Wikia

WoWWiki

Talk:Sexuality

101,314pages on
this wiki

Back to page

few comments about harpies and forlarren? Noobi666 (talk) 18:09, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

It's a work in progress. You are welcome to help out.Baggins (talk) 18:10, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

thanks. An about sexuality, do you think that this:(http://wotlk.wowhead.com/?item=43632) hints bout Sylvanas´ one? Noobi666 (talk) 18:13, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Well I think its saying that they all want to get married to other men, together, not to each other, :p.Baggins (talk) 18:14, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

"get married together" Noobi666 (talk) 18:18, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Getting married together can mean that all want have their marriage services at the same time. Not necessarily that they all want to marry each other. I honestly don't think incest was on her mind...Baggins (talk) 18:22, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm going to concur with Mr. Baggins. The context of "together" includes "grow up" here; it sounds like a little girl's wish that she and her two sisters (one who married Rhonin, and one who has a child with Turalyon) could all have happy lives and be together forever. Having been a little girl once myself, I find it conclusive. Tiraline (talk) 16:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

yeah, i know, but you know what it sounds like ;) Noobi666 (talk) 18:24, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

You think that sounds risky? You should read the german translation of WotA and DotD. DotD alone has enough moment where I wondered if the person that is talked about is naked, but all four books (at least by the german choice of words, need to read the original yet)make it sound as if Malygos mates with males...--Maibe (talk) 21:38, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

really? Noobi666 (talk) 15:06, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Seriously, each and every time Malygos' mates are mentioned they took the male term as translation (except for one time I think)--Maibe (talk) 15:37, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
I would say that Saragosa is definetly female. Is there a convention in German for having all dragons referred to as male? That's the only intentional reason for the oversight I can see.
I'm really not sure about this page. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 21:55, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Not what I meant *laughs* Saragosa came later and is still female ingame. What I meant was simply that, not ingame, but in the translation of the novels they used to translate the word -mate- -consort- etc with the male term (Gefaehrte, for example) instead of using the female term. That happened in all novels where Malygos and his mates are mentioned, except for a single occassion. Ingame he mates with females...and apparently has too much libido for those he has...why else would he try to make Keristrasza another mating partner?--Maibe (talk) 23:13, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
A replacement.--SWM2448 23:22, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Isn't it said even before (when you have to free Keri the first time) that Malygos wanted her to mate with him, she refused, he locked her in a crytsal and shattered said crystal, or did I get something wrong?--Maibe (talk) 02:48, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Maibe, what about Neltharion's mates? or Saridormi? do they use female terms? (note that this does count as editorial, a "lost in translation" section could be added)--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 23:25, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
They are all refered to as females. I'd have to look all the parts in the book the aspects' consorts are mentioned, but if I remember correctly Malygos' consort always (as said, except for once) get the male term, while all other female consorts get the female term. This even happens when there is no need to use the male/general term to, for example, avoid a repetition of words.--Maibe (talk) 00:22, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

From the Tcg Edit

http://entertainment.upperdeck.com/wow/en/news/article.aspx?aid=4711 The concubine card to be added to this article?--Maibe (talk) 15:33, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

is carved ogre idol "art" ? Noobi666 (talk) 15:39, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

ye, sure you should add it. and maybe few words about "concubines", i dont know if she is sex slave, or Illidan has perversions....Noobi666 (talk) 15:42, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Never uploaded pictures to wiki yet. and...going by the flavour text...I think the second is it...--Maibe (talk) 15:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
You know there's other people than Illidan in Black Temple, right? User:Gourra/Sig2 15:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

you know who concubines are? and btw, their comments are pritty ...ehm, "suggestive", should be added to Quotes? Noobi666 (talk) 15:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I know what concubines are. But there's other blood elves in Black Temple. User:Gourra/Sig2 15:52, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

...and they are succubus in belf form, i think that no one normal person would ever [censored] demns, even attractive ones Noobi666 (talk) 15:55, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Temple Concubines are not demons. User:Gourra/Sig2 15:58, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

ye, but concubines are Noobi666 (talk) 15:59, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but Concubine and Temple Concubine is not the same. Concubines are in Karazhan, while Temple Concubines are in Black Temple. User:Gourra/Sig2 16:03, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

If you think about that, Illidan wouldn't alow anything on the black temple just to please his allieds... Anyway, they do fit here and yet, this is another reference from the Arabic culture so explored on TBC. And only the girls on Karazan are demons and undeads, not the ones on BT Azahel (talk) 15:59, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Azahel, concubinage is NOT exclusive or even typical of Arabic culture. Yes, concubines can be added, but it's possible that Blizzard didn't use a strict definition.--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 16:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
I wonder if they meant something more like "temple prostitute"--but of course can't use that term because you'd better believe the rating would become "M" in a heartbeat. Tiraline (talk) 16:07, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

(from Wikipedia:) Concubinage is the state of a woman or youth in an ongoing, quasi-matrimonial relationship with a man of higher social status. Typically, the man has an official wife and, in addition, one or more concubines. Concubines have limited rights of support from the man, and their offspring are publicly acknowledged as the man's children, albeit of lower status than children born by the official wife or wives; these legal rights distinguish a concubine from a mistress. Noobi666 (talk) 16:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

They're probably using a fancier and less controversial word, even though it's a different meaning. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 16:11, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Ragestorm, go to black temple, take a look at the place where the concubines are, read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harem_(household), then read my post again and you'll understand what i meant Azahel (talk) 16:12, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Before this gets out of hand, gents: relevance check. What does the matter of concubinage being Arabic in origin/practice or not have to do with the topic of the article here? And is it worth getting in a fight? Tiraline (talk) 16:16, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Added polygamy to sexualityNoobi666 (talk) 16:20, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

And I added a "speculation" tag. Noobi, we really don't know what the relationships are in BT. Don't take offense, but we just don't know at this time. Tiraline (talk) 16:23, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
?

Nobody is fighting... anyway, yeah, the card is a good add but i still can think of a thousand of things that can be added to this page, it needs some control though so it won't become a spam with every two meaning words being posted Azahel (talk) 16:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

ofc, thanks Azahel Noobi666 (talk) 16:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

no, no fight, this is how we discuss.:-) Anyway, Azahel, see your point about Harems, and you're right, this page needs to be tightly regulated. However, there are, by my count, three admins involved atm, so that should be enough to keep order. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 16:28, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

gourra, polygamy is only just non verified fact, so dont delete it. ? means speculation Noobi666 (talk) 16:32, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

"Speculation" does not mean "non verified fact". The concubines are there in the Black Temple, which Illidan owns. That's all we know. There is NO FACT AT ALL that those concubines are for the pleasure of Illidan. User:Gourra/Sig2 16:51, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
BTW, speculation is rarely allowed, and usually has to be tightly cited. It also doesn't go in the middle of an article. Speculation sections must be at the end of an article. "Polygamy" means multiple marriage. A concubine is someone who lives with a man without being married. So the use of term is a bit innacurate.Baggins (talk) 00:41, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure what to call the assumption that the concubines are just there for the other blood elves to use and Illidan, who considers himself practically divine, just sits on the roof with a skull pining for Tyrande. Naive, maybe? Blind loyal fandom? Not sure. Point being, yea there are other blood elves in black temple, as well as naga and fel orcs and demons. And there's Illidan. But, since this is a T rated game, we're not going to actually see Illidan go down off the roof and have relations witht he concubines, we're not going to see actual proof of it.Tweak the Whacked (talk) 01:08, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Additions Edit

Yes we have people monitorating this page but yetm I don't like tos ee so much activity on a page from so many people with diferent thoughts, anyway, the part above is to talk about TCG.

Back to the subject, I think we could add some of the quotes on the flirt page, not all the of course, also, there's a part on the book "The Sundering" when Azshara tryes to seduce Illidan but is interrupted before the thigns get too far, could be a good exemple of this thread on official lore. Azshara herself is a good exemple of sexuality. Azahel (talk) 16:38, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

really? i have always thought she is just random maniac. could you link comments/something...ehm.."sexual"? Noobi666 (talk) 16:44, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

She is a random maniac
anyway, from The Sundering:

"Please! For you, I’m merely Azshara…" Her fingers ran from his eye sockets to the rest of his face. "Such a handsome face!" She touched his shoulder, pushing aside part of his clothing. "So strong, too…and with the mark of the Great One there as well!" "Truly you are favored by him…and, thus, favored by me," Queen Azshara whispered, drawing close again. "And there are many favors I can grant you, which even he cannot—"WoE 38 Azahel (talk) 17:07, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree, Azshara is probably the most overtly sexual character thus encountered. This may have been Knaak's active choice to counterbalance her to Tyrande. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 17:24, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Then of course there was the information about Aegwynn and Jonas sleeping together, and the conversation between Aegwynn and Nilas Aran about their one night stand. Course Aegwynn just comes off cold. She got what she wanted, and wanted nothing after that. Though I'm not sure what heading to put that kind of info under, and how to format it. Not to avoid resorting to victorian prudeness, i'm not sure "fornication" would quite cut it.Baggins (talk) 17:52, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
The phrases you want, Mr. Baggins, are "premarital sex" and "extramarital sex." I would submit that there is no serious stigma attached in human culture to the former; can't speak to the latter. Tiraline (talk) 21:14, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
that's what i'm talking about, the page would be too big if we add everything we know. Anyway, another important icon would be [Sally Whitemane] Azahel (talk) 18:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
How is Whitemane an "important icon"? User:Gourra/Sig2 18:22, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Not by herself obviously, but because of how she is taken as an icon, just to mention of course Azahel (talk) 18:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

There is no way we could add everything, and thus we need to use well known examples. Infact some of the topics on the page, already go into their own topics. we have pages for male and female gender.Baggins (talk) 18:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

how Wanton Hostess are related to article? Noobi666 (talk) 20:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

You mean how are Wanton Hostesses related to this article? Given that "wanton" is probably not referring to the dumpling, I think it's safe to say there's a sexual connotation there. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 05:30, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Snickers at dumpling joke.Baggins (talk) 05:34, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Homosexuality Edit

Are there actually any hints it exists on Azeroth and in Outland? There is Jarl's visitor at Swamplight Manor, but saying what he says at the end of his questline is an evidence would be far fetched and pretty full of prejudices. So, are there any serious hints/evidences?--Maibe (talk) 21:59, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Beyond the quilboar marriages between a female quilboar warrior to another female, not that I know of.Baggins (talk) 00:18, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Didn't know about that one. source?--Maibe (talk) 00:50, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
MOnster guide, its alreayd int he article under gender identity section.Baggins (talk) 00:55, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Ah thanks. Missed that one.--Maibe (talk) 01:10, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
This subject comes up on the RP forums every now and then. In the lore, I'm yet to actually see such a reference. In quests apparently though it's suggested in places. From an RP perspective it's probably there somewhere, but from a lore and canon perspective, it's not there.--Dushi-du (talk) 11:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Sentinel Sweetspring? - Sikon (talk) 01:54, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Only one homosexuality reference? Edit

Is there only really one? I remember at Blizzcon a few years ago a girl asked if there could be more, but I might change remove the statement. Tankingmage (talk) 00:16, November 12, 2013 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki