We may never know what the author truly meant by : Arthas had enjoyed turning beautiful, proud, strong-willed Quel’dorei women into banshees, after his “success” with her. Arthas had slaughtered countless people up to this point, never has the author referred to killing as “success,” nor has anyone used it since. Of course, he turned them into banshees after he killed them, it’s a no brainer. Why not just stop at Arthas had enjoyed turning beautiful, proud, strong-willed Quel’dorei women into banshees. We already knew that Arthas needed to kill to be successful.
You may be right, but Cdev has written some rather creepy stuff about Arthas over the years.
Which within the context of the time period it was written in? 100% almost feels like it was intentional which is just… Yucky.
I’m personally ok with ignoring that even existing because I genuinely don’t think see how ‘any’ of it serves the narrative beyond being incredibly weird.
Arthas can still be a pure-evil bad guy without needing any of that existing, the fact it wasn’t even a thing before but was ‘tact’ on just kinda makes me cringe in disgust, there are times when such ‘themes’ can be narratively impactful but in this case its just ew.
EDIT: It reminds me that Alexatraza also got this treatment in Day of the Dragon as well…
Arthas’ treatment of Sylvanas got that ick factor tacked on after the inital events. Alexstraza had always been enslaved and literally used to breed an army (forced to mate with her fellow red dragons to produce more eggs) at one point.