is happening here between Light and Darkness, it doesn't actually matter. This conflict is futile and doesn't understand the real nature of being alive, dead, a god, a person, a monster, an animal. The truth lies elsewhere --but you will never be told what it is."

It's: wild.

One of the game's most striking traits of narrative brilliance in my opinion --to the point where I'm wondering whether it's there on purpose or was effectively an oversight since every other aspect of reality breaks its own back trying to reassure us that everything is at its correct place, receiving the appropriate treatment by the universe in a way that is never to be questioned.

Another case of that ambiguity being allowed to exist without being immediately crushed and repressed is the case of the Horned God (interesting parallel to Ganon's actual horns that he develops in this game in case the hellish parallels weren't clear enough already): a demon Hylia sealed into stone and pushed far from humans in a clear case of questionable behavior since, while the Horned God isn't exactly nice, does propose a different philosophy you are not punished for exploring; and yet, a proposal that has seen itself persecuted in a very real sense by the goddess of absolute goodness, patron of hylians, Zelda, and many more. Pushed away from view.

Interesting.

And Yet, Light Must Prevail

Okay, so, after all of this, we're left to ask... What the fuck is up with morality in Tears of the Kingdom?!

What do we trust? These half-breaths in the occasional sidequests that Light and Darkness is just the wrong frame of reference, that nature cannot be this simple, is ever-shifting and can be recalled or reaffirmed by arbitrary forces, and might even not matter at all in the universe's fabric, despite having so much of its lore soaking in the dychotomy? Or... everything else about the game, this insistence that Good must not only be assumed as whatever tradition the kingdom has passed down for thousands upon thousands of years, but remain utterly unquestioned the entire time? That Bad is without cause, graceless and unworthy of investment?

Are the Bargainer's statues the only thing worth listening to, that morality is a fable the living tells themselves --or should we be moved when Darkness destroys Light, when Light suffers to preserve itself and the world --but not when the Other is rightfully slain?

Was Kilton correct to see beauty in the monstrous? Was Kolton onto something when he let go of his previous form because there is no clear distinction between what should receive an arrow to the face and what shouldn't? Or should we rather focus on Zelda losing her human form as a beautiful and tragic sacrifice --but something that never actually altered her nature as a hylian, the descendant of a lineage of Good Kings meant to rule forever?

Is the Dondon good because it always was, or was it worth Zelda's love in spite of the fear it initially provoked?

Either way, at the end of the game, evil is slain. Ganondorf is, not killed, but --like his angry BotW boar counterpart-- destroyed, as monsters tend to be. He explodes over the lands of Hyrule, freed from Darkness; freed from everything wrong, since the foreign menace that embodied it all was wiped out in one fateful sweep of a holy blade cradled in sacrificial love. Nothing wrong remains. The Sages reaffirm their vows to protect the kingdom forward, and a very human --hylian-- Zelda smiles: Hyrule now forever and ever basked in eternal Light.

[turtleblogatlast]

[ cw: death mention / immortality mention / imprisonment mention / torture implied / ]

I think one of the reasons why I love to explore the idea of the Prison Dimension and especially Leo being trapped there for considerably longer than canon is that, well, literally anything is possible. Time could pass the same or it could pass faster or it could pass slower or it could go so slow for years and at random outshoot earth by half a decade or vice versa like-?? It’s such a malleable concept.

And I think that very same malleability is what makes it so horrifying.

Because you can toy with the concept of death to its utmost there. You can choose to keep it as with the outside’s reality, where death by injury or sickness or even old age may occur. Or you can assume it is a place that simply won’t let its prisoners die, and that whoever enters is doomed to eternal life in endless void. Or even still, maybe you can die, but you’re rewound, or your soul can’t escape (or is kept there), and now you’re in a cycle, back and forth between life and death.

That doesn’t even touch upon whether the inhabitants can age, or grow, or if they need sustenance, or sleep, or if there’s any other life in there at all aside from who you’re thrown in with. And, if there is other life, is that life friendly? And could you even come across it in the vastness of the space?

How big is the Prison Dimension, even? If you went forward one direction for as long as you could, would you never run out of space, or would it cycle you back around to the other side? Gravity seems to be both there and not, so I wonder if the dimension is random in regard to how that works.

And, further, I wonder about the possibility of the dimension being even slightly sentient, and the potential horror that could imply.

The Prison Dimension is an endlessly fascinating concept to me, and the thought of Leo being trapped there, and not getting out when he did…that’s horror, really and truly.

[sciencegothic]

jekyll who does not die at his wedding, but instead must deal with the fallout of it. utterson who understands that jekyll does no control hyde’s actions but is still, in a way, responsible for him. lisa who loves her husband, but struggles to look at him without seeing the face of the man who tried to kill her. sir danvers who cannot stand for any of this, and yet, cannot seem to get away from it either. hyde who is just so glad that he gets to keep living

[stardustdiiving]

I notice Nahida is portrayed as frustrated or scolding of other characters (usually Wanderer) in fanon often but to be honest I don’t think Nahida really has that much of a temper where she defaults to that sort of thing very much….She can be angry and firm as needed but I really don’t think that’s her first instinct on how to assert herself in a lot of cases.

She instead really strikes me as someone who primarily gets upset when it’s on behalf of other people or someone embodying ideas she finds very devoid of care and compassion for others….but struggles to really be angry on her own behalf. Like, it’s pointed out it’s only until she’s actively being rescued that she finally says she’s angry at the Sages, and while she is openly angry then we see later everyone comments on how they seem to have gotten off days, which I touched on in this post and feel u can infer from that this idea Nahida struggles to be harsh even towards to the people who kept her in a cage for 500 years—which makes when u see how much she rationalizes being treated like this earlier on. She ultimately seems more concerned with the Sages mistreatment of her people vs their mistreatment of Nahida herself.

This feels consistent to why she seems pretty visibly disgusted with Dottore when they have their negotiation. Dottore is more or less an antithesis to everything she believes about wisdom and embodies a lot of malice and cruelty that Nahida would be really disturbed by. I personally like to write her lack of a temper in some areas as something that seems almost troubling — bc on one hand she’s very forgiving and kind despite through being a lot, but on the other this seems like it might be rooted in just genuinely not allowing herself to be angry to protect herself. But yeah overall I think unless you’re really causing an issue Nahida is more likely to give you a kind of frazzled sad puppy look and very politely ask you to be better as opposed to hitting you with a sandal or scolding you for it

In the case of her relationship with Wanderer specifically I’ve like, talked about how I feel people overlook the fact Wanderer makes a genuine effort to cooperate with Nahida and doesn’t really fight with her much…so i don’t think they’re often bickering with each other to the point Nahida has to get really firm with him. She seems to have a pretty interesting amount of patience with him especially post AQ, which again I think is helped by the fact Wanderer is genuinely trying to cooperate and she sees that. We do see her ask Traveler + Scaramouche to stop bickering in Inversion of Genesis but she is in my opinion very polite and at most a bit awkward about it, not scolding or irritated

[duncebento]

the leftism leaving people’s bodies when they need “convicted felon” to act as the most epically pwning insult

[gameo-archive]

"Do you have any inside jokes you could share? Or just your favourite jokes broadly? I’m going on holiday to London in March, any recommendations for non-touristy activities? Do you remember your dreams (sleeping ones) and could you share any?"

Transcript below:

"G: Right, oh, hello Tan, it‘s George here from… Percy Jacks— sorry, Dead Boy Detectives. J: And Jayden from Per— Dead Boy Detectives. G: Both filmed in Vancouver, both excellent shows of the supernatural variety. So, you‘ve asked us a few questions, Tan, and we are gonna get straight into them, so… question number one: Do we have any inside jokes we could share. Could we share? J: We probably have inside jokes but could we even explain them? Not really. It‘s most of them is just like noises and like weird just quotes from random things. G: Yeah, that's the thing, they kind of evolve as we're spending time together. Cause when we were filming the show we were literally in each other's pockets every day, so… Also, they just wouldn't be funny to you. J: No. It's like… you gotta be there for it to be funny. G: Not in like an exclusive way but, like, even Kassius didn't find a lot of them funny. J: No. Nobody did. G: Nobody did, no. J: You would have just thought we had like Tourette's or something. We'd just walk around set just shouting things and making noises. G: There's the shag smash one. J: Yeah. G: That's quite funny J: That was quite funny. But, I mean, is that an inside joke? Well, that's a joke anyway, so let's talk about that. So, obviously I had the line in episode… G: Three? J: Three, where I have to say, oh you know, we shag, smash, you know. Get it on, whatever the line was. And for some reason I was doing it in this voice where, when we were reading it and rehearsing it, I kept going ""shaaag"", ""smaaaash"". Again, probably doesn't sound that funny to you right now but at the time we found that absolutely hilarious and when it came to the actual rehearsal and when I tried to say it normally, it was the first time I said it normally, and we all were just on the floor. G: And the crew who watched the rehearsal—there's about over a hundred of them—they were not impressed. J: They had no idea G: They had no idea because… because it was a British joke. J: It was a super British joke. And they were all literally like this. G: So we then had about twenty minutes after that rehearsal to actually filming the scene which you see, which is now available for everyone to see. We had twenty minutes to get our you know what together. So we were literally lying down one by one and standing on each other's chests… J: To get the laughs out. G: …to compress them and get the laughs out. And it worked, didn't it? J: It did. G: I couldn't… I'm sure if you watch that scene, I'm not looking at him when he says that line because… J: I think I was looking at your bowtie as well, I couldn't look you in the face. G: Probably. It was towards the end of the day as well, wasn't it? J: Yeah, it was G: And sometimes towards the end of the day you get the giggles a little bit. But it means that we were having fun and that's the main thing. Erm, you said you're going on holiday to London in March, any recommendations for non-touristy activities. J: Well, I let you take this part, because I'm awful with anything touristy or non-touristy. G: I mean, it's not too touristy but you should visit the Greenwich Naval Museum because we filmed the very first part of the Pilot there, so you can go and reenact it, should you wish. J: Oh, I got one. Go to the Sherlock Holmes Museum as well. Me, George, and Kassius actually went there for some pre-filming research. G: In Baker Street. Yes. Do we remember our dreams and could we share any? I don't remember my dreams. J: I do remember some but they are just so blooming random. I had a dream last night that I went to my nan's house with my little brother and we walked in and she jump-scared us and I woke up. G: Fascinating. J: Yeah. G: Well… Both: Let's end the day with that."

[short-wooloo]

the reality reylos live in is so weird

listen to them talk about their precious “kylo lives” au follow ups to ros and they’re always going on and on about how “wonderful” it is that Rey and kylo live happily ever after together (bleagh) in a hetero nuclear family new jedi order, but they never seem to have an answer for why everyone in the universe ignores and lets the mass murdering fascist off the hook

[detainedstaffday]

United Nations Rules for the Treatment of Women Prisoners and Non-custodial Measures for Women Offenders (“Bangkok Rules”).

International human rights law provides a clear and universal framework relating to detention, enshrined by the following rule:

United Nations Rules for the Treatment of Women Prisoners and Non-custodial Measures for Women Offenders (“Bangkok Rules”)

Bad food and medical care and even worse problems make prison reform a must.

The Bangkok Rules give guidance to policy makers, legislators, sentencing authorities and prison staff to reduce the imprisonment of women, and to meet the specific needs of women in case of imprisonment.

[dentist-brainsurgeon]

Got the fucker

[mugiwara-lucy]

Oh wow!

As a gay woman finding out EVERYTHING Joe Biden has done for Gay people REALLY warms my heart!

Here's a couple of snippets down below:

And that's not even ALL of it! Here's the FULL LIST DOWN BELOW!

Credit to @batboyblog so thanks!!

Now compare this to Trump who wants to do away with all of the progress the LGBTQXIA+ have gained in this country so if you need a reason to vote....it's to keep ALL of the protection the LGBTQXIA+community have gained so PLEASE VOTE BLUE THIS NOVEMBER!

Again I've stressed this and WILL CONTINUE TO STRESS THIS; NON VOTING AND THIRD PARTY VOTING ARE INDIRECT VOTES FOR TRUMP AND HIS CAMP SINCE THIS PAST WEEK HAS SHOWN THEY WILL VOTE FOR HIM NO MATTER WHAT!

Thank you.

[rawliverandgoronspice]

behold: my second least favorite string of words in the entirety of Tears of the Kingdom.

(it's a little less transparent why this time so I'll explain my thoughts under the cut)

So why do I not like this?

In so many words: because if you remove it, the scene still works, but you lose the moral certainty of what is going on.

This single sentence does so much legwork for the entire game (the kind I dislike), to the point where I'm about 60% sure it's the product of a rework that realized how ambiguous Rauru's position was as the Good Rightful King and needed to nervously reassure the players that Ganondorf Is and Always Was the Invader, Actually.

(no matter that it leaves the gerudos in this awkward in-between state of both invaders and victims, while never dwelling in the specifics of their history and their own agency in the entire thing; brushed off as a sin they have to expiate through loyalty to the winners of that particular strife, but without explicitely blaming them either to avoid the implications of what that would have looked like)

If you remove it, not only do you lose a pretty clunky line that detracts from Ganondorf's intimidating presence (who is he even speaking to? who needs to hear this right now?) that honestly speaks for itself when it comes to his experience with warfare, but also you lose any tension and any mystery regarding why he is attacking in the first place.

You also... kind of rob Ganondorf's motivations of their meaning. "Hyrule will bow down before me" leads to asking... why? What does he want? What does he see in those lands? And what little we get with Rauru and then Link during the final fight begs more questions; why do you prefer hardship to peace? Why do you value strength? What leads you to want to rule a land devoid of survivors, become a king without a kingdom? I don't think we ever get satisfactory answers. If you remove this sentence, on the other hand... Subtextually, it becomes pretty clear that his motivations is that he felt threatened by Rauru's power, which is ripe with subtext and questions about whether this is a legitimate reaction, whether his "no survivor" stance is due to a feeling of betrayal when his own people turned against him post the Demon King shenanigans... I'm not saying it would fix the entire game's writing, far from it, but it would already do *so much more*.

(genuinely, I think he could have stayed completely silent during the Molduga Assault, speaking only in the Show of Fealty before going completely nuts after Sonia's murder, and it would have worked MUCH better in terms of characterization but anyway anyway

EDIT: ALSO!!! that way he wouldn't speak hylian to fellow gerudos, which is weird inherently)

Without this line, the core of the tension between the gerudos and Hyrule comes front in his conversation with Rauru; it allows the cause of his hostility to be Rauru's invitations, that he would have taken as a threat, and would have still made him warlike and domineering without making him cartoonishly flat, because, once again, Rauru is not acting in a particularly more legitimate way when Zelda arrives in Ancient Hyrule; and it would have been... fair to point that out. And make for better characterization for Rauru, and Sonia, and Mineru, and everybody. But the priority was for Hyrule to be pictured as unquestionably holy; always legitimate, always truthful, always beautiful, always just.

Also, and this is more of a nitpick but: why would Ganondorf want Hyrule, specifically, to bow down before him also? Was he at war with the rest of the disparate tribes before, and just carried on his ambitions to the very very newly-founded kingdom as they allied under a new banner? (though it seems to be implies the lands were crawling under monsters in a generic sense, and not Ganondorf's attacks in particular) Why would he even consider Hyrule a legitimate entity worth taking over then, if it is so new, born from the will of a powerful rival, founded by what is basically a stranger to these lands? Why would he covet something so young instead of destroying it and just calling the lands Gerudo Lands II or Grooseland or something?

I don't think any of that was even accounted for, because, beyond everything else: to me, this sentence is so clearly and painfully crammed in here to shield Hyrule from any potential blame and immediately characterize Ganondorf as Bad without having to remove any of the causes that could lead one to side-eye Rauru's little pet project as equally questionable.

Beyond the clumsiness, it is cowardly --and, I think, a little damning.

[rebel-sqrrl]

Sometimes Ward reminds me how good Wildbow is at writing "heroes" who are absolute scumbags, and then makes me wonder why the hell he made them the main characters.

Anyway, Rain is the fucking worst. Leaving a traumatized, abused, brain-damaged child in a secret bunker prison — potentially for years — where she's not allowed to talk to her family and no one respects basic human rights, just because he can't manage to scrounge up a shred of empathy... yeah, Love Lost was right about him.

#JusticeForColt