The Ultimate Vampire Resource and Directory

I have seen many different beliefs and theories towards vampyres, the most common of which I found was Psi and Sang.

What is your take on Psi and Sanguinarians, do you think a vampyre has both abilities or only one?

How would you define a real vampire? or even define a fake?

Anything interesting or history found over this is welcome too.

Let say, time is getting close to many thing revealing, vampires isn't exactly one; but who knows in the mist of upcoming events things get more clear, as things happens to trigger individuals cognitive senses, their will be a time that when you read you are going to feel like things are clicking one with the another and wonder if its more than just you turning lunatic/delusional or is it real. As for the questions: Their are things that feed on emotions of others and their are things that need only blood to sustain. Their are human that do this as well but not in concordance with the concept of vampire and not as singular source of energy; they might think they are vampire, but is just a biological glitch in the DNA in my opinion, I said is my opinion; no need to debate if Im right or wrong; take it as will.

No, you could be correct in your assumption ~IlLuminaria~, but those who do follow that path, oft times confuse themselves with the stereotype because they have no definitive term for what they are "experiencing." Thus taking the word "vampire" out of context entirely.

I could've swore there was a similar discussion already, recently in another thread...

~Goddesscirce~,, there are tons of other threads relating to this discussion, which is why I am going to wait to go sparatic with my viewpoint. It may just end up reading like a 'preacher on a soap box" yet again.

"Let say, time is getting close to many thing revealing, vampires isn't exactly one; but who knows in the mist of upcoming events things get more clear, as things happens to trigger individuals cognitive senses, their will be a time that when you read you are going to feel like things are clicking one with the another and wonder if its more than just you turning lunatic/delusional or is it real."

As for that, yes it is probably one of the most thought of things when this comes to mind, people confusing themselves with something similiar or even what they want to be. This is meant to clear up those kind of things, hopefully specify what is and what isnt, but too many people have different views and theories on such matters. Most are fake, and for that reason too: they are delusional or are simply trying to get into another 'fad' that movies such as twilight has provoked. Also, this isnt meant to say any one person is right, merely state your beliefs and openly discuss views, beliefs, theories and possibilities.

*Chuckles* Ack! You mentioned "Twilight" you sinner!!!! Interview With The Vampire came out long before "Twilight" was even thought about and is still being mimmicked by the main stream crowd. Even the HBO series: True Blood is about to be mimmicked before "Twilight" even has a chance to be so. If an individual deems themselves to "mimmick" any character of "Twilight" (Waiting for the sparkly vamps to come out), I will laugh at them for it. HA!, double HA HA! (Sounding like the bully from the Simpsons.)

LOL. Yea but twilight is the thing that comes to mind when I think of annoying, wannabe vampires, kids that just created another thing thats popular for a year or two and is then tossed aside. So I find twilight very annoying for that, making vampirism a metaphorical used condom in a couple years, and the culprit, society and what it deems popular.

Ah yes, the "what is deemed popular" scenerio is what brings about the terms "psi" and "sang" by those individuals who would carry on as real vampires to support something that they do not have a correct definitive title for.

'Psi" is deemed popular because of the insufficient data that allows the individual to be this. Anyone could say they were "psi" rather then "sang" in order not to "drink blood" because they dislike the taste of it, which contradicts the whole "vampire" structure itself.

Therefore, in my perspective which is based on actual studies and documentation, the "kids" that seem to adopt or have adopted the "psi" connotation are nothing more then a fraudulant excuse to simply put "fit in" and are nothing more then "role players."

Now don't get me wrong, there are individuals out there that do "feed" off of energy itself. This would include the depressed, angery, ill, elderly etc. But these individuals do not segregate themselves into this term for the benefit of "fitting in." This is what seperates the true psychic "have to feed" vampires, from the role players that just take on the name itself.

So, 'psi' gives way to more possible fakes. Sanguinarian ways are harder to disproove. Although I have my doubts about many 'Psi's, I have seen a recording of a transfer of energy, via a camera that detects heat, the man literally pulled the energy out of the other person and it moved into him, it is quite possible it is fake but also quite interesting to see, I'd give a link but It was on tv.

Sounds like you were watching Shang Tsu draining someone spirit, hehe, careful with the idiot box.

hehe yea, concrete evidence is hard to come by, especially for these matters. Like I said though, most likely not true, but interesting nonetheless.

And it was off of 'Ghost Hunters' usually seen on the scyfy(AKA scifi) channel.

~Someguy~ speculates: "Sanguinarian ways are harder to disproove."

I respond: Not so in my perspective, "psi" are harder to disprove since they seem to adopt that certain abstract way of approach. While certain individual can and do present their abilities, I am simply suggesting that the roleplayers would call themselves "psi" since it is the easiest to mimmick without actual proof. Since the audience cannot see the energy being manipulated and or transmuted into the hosts body.

Sanguin are easier to disprove simply because no one individual actually needs blood to survive unless they were anemic or had other relative diseases. This is not uncommon. The practice of "blood letting" and I use this term subjectively since it is the easiest way to describe the practice, is in my view, derived from those individuals who would instigate the whole "I am vampire, you are my donor" stereotype and drink openly even if they do not know how to perform the act properly most times.

One does not need blood to survive and if they do, give me the verifiable documentation to explain why. Sure, the practice can be to a few, erotic. This does not mean the individual is vampire by any means. Blood play is a dangerous thing and would allude to the fact that if vampiric, the individual would be "immune" to the consequences of such play. Which is why it would seem to be much easier to disprove the association with the term "sang" as a direct link to those who would call themselves a stereotype for the vampire.

As well, if the vampire is actually "immune" as per the definition of the vampire... Then why the bloody (excuse the expression) hell would vampires actually need "DONORS"? Or talk about safety precautions?

Answer that one.

Well it was more of a question than a statement but that doesnt matter, it provokes this conversation further. Lets not forget Im new, so Im exploring different beliefs in this kind of thing. It is possible that vampires are still part(to any extent) human, making them just as vulnerable to most diseases, disorders, and problems that occur with humans.

As for this part: "Then why the bloody (excuse the expression) hell would vampires actually need "DONORS"?" Im not entirely sure as what you mean by that, care to explain further?

Sure...

On most "vamp'y'ric" type of sites, they usually show safety precautions and measures to take when in the practice of such methods of "blood play." Which is why I brought it up in the first place.

If the vampire is rumoure to heal so quickly in an efficient amount of time, and is somewhat "immune" if not entirely "immune" to dangerous environmental ailments such as disease, then why have a safety precaution warning?

A question that may come to mind is the fact that I put a parenthesis over the y in vamp'y're. Let me explain.

There seem to be two variations of the word: Vampire, as apposed to the natural meaning of the vampire in general, the blood sucker of history.

And Vampyre, the term that is widely and most commonly used with the life stylers and roleplayers who most times, follow a guide lines called "The Black Veil." This would be getting deeper into what I consider my "preacher on a soap box" debate.

So they come off as if they are supernatural and have abilities more easily disproved? Where as the other approach is more logical and human based? Ive heard from different places, vampire is fake and ive also heard vampyre is the fake. Some refer to vampire as the fake due to its constant use in modern society where as vampyre is more old and used in old depictions and such. Personally, I find the supernatural, vampires with many abilities such as immunity, fast healing and such abilities hard to believe. Id say a vampire is more human and has a small amount differences, mainly feeding of energy from others(feel free to correct me if im wrong).

Such as I am doing at this time, comparing with empathy from your end that your posts seem entirely passive and none arguemental, I will respond in kind.

I will not debate the ambiguous nature of the term in general, instead I will speculate with an analogy of sorts to affirm my association with these two spellings.

An individual will dress in victorian style clothing and consider themselves to be a vampyre and actually tell others that the spelling is in fact with a y. While they are carrying on that old roleplayer-esque fantasy style wardrobe which is not uncommon behavior amongst that culture, they where their plastic fangs and sport their long finger nails.

On the other hand, we have the second individual standing or sitting beside them, plain clothed in a green dress shirt and slacks, looking like they are ready for some sort of business meeting. This individual does not identify with the vampi/yre in the public eye, but will later on, indulge themselves with a bit of blood, or energy on their own time and in their own way.

I would believe the second individual since they would seem more "private" about the matter. They are not into it for the sensationalism of it all, but need to do it because of some ailment that they may have that could be medically related, or a spiritual path that they follow. They in turn admit to an interviewer that they would spell the word with an i at a later date. Since the y seems more olde-esque and would put it in a position of roleplay since more roleplayers seem to speak with an "olde english accent" most times for example, "Good eve, my lord", or "Might I have a word, Sire?"

Psi or Sang? I pick: or.

I would pick neither. Since it is something completely differant altogether. those two words are simple stereotypes that individuals seem to segregate themselves into. It should not be categorized at all, but it is a human fallacy after all.

According to the "What is a vampire?" page, here in this very site, this is one definition.


2. Fig.: One who lives by preying on others; an extortioner; a bloodsucker.

I, for one, have come across many vampires (by this definition) here. I would say that, because I have no physical contact with any members, that it is all energy based for me.

"Vamps" here will make you feel good or bad to provoke a response. If you chose to respond emotionally, then, it seems to me that said "vamp" feeds off of that energy.

People, who's eyes light up at the first hint of drama, could be considered Psi Vamps.
As far as the other metaphor goes, I have no such experience.
At least, this is what I feel.

I think that you can only be one or the other not both

Soulshroude, I'd have to agree with that last paragraph. Although it is possible some are attracted to the 'vampyre scene' just like normal people, they could have entirely different views, some say all vampires have a certain personality, knowledge, and way they act. I do not find that all vampires are alike to be credible. As for Psi or Sang, I believe that the two are related, saying that the two are completely different would give the possibility that there are pretty much, two entirely different breeds of vampires. I see it possible that evolution has taken place here. In the past, vampires are almost entirely known for being saguine or drinking blood, which they were persecuted for, over time some have grown to avoid blood, mainly for fear of persecution, making them find alternatives to taking the energy needed or desired.

this thrad could go on and on it depends on who you talk to and what that persion defines as a "real vamoyer"

Well Im not looking for someone to define a 'real vampire' because everyone has their own definition, its to show different views on the subject.

Aww this will be fun

*dusts off my old soap box and and gets the talking stick to hit people with*

Now for those of you, who dont realize what nonsensical ravings you have, lets have a bit of enlightenment.

There is no need to interpret what a vampire is. they simply are.
But heres a good definition.

A vampire - any creature that subsists on the blood/vital spirit of another.

To be human is a vampire.

The question was, which one were ya.

So to be truthful to the point and end up back before this thread is closed for its tangent.


I would have to venture to say, that both. Since in nature one must survive off of the emotional and "psi" currents of the ways of nature in order to be able to gain their experiences and god forbid, wisdom from nature. That one must both need to feed upon the fleshes and the bloody aspects of the natural world as well as devour the living spirit of things in order to get ahead on with ones path.

To be a vampire, is just an aspect of my personal whole. (Its about to get a lot more interesting) in that the entire reason why one must acknowledge the states of self, as in relation to this concept of a vampire, but in the greater aspect of things, even a god is a vampire, leeching away the spirits and lives of its subjects. Best t be as the source of things, and be as the empty vessel, as it matters not so much what the space that contains it becomes, but more to do with what the space in side it that needs protecting by such trappings as "vampire" to protect it. What would then need to be, if not be housed within the flesh of a vampire?

Forgive my ranting but I find Infernalmages post intriguing.
A question answered with an answer is knowledge, but a question answered with a question is more, it is enlightenment. It gives further contemplation and shows you others things you would otherwise be blind to.

Seems I am, forever, finding myself agreeing with SG. Where is the fun in a thread that does not inspire debate? Where would an "energy vampire" be if everyone only wanted to hear their own opinion? No offense intended to those of you who only want to hear your own opinion. *grins*

Vampires are Sanguinarians. Something that is Psi is something else entirely.

DJJarak, have you read the definitions provided by this site at the "What is a Vampire" link.
One does not have to drink blood to be a "vampire".
I would never claim to be such a vampire. There is no such thing as a person that needs to ingest blood to survive. Even my imagination can't embrace that concept. But then again, that is just my opinion.

lilwhip- Thanks, Its nice knowing my views and thoughts are heard here, everywhere else logic is rejected by pretty much everyone, reason is a thing of the past to most, but not here.

DJJarak- Ive noticed in your profile you believe a 'psi' to be more demon related, care to further explain your view on the situation?

I concord with DjJarak on the previous post.

DJJarak, again I am like SG. I am extremely curious on the matter of "Psi" being something else.

The statement I just made sounds sarcastic, but it is not. This is the part where I get to learn something new. A new point of view. The concept of demons is much more believable to me than that of a blood sucking vampire.
I am very excited! Please, elaborate.

It is all correlative when you find the answer of "demons" out of the interpretational concept of ancient times, in the conveyance of describing something out of limited understanding as well as editing for reasonable purposes.

Ok. What did you say Illuminaria? Speak English, man?
I would love to study up on the demon concept. If you are suggesting a reference, try again and speak a little slower.

And I still wanna hear DJJaraks points of view.
Hugs and kisses Illuminaria.

Well I wont give you the things directly because it is not in my disposition to implement things in the beliefs of others, I could only inspire interest, but demons are described as such because is made by the church and other philosophies as spirits that promote negative influence, not because it is directly evil, but because is seemed as evil in the individual realization or self conclusion. What is deemed evil in one culture could be venerated on other, so the concept of demons become something of interpretation. If you stem that demons are evil spirits or entities with evil agenda, and by physical means unknown to this dimension, you could found another thing outside the fabula concept on one. When you grasp on the idea that in ancient times the knowledge of the unknown was limited for the secret groups, and the general public was ignorant to this accounts it could only be described as fit in their ideas. Thats why is so cryptic understanding ancient glyphs when is not standarized on our level of modern knowledge, somethings could only be depicted with animals, others with figures, others with dead languages, again only the ones educated to understand them not the general public. When you see the demons from the sacred Bible, could in fact be another things demonized to forever inprinting an image of evil whenever the time of this beings appear to someone to identify, like perhaps the "snake".

So, what you are saying is that, for you, "demon" is relative to the person?
Wait! This is another thread. Illuminaria, open a thread on this discussion, please. I am soooo curious.

A vampire is, as I see it, a creature that must feed from another to survive or improve their existence. I'm a vampire because I need to feed from another to keep from being ill and to function better daily. Vampires don't feed just because they can, they feed because of the need.

Take the vampire bat, for example, they feed on blood because it's there food. Without it they would become ill and maybe die. The blood is a need not just a desireable food item.

I've lived a life of illness and now I've become so ill, I'm disabled. After, in recent months, I awakened to my true vampire self, I have come to realize the need to feed. After feeding, my physical system (my body) feels much better. I have enough sustaining energy for a couple weeks.

I never knew or thought I could feel as good as I do after feeding. Currently, I feed off the energy of a crowd. I only do this because finding willing donors is very difficult. If I found willing donors, I would be a "Hybrid". A vampire who feeds on blood and energy. I have always loved the smell and taste of human blood.
Feeding on energy is something new for me in the last 15 years because of my understanding of basic physics and how I can have control over energy.

I've tried to feed off the energy of trees, plants, water, the earth, the sun and the moon and the stars. They give me a short burst of energy but nothing sustaining like human energy.

I feed out of need. It does make me a true vampire. I've chosen to embrace it, instead of rejecting it. I've embraced it for all that it is, spiritully and physically.

Once again, no one "needs to 'feed' on blood" in order to survive or stave off illnesses. This is a trait of the vampire of lore and literature. On the flip side, yes, all of us need energy to survive; and it can be obtained from many sources including that of other human beings around us at any particular time. It's actually quite natural and instintive. To be human is to be vampire....whether we feed off of the positive or negative energies emitted from those surrounding us or that which is emitted from nature and the elements.

*Chuckles* Sorry, I am still laughing at those individuals that think "Sang" and "Psi" vampires are two differant things.

A vampire is a vampire is a vampire already people, get off of your whitewolf, black veil nonesense already. Next thing we know, most of you will say that you are "hybrid" because you are both "Sang" and "Psi". Make up your mind already. Which kind of vampire do you wish to portray with your roleplay???

There is no such thing as "hybrid", "therian", "sang", "psi", or what ever else stereotype anyone wishes to come up with to concur with other individuals beliefs and or methods of reckognition. Its getting quite old, quite fast.

Again, the vampire is vampire. It feeds from the energy of life whether it is through the blood, or through other means. It is not categorized into words of charade.

Yes, the individual can describe themselves into what ever category they wish if this makes them feel all the better about themselves, or if they simply do not understand, or have not learned any other explanations for the vampiric ways.

The vampire understands perfectly since it relies on instinct alone, and will NOT stereotype nor segregate itself into definitive meanings just to describe itself. It has the NEED to FEED simply put. Classify it as you will, but in the end, once again for the third time... The vampire is vampire is vampire!

I have read every post here as of yet. I do agree a lot with everyone. One person alone cannot have all the answers. I do agree with soulshroud that these vampiric people are segregating themselves to fit in...And some of them might be "vampires" but I believe more it is a stereotype people are trying to fit into.

I am vampiric, but not because I can manipulate energy. It is more my being, I am instinctual, dark natured, I've had odd things happen and I'm very in tune with myself. I do not need a stereotype and others shouldn't either.

I am here for information, likeminded individuals; not to rant about being a vampire.

I believes it's a bandwagon that many are jumping onto. Most people here will be out of it in a year or two and onto something else.

Although I do not see a "vampiric" person as needing only blood to survive, I believe it gives energy yes, but fills an instinctual urge and craving long past.
Maybe we're just connecting more with the animal that we are because a lot of people try to say we are different from and aren't animals. Which is totally bunk.

These are just my thoughts though.

"Maybe we're just connecting more with the animal that we are because a lot of people try to say we are different from and aren't animals. Which is totally bunk."

This could not be closer to the truth. Not suggesting that vampires are akin to animals mind you, but in reference to human's and animals with that primal instinct.

It is a fact that survival of the fittest instincts are by nature the conveniant truth regarding primal instincts when adapting to a new life scenerio IE Zombie attack, Pandemic, Martial Law, Earth Quakes and or other natural disasters and phenomenon.

So the point is valid and justified for all living things, not nessessarily a vampiric tendancy.

I do agree. I do agree. My husband is on psychicexperiences.com right now and we are laughing at some posts.

"Am I empathic or can i just read people well?"
...says one person


LMAO!

doo doo doo doodoodoodoodoo dooooo doo doo do do do do.

-jeopardy

People like to think their abilities are above normal when we all have capabilities to some extent but people and society has shut them out.

Well the Cosmos is full of elements and different forms of elements and the matters, certainly I do dire few of them such as space and energy of cosmos, aura and love of beings and souls. This is certainly pull me out of sanginarous practice. Bt you can say I am psychic vampire than psion. coz I intake energy in form of pure energy at space which makes me throbbing beast in handling that speedy intake and it drown me fr many hours after the intake that I have to merge into space to balance it or I will be mad and then i have to do most relaxing exercise in sleeping position for 15 minutes least. But human yogis do not do this is sure...

"But human yogis do not do this is sure..."

Question...with this statement are you alluding that you yourself are something other than human. i'm having difficulty understanding your posts, sorry

Well Yogis do not believe in forcefully in intake of energies. even kundalini yoga do not suggest the forceful invasion of energies of cosmos. it loses its true properties when doing this.

Yes I do intake aura by invoking subconscious and intake space energy through yoga exercise mixed with astral practice and meditation.

You too can do this but you are not knowing the technique commonly. but this technique is called uncommon and kept away coz it may lead person to imbaanced due to in subconscious lock regards so itisuncommon technique coz it require immedately the balancing or relaxing exercise to come out of subconscious or locked to it.

total energy intake is based on subcnscious grown. and person without knowing how to come out of subconscious lock should not do it.

Example breathe - visualise breathe as the word of any person or god and intake and exhale it serenely without pause, your thoughts should not stuck your this visual breathe, it shall be continuous and serene and pauseless. regularise it. is this common human act...? nope...

Do care that while intaking the name there mustnot be any force on breathe by your body and no pull from your body to inhale the word and there should not be forceful breathe holding before and after exhale of the name and there must be no force on the word you are exhaling....

this is not common technique and you are aware that this is used in certain prayers in Witchcraft. its rich form is suggested in Yoga its the most rich form in Yoga and is called meditation with manta. with different mathods to reach the cores or origin.

Got into this conversation a little after its prime I see and find the course of the discussion starting out as chastising over tv shows mentioned to what's harder to prove or disprove to the eventual discussion of yogis...

Isn't this question of psi or sang just an individual preference of energy/lifeforce consumption based on physical or psychological needs?

The causation of vampirism definition that I found makes the most sense that I feel applies to me is that generally some kind of illness or accident causes one's body to lose its vitality and therefore find a need to replenish it.

In my case, the doctors are calling it fibromyalgia (which if you go onto webMD and look up the list of symptoms and compare them with those of a vampire needing to feed on many postings in the database here on the site, are identical), thus making me need to find a source of energy to just make it through the day.

The form of energy I more or less stumbles across was what I believe to be psi-vamp type consumption and after discussing what I had discovered with other psi-vamps on here, they taught me a few basics and I can say with certainty that I am slowly having a turn around in the ability to make it through the day.

Hope that answers somewhat of the question that started this roundabout discussion :)

~Tskune~ are you comparing you "vampiric tendancies" to that of a chronic pain and fatique syndrome, that may be due to arthritis conditions? Last I heard, vampires do not have chronic pain, but do suffer from fatique from time to time. This syndrome in no way, shape, or form compares to the "tendancies" and or "side effects" of the vampire in general.

I so do wish society would quit trying to creat ways to turn perfectly good scientific syndromes into an explanation for their supposed "vampirism's."

You ~Tskune~ may have fibromyalgia, but this again in no way supports your claim of "vampiric tendancies", and or symptoms.

~Tskune~ asks: "Isn't this question of psi or sang just an individual preference of energy/lifeforce consumption based on physical or psychological needs?"

No, it is not. The vampire does not have a preference of energy or life force consumption. It is simply a "need to feed" that drives the creature to "by any means nessessary" to grab that "bite." As far as the psychological needs, this may create the vampire in metaphor, since the individual does exibit some tendancies, but in no way alludes to that individual being vampire.

Soulshroud: part of the precautions for "bloodplay" are for the protection of the donor not just the "vampire".

Yeah ~Wolfie~, we both know this. But in the context I was alluding to was from the vampires side since most of the lifestylers/RPers could be niave enough to try it themselves. Thus my interpretation.

I don't believe in Psi or Sang. I am a vampire myself, but I don't need blood, which the myth says vampires they do. Its like this, I could be playing video games, watching tv, just anything, but if I think about the blood, the delicious liquid that keeps us all alive, vampires and humans, it makes the urge for human blood show, which I combat it with a substitute. If I even see blood that can also cause the urge.

I do believe very much that a person can "need" the energy that is in the blood. There are very real people with very real needs for this energy. You have heard of those who are born with an imminity deficiency? Meaning they cannot heal on their own and require special vitamins or drugs to aid in this process. Well the need for energy is not unlike this. Each human has two bodies. A physical one and an astral one. The astral body requires energy to sustain itself and there are those that cannot produce this energy on their own. I am a sanguine vampire and my wife is a PSI vampire. Neither of us actually "have" to have this extra energy to survive or realy even to stay healthy. But it does give a major boost to our happiness and prevents so much irritability. We feed off of each other and get something not much different that a high much like the effects of marijuana yet somewhat different. And for some this energy is an upper and for others it may cause them to relax and go into a uphoric state. For some however, this taking of energy whether it be through blood or someone or some thing's psychic energy is necesary to remain healthy and for some to even survive. This is also one theory for the myth of immortality. It is believed by some that people who learn to feed psychically as a second nature in life, can keep the astral body alive for ages after death as long as it can maintain this energy off living things. Humans, as well as animals, or even trees and running streams of water.

I still cannot believe that society falls prey to the manipulate guise of the whole "Strigoivii" nonesense, that instigates there are two differant type of vampiric stereotypes IE "sang" and "psi."

Is the population that impressionable to look for any distinct characteristics just to prove to one another what they think they are?

Why live by a clause of two definitions for what one thinks they can relate to because of the characteristics that their bodies may endure?

For the psi - Is there any real proof that the spirit actually needs to feed of of "psychic" energies, do you really understand this concept enough to know what it means, as well as if it is not just a placebo in order to trick the mind and or body into thinking that it is in fact "healing" itself?

For the sang - Is there any real proof that by introducing blood into the system, that this stabalizes any sort of condition that the body may have aside from the obvious medical conditions IE Anemia? Or helps the body to survive, look younger, feel younger, get rid of mild to major physical ailments such as depression, anxieties, etc?

If not, then walk out of the fantasy world already and see it like it is. Who is the "community" really trying to impress, themselves to gain more self esteem, or their peers for that added appreciation value, to fit in and to belong?

Seems like more of a personal problem to me...

Here is one of a few definitions of "vampire" listed in the dictionary.

"one who lives by preying on others"

(Quoted from vvSoulshroudevv
"I still cannot believe that society falls prey to the manipulate guise of the whole "Strigoivii" nonesense, that instigates there are two differant type of vampiric stereotypes IE "sang" and "psi.")

As I am assuming that what I said is some of what brought on your last post let me say that I don't believe that vampirism is limited to only "sang" and "psi". By speaking of only these two I am merely staying on topic with the thread at hand. According to that definition that I posted a "vampire" may be a number of things. A con man who uses deception can be considered a "vampire" for example. An "attention whore" for lack of a better word, who demmands the attention of an entire room, or in this case forum box could be considered a "vampire". Even with the belief of energy manipulation such as what I believe would be more accurately associated with the likes of Reiki than "Strigoivii" (The definition of "strigoi vii" is "live witches who will become vampires after death") being thrown out, if you merely took blood from someone for your own consumption (with or WITHOUT the belief you are taking energy from it), you would still be considered a "vampire" by that definition.

You see by stating things like:

"Is there any real proof..." and

"If not, then walk out of the fantasy world already and see it like it is. Who is the "community" really trying to impress, themselves to gain more self esteem, or their peers for that added appreciation value, to fit in and to belong?"

.....you are also critisizing so many other things on an astronimical level. I can only assume that you are an Athiest as well for religion cannot be proven. There isn't a lot of what I stated in my previous post that can be proven. Only theories. I can tell you that after doing so, I promise you that I feel better mentally and physically. If I AM tricking myself into thinking I'm feeling better, in the end I am still feeling better whether you or mainstream society believes/likes it or not. And to me that is all that matters. I could give a shit about whether anyone other than myself is impressed by it. Just like my comparison with religion, at the end of the day if it makes you feel better, thats all that matters.

i know this is a little off topic and i apologize. my (and my fiance's) friend said that there is this book of rules and that psi made it to get rid of sang's way of needing energy "they banned blood-taking'. he said he saw this on one of the many documentaries of vampires as he is studying but not practicing. i would like to know if anyone knew what nonesense he was talking about?

and my intake on the psi and sang...
well i in a book (sweet blood i believe) realized there are many different intakes on what is a vampire or vampiric.

in this particular book, they described diabetes as a vampiric trait (like anemia, which i have) as their symptoms without insulin would be vampiric and they seemed to have some sort of point showing this.
i believe anyone empathetic could do the psi but whether or not they need would probably depend on their health energy-wise. it is harder to prove they are psi and as for sang.... a few things.

when we speak of sang we seem to mix the practicing vampirics *who follow the actual lifestyle not the roleplayers* and the stereotypical vampires that are immortal (holleywood).
now...

as for the safety precautions, a practicing vampire would need such, as he/she are not immune to diseases of any kind. they may or may not have extra strength or life, and they may or may not be able to have an immune system that allows the smaller diseases not to effect their body but their body had to have grown immunity for it over time.
for the stereotypical, no, they would not because they're immortal. apparently there is something in their blood that makes sure that any defects in another would be cancelled out.

i think anyone can be vampiric but that the stereotypical is hard to prove because that's holleywood. it's easier to do either one depending on a few things.
your taste for blood, or need for it (anemia, for example)
and for psi, your energy from illness or such and age can also apply here as well.

To each, their own. Be who/what you are.

Soulshroude, I realize that I'm having a bad day and that upon seeing your rather condescending and belittling response to my posting, I wonder if you read what I had said at all or just jumped the gun with the hopes of getting to look like you are the end-all to any discussions posted on here...
I was not comparing being a vampire to having fibro, I merely pointed out that what I found in this site's database as symptoms that one may be a vampire are the same as the symptoms listed on webMD for fibro...
As I have gone through and read your responses to what people post, you seem more apt to love the opportunity to shoot what someone says down rather than converse with them, in such case I think I'm going to be a little choosier when I decide to jump into any forum conversations, as it seems that whatever I say will be reworded in some fine works of fallacy

Directed toward Tskune: Since you do realize that you are having a "bad day", I will be a bit tame with my response toward your post.

Though I am going to have to respond in group paragraphs aimed at certain areas of your post...

"I was not comparing being a vampire to having fibro, I merely pointed out that what I found in this site's database as symptoms that one may be a vampire are the same as the symptoms listed on webMD for fibro..."

*Chuckles* Is this not the same thing, you just described twice? comparing the vampire to having fibro and then stating that symptoms of one may be a vampire are the symptoms listed... You are clarifying my point twice. Comparison and stating symptoms is the foundation of the relation. Therefore, they relate/compare.

As far as questioning my motives, members question my motives all the time, you are no differant, and thus I will respond in the same fashion I respond to the rest...

I call out the threads that are obvious mockeries, and or sham threads from individuals that think they know what they are talking about, but post just to post and create a count. I always call them as I see them, since most of the threads are based on common sense, so I tend to call the B.S.er's out on a regular basis.

You may percieve my posts as belittling and or condescending and this is your choice, to be offended if it suites your judgement. But in most cases, my posts are not as offensive as they appear, read between the lines and you will find that most of my posts actually make a hell of a lot of sense. I rarely see any of the higher ups complain as the newer members oft times do. Thus, I present my posts very well and to the point.

Reply or not, this is again, your choice. Don't mind words on a screen since they are just that. Unless something IRL is bothering you, ignore the words on your screen and don't turn it into a dramatic conclusion as if it actually matters. You may turn off your comp at anytime to get back into the real world. Most individuals forget this concept. Its like playing World of Warcraft or being in the "vampire community". Taken far too seriously for a game and or a lifestyle choice and therefore falling prey to aggressiveness and or bantery then claiming that someone has crossed into your territory, then claim the right to defend yourself by any means nessessary.

Grow up already. Its only a website.

I guess I am radical and feel that the terms psi and sang to be silly. You cannot identify those who are vampyric by how they think they feed. I have done researches as well and there are a myriad of, I will use the word creatures, identified as vampires and many do not drink blood. I could go into details about all this but why, who cares. This subject has been debated on so many times. I don't identify with the Eastern European style vampire that mostly stems from fiction. There are so many factions and belief systems you cannot count them on both hands.

Is there really more energy in blood, that remains to be seen. I don't know how this idea started really. I never heard this until maybe after 1980 or so. People didn't dwell on these things and feeding styles and such. These are not types of vampyres but merely feeding styles that many have expressed to exist, among many others. I don't think anyone has the answers to any of these things that float around amongst people. The reason I say that is so many come up with differing answers after years of research. My opinion is just let people be and stop worrying about how they do anything. How do you cut your steak? It is like saying vampyres are mass produced and are all alike. It is just a label.

Something I forgot to say. The vampire/vampyre thing is nothing. Vampire is the more common word and spelling you will see around. It is more modern. Vampyre is the older way of spelling it and they are both the same. What has happened is the modern community has mostly adopted vampyre to mean "real" as opposed to vampire meaning fictiona/historical. There are some that won't bother with using vampyre and others who for some reason have reversed the idea but vampyre is the one that most use. It is the same as magic for prestidigitator and magick for occultist. It really doesn't matter which you use. It's apples and oranges. It's like buzz words that any subculture has that those involved know. I pay no attention to many of them :)

I agree.. Those who tend on setting themselves apart by claiming the terms "psi" and "sang" are by tradition alone, willing to fit in and be impressionable by those who think they know what they are talking about when it comes to "types of" vampires, when in fact they really have no idea.

Just because an individual writes a book, or an interpretation as to what they think a vampire is, does not mean that they are the be all end all on "real vampires" by any means IE Aaron Todd Hoyt commonly known as Father Sebastian and a slue of others.

Though I can say that he was the instigator and can conclude without arguement that he may have been the initiator of "it all" when it comes to the "HLV" (Human Living Vampire) roleplaying nonesense. Thereby taking the Vampies: The Masquerade to a whole new level.

Props to Sebastian "Todd", you seem to have manipulated more then a state full of idiots, congrats! We now have a plaque of idiots that are blinded by another charade and or facade...

I do have to agree SoulShroud... My husband tells me over and over about people loving to fit into stereo types... You remind me of him quite a bit in your posts because they make a lot of sense and aren't meant to put people down, just to think.

I hate that Vampire the Masquerade has been taken to such levels and having games online!

We play Jyhad, What is now Vampire the Eternal Struggle, it is a kickass card game thats not easy to learn for the feeble minded, (or people who play magick) BLAHHH!

Directed right back at Soulshroude -

you state that you single out those that are an obvious mockery...if that is how you perceive others with no basis to go on, especially when my thoughts have been agreed upon with those on this site that are much higher than you, but you seeming to know all condescendingly refer to me as an obvious mockery then I pity you, for an honest statement that gets trampled because you see yourself superior says much of your character.
You seek not to correct, or at a minimum just offer your viewpoint, rather to trash someone because you immediately label them as a sham.....sad
I was offering up a viewpoint out of a published book about psi's becoming dependent on new energy sources after an injury or illness, but no, I'm obviously mocking.....

I am finding most of the posts on this very interesting whether they are in agreement with my views or not and I have to say that there are at least one or two statements that have been posted by almost everyone in here that I agree with.

I also agree that the terms "Psi" and "Sang" are labels. But most things have labels. The idea of anyone getting upset or apaulled by the use of the two different names is rather rediculous. I hate to refer back to the apples and oranges statements but it does seem to be the best example to me. Sure a vampire is a vampire. But then again whether you call something an apple or an orange, they are both still fruit. Does anyone get upset that there are strawberries, and bananas? Would it make you feel better if they just did away with those labels and simply called them all just fruit? Like it or not, though they are both vampires, "Sang" means blood and "Psi" means psychic energy. Rather than being mere labels, can't these words be used simply as adjectives? I could simply tell someone I had some fruit with my dinner and it was yellow in color, had quite a bitter taste when used alone but very good when I squeezed it into my tea. Wouldn't this have been much simpler put if I had just said I use lemon with my tea? All I am saying is that "Psi" and "Sang" are only words used to describe certain aspects and features of different qualities. Good day to you Mollidew, vvSoulshroudevv, ps1v4mpv1. Or would you prefer to simply be referred to as goodbye to all you "people". After all using your names would simply be giving you labels.

SevirD, to tell you the truth, i have no problems with labels, its whe people NEED to fit in so they take a label, or they let a label become themselves that I have a problem with.
I was only commenting on soulshrouds...ways of going about things, not really supporting his ideas at all. I agree and disagree with him at times.

~Tskune~ states: "you state that you single out those that are an obvious mockery...if that is how you perceive others with no basis to go on, especially when my thoughts have been agreed upon with those on this site that are much higher than you, but you seeming to know all condescendingly refer to me as an obvious mockery then I pity you, for an honest statement that gets trampled because you see yourself superior says much of your character.
You seek not to correct, or at a minimum just offer your viewpoint, rather to trash someone because you immediately label them as a sham.....sad
I was offering up a viewpoint out of a published book about psi's becoming dependent on new energy sources after an injury or illness, but no, I'm obviously mocking....."

I respond: You really could have taken this to messaging, but instead you wish to add more drama to the thread.. Alrighty then. It really does not matter if ANY of your posts are agreed upon by those of whom are "higher" then myself. This is not game.

Did I call you a mockery, no I did not. I called certain threads mockeries because the way they are poorly made as well as adapted from other "like" threads.

A viewpoint out of a published piece, does not nessessarily make that published piece the be all end all by any means as I have stated before. A couple of published pieces could have been written by certain individuals that may think they know what they are talking about in order to feed through the manipulated masses IE "human living vampire" contradictive roleplayers that cant seem to let the masquerade die, but take it to a whole other level.

Criticize you, mayhaps. Mock you, no. After all, what is a good debate without a bit of a debacle? Learn to compromise within threads without retaliating in such a dramatic way and the thread will flow smoother. I compromise in my own way when the time is right and the end justifies the means.

ps1v4mpv1 I understand now. Thank you for clearing that up for me. I wish that more people in these threads could agree to disagree without getting angry. It is people like you, soulshroud, and a few others in here I have noticed that make it interesting to express different opinions in these threads without being made to feel like your doing something wrong.

Eh, it is more of a personal choice to bite back at the hand that feeds within any thread. The choice to lash out when someone contradicts the individuals views. Let them, as it is only a website... no hair off of the back.

True Dat!! LOL

I would say neither also. I am a vampyre and I drink blood, but I wouldn't exactly say I was a Sanguinarian. As for Psi, Im not saying this to provoke anyone's belief, but I would have to see it or have proof of it to believe that it exists.

Let me clear this up for you.

I am a sanguine vampire. Sang is the french word that means blood. So sanguine therefore means "blood drinker"

Psi vampires are vampires that don't feed on blood. They rather feed off of the energy of people. They may feed off of the mental energy (hence the name psi or psychic), they may feed off of emotional energies as well.

There are also hybrid vampires. An example is Don Henrie. He not only feeds on the blood of his donors but he feeds off of their various energies also.

The point being, ~SangVampire~... Whether the individual wishes to segregate themselves into any stereotype of their choice, base on popular Strigoi theory or belief system, they are still vampire regardless the tenacity to word what they are.

Using such definitions does not give any individual "power" over any other, nor make them special in anyway, shape or form.

Call yourself what you wish, if this makes you understand yourself any better. In the end, you are still you.

I believe vampyres have both though i would have to say that one would be more prominent for them. Just like something comes easier then the other.