It was his heart, which was pierced when he was An’she, while protecting the Shu’halo from the Old Gods in the dawn of universe. His wound was unable to be mended, the void now attached to his heart began to consume his Light. In order to save the last shred of himself, his hope, his empathy, his love, his compassion. he severed his own heart from his body knowing that it would make him devoid of light, devoid of love and compassion.
Or at least that’s the story I wish and hope they are telling. But it’s futile to hope.
But Alas he wasn’t healed when he reabsorbed his anima so that’s likely NOT the direction they are going. Regardless of if it meant anything or not, Zorvall didn’t change when his anima/sigil was reunited with his person, so Evelysaa is probably right it was possibly just a misdirection so no one would theorize that the Jailer and the Arbiter are two halves of the same and we are the dummies for reading too much into it.
I’m of the opinion that Blizzard didn’t think in regards to this subject at all and have been operating on rule of cool as they often do. Though if you want to look at it as some sort of “gender theory”, I see it as the creation of the Arbiter making a yin and yang, that being the female form being the yin and the male form being the yang; the Arbiter and the Jailer are two sides of the same coin in the realm of Death, one good and one bad but both are needed for the balance of the Shadowlands, just as man and woman are needed to create life. The Jailer taking his core back from the Arbiter isn’t the male eradicating the female, it’s the male combining with the female to become what he/they (both the Arbiter and the Jailer) had been, which is a term that starts with the letter H which I don’t think is allowed to be used on the forums. With both genders combined together, Zovaal’s armor returns to his exposed form and is made protected/stronger because the gender split has been resolved. Through this, Zovaal has escaped from the Maw (male gender norms), reunited with the half of him that has been taken, then left the Shadowlands, with the prison we’re intended to be set free from metaphorically being the construct of gender itself.
This is a barrier for me in looking at the scene. The end result.
With that said: Yvenathilm and I were wandering into questions about Xal’atath elsewhere.
The Primus must have used a mourneblade on Zovall. It’s possible Zovall isn’t whole yet.
Whether they do that… /shrug
there’s still hints, like for example the toy you got from completing the Tier 5 research is a sword that allows you to cut out someone’s shadow. That’s very Jungian. it’s the Shadow Slicing Shortsword toy.
A sword made of light that can cut out anyone’s shadow. that made me absolutely giddy.
I hate when the writers hint at things and they don’t follow through.
Quite a few people are overthinking my post. The only thought behind it was it didn’t make sense for the Arbiter to be female when she was made from a piece of the Jailer’s soul and he’s male. Then someone said she was actually made from his anima, which does make sense.
I wasn’t going to say anything since there were some interesting and relevant topics raised… but then you two started denigrating me.
I mean “gender confused” is what trans people have thrown at them IRL, that’s a real phrase used in real life.
Ergo my suggestion you should probably change it since you’re just gesturing at the gender dynamic of Arbiter vs Zovaal which I explained on my second post in the thread
So many people - including yourself - have recklessly accused other people of being “-ist” this or “-phobe” that, I struggle to take such accusations seriously. It’s like the villagers from Aesop’s Fable “The Boy Who Cried ‘Wolf’”
??? Calling people gender confused is literally one of the go-to insults trans people hear. This is common knowledge, and even if for some arcane and mysterious reason you are unaware, easily verifiable.
Trans people are not that common. I’ve only ever met two trans people, and we got along and didn’t discuss those topics, so how and why would I know anti-trans slurs? Are you thin-skinned? I can be sometimes. Or are you just looking for trouble?
Because you exist online and engage with communities outside your own? Presumably?
Look man, you made a title, we engaged the topic in good faith, we are now telling you the topic title is actually a phrase commonly chucked at trans people by transphobes, and you no longer have the excuse of ignorance.
While I appreciate that we’re having a civil discussion about this, the fact that it only happened after I called you and Renautus out is telling.
I looked up the phrase, it originated as a medical term for the condition now known as gender dysphoria (and I don’t know whether the name was changed due to sincere support or ideological agenda), and didn’t find it on any list of transphobic slurs. Citation needed that the phrase is “commonly” thrown at trans people, and whether it’s offensive sounds like a subjective or case-by-case thing.
People - especially these days - have called so many things offensive it’s hard to see what’s actually offensive. The problem is exacerbated as numerous times people only claimed something was offensive because they refuse to tolerate people who disagree with them or they have an agenda; while people from all groups have done this, it’s most common these days from left-wing ideologues.
Changing a term because someone finds it offensive can become a slippery slope.
While it wasn’t my intention to offend, I would have been more open to changing it if either of you had discussed this with me first instead of disparaging me among yourselves.
So due to the risk of a slippery slope, this being a subjective matter and how both you and Renautus have treated me, my answer is no. I will not change the title.
I don’t think you do appreciate civil discussion. So let me bring the discussion to the gutter.
(Mostly kidding)
I don’t see why this is even an issue. If you are admitting that your knowledge on Trans culture is limited due to your lack of exposure, maybe take some politely offered knowledge from people who know more about the topic.
Look, I don’t know if English is your second language, but the use of the term “gender confused” is what the Straight world derisively calls people who aren’t straight. As if there is a confusion on the part of the person being diagnosed - when they often are totally understanding of themselves, and it is the world that is confused by them.
In this particular case, it is involving a Male (Zovaal) and a Female construct (the Arbiter) produced from his stolen anima and sigil.
I think the point you are missing is that it is insulting to use the term “gender confused” because it is almost accusatory. It makes it seem as if a person is “confused” because they do not conform. They might have a whole sense of self, and the confusion lies on society as they try to make sense out of the unfamiliar.
So you were rude on accident, and because people pointed it out, you will now be rude on purpose?
That fits with your posting style.
It isn’t a big deal to me, personally, if you change the title or not. It doesn’t outrage me - but I recognize that it can be hurtful to others. You were explained why it is offensive to some. People did give you the benefit of the doubt as far as your original intentions. But now after being told, you admit to use the term out of spite, so we all see where you are coming from.
I read the title when you posted it a few days back, and I was thinking: “that’s very of rude and ignorant, but it fits with the OP. Maybe he truly doesn’t know how offensive those words can be.” But you have since been explained why. And you state you will continue to use those terms out of spite. And that speaks volumes about your desire for civil discussion.
The word choice of “gender-confused” made it clear which side of the argument OP lands on.
Also always Thadeus you can be read like a book. If this is “disparaging you” then I’d hate to see what you consider outright insults.
Pointing out that you are a self admitted right-winger who follows puritanical ideas on gender conformity isn’t being mean to you. It’s fact, one you openly admit to it seems.
Regardless, Zorvall isn’t “gender confused” that term in context is just silly. It makes this whole thread seem silly, when it could have been a really interesting discussion on narrative subtext if worded differently.
It’s not offensive to me, it’s just silly. I don’t know why you keep talking to the whole like everyone shares your right wing or religious views, and then getting upset when people admit they don’t, or find you abrasive any time you are faced with citicism or even slight push back.
Back on topic though, it’s clear this game is pushing an animist agenda but not sure if it’s pushing a political one. All things have souls. The gender of that soul or gender norms of each soul seems fluid or subject to change without reason. There’s no lore support other than soul gender fluidity or gender nonbinary that explans why Zorvall’s anima would be female as opposed to male. But I doubt that’s an answer you will accept Thad, it’s too “left wing” do you also dismiss Plato’s Republic’s concepts of the soul as “left wing ideology” too? It’s a shame. You call yourself a theologian but that’s hard to believe when you reject any metaphysics outside of rigid Catholic belief and political propaganda.
Animism is historically connected to indigenous beliefs from all around the word as well as ancient and modern paganism. And in most indigenous belief systems gender is fluid. Native Americans for example recognize at least four distict genders. So no, Zorvall again is not “gender confused” WoW’s animist view of souls and anima is greater and more complex than your right wing gender binary of male and female. But I feel like Baal and I will be likley dismissed on the topic, even though it’s a topic of interest. Because the topic is too progressive for the audience.
It makes people “uncomfy” to talk about Indigenous beliefs, paganism, lgbtq+ etc because they are heavily politicized topics. It would be nice if we could discuss these topics like old scholars used to…that’s my gripe.
I thought you’d react like this, though I didn’t think you’d be this wordy. If your ability to “read” me (that is if you weren’t lying about me) was the same as your sight, you’d make Ray Charles look like Simo Häyhä.
I don’t have a problem discussing those topics you cited, and that explanation about Zovaal’s soul anima could be what Blizz was going for. The different genders could also have been a misdirect to hide the Arbiter’s origins before it was revealed in-universe. I just didn’t think it made sense at the time (that title is also partially clickbait to generate discussion about the topic).
You claim you don’t care, @Cursewords, but your verbose comment and - once again - quote-mining me proves you a liar (you might also be virtue-signaling). If you were right about me being spiteful, I’d say to you “pot, meet kettle”.
The story forums have really shrunk if my hate brigade consisting of you, Renautus and Cursewords are the entire story forum besides me. In light of that, to answer your question, it feels fine. Like pulling on a warm pair of socks.
Your lack of reading comprehension is likely why you make so many mistakes about the lore, and get corrected in nearly every thread.
I will challenge your false claims. Your lies. I will use your words to prove your dishonesty. Call it quote mining - they are your words that you typed.
When you claim:
And
That is false, by your own admission, as you reveal yourself with :
You initially pretended to be unaware it was offensive. Then you acknowledge you really were aware that it could be offensive, and that you intentionally made a “click bait” thread.
If anyone had any doubt you were just trolling, it is all but removed by your own admission. At least you make your dishonesty easy to discern.