The Ultimate Vampire Resource and Directory

A common phrase here in the forums is, "We are vampires, yet we are just like everyone else."

It is also noticable that most who profess to be vampires are indifferent to the claims of others.

What is the intent of those who profess to be vampires?

Is it to convince others that vampires are not fictional
fabrications?

How many times can people present claims that have no supporting sources?

Is it reasonable to suspect that some who profess to be vampires are simply thriving on the attention (positive, or negative)?

When a skeptic questions a claim of someone who professes to be a vampire, there is contravery.. yet when another person who professes to be a vampire calls another out it is glossed over.. why is this so?

After awhile won't claiming to be a vampire become blasa'?

I am at a lost as to why those who profess to be vampires expect "mundanes" to simply ammend existing
definitions for what constitutes a vampire.

I see nothing that indicates those who profess to be vampires are even close to settling on any perticular
conclusion.

Some will do it just for the attention I think, others just let you know what they are but are too tired of explaining why they are that to skeptics. And some just feel that they are but don't know how to explain why. That what I think a few reasons are anyways.

It is not just skeptics that inquire.. how does one "vampire", confirm another "vampire". see the failure of your reasoning?

I'm just stating the reasons that I've noticed so there's no failure here, as there are definately other reasons that I don't know because I'm not in other peoples heads to know. But for me, it's difficult to tell whose a vampire and whose not just from what's said online. But it's not my place to judge those I meet online on what they say they are, I have no right for that. In person though, it's a bit easier to tell.

So what of the "vampires" that are so critical of others? it is not just the skeptics that are critical of those who profess to be "vampires".

But some people are like that, not just vampires. You go to any community, whether it be a coven, religion, or cult, and you'll find extremists who will turn critical even on those like them. That's just how some people are.

There it is Sara.. just as you said it. That is an example of being Jaded.

Yea... well can't really do anything about that though..
but to answer another of your original questions, I profess to be a vampire because I seek others like me and to learn more about what I am in general.

So basically no one who professes to be a vampire cares about what others professing to be vampires have to say.. they are only intrested in how people react, reply to their claim.

I wouldn't say that. I know I definately care what others who profess to be vampires have to say. If I ignore what they say, how can I learn? I don't believe what anyone say right off, but by listening to each person and putting it together with what I've experienced and know, I learn about other vampires and even get to know some :) So you can't say everyone is like that Dab.

Thank you for admiting you are critical to a degree.

Well if you mean critical in the fact that I seek to learn from those I meet then yes, I am. But if that's not what you meant, then I don't know what you mean. But you my main point was you really can't lump a whole group together from the thoughts of one. You can't say no vampires care what other vampires say. While it's true some don't, there are many like me who do. Well I guess I am sorta critical on steriotyping. I don't like when people steriotype a group of people, it shows too much ignorance.

Instead of being called "mundanes" can non-vampires be called "jadeds?"

jadettes?

Jadettes would be "vampires" that don't believe in other 'vampires".

No t's, please. Mundane reminds me of a bog, all mushy and dark. Jaded is sharp-edged and bristly, colors spin off the jaded's aura. Jaded's smell good, too. Mundanes have the stank. So if we must label one another, I'd prefer Jaded. "She's one of the Jaded's." "The Jaded's are skeptical about everything." "The Jaded's like to hang with the undead, even if they refuse to acknowledge their existence."

Yes I would rather be called a jaded then a mundane. Mundane sounds so boring. And all that really know me know I'm never boring.

The implication that it is just so obvfious what a " true vampire" is, and that "mundanes' are so oblivious hints at elitism. I just find it laughable that they critique their own ranks, yet scoff at skeptics.

Every opinon, and idealism, among those who profess to be vampires is without support, yet each faction attacks the foundation (as vague as it maybe) of the other factions.

How can they expect "mundanes" from writing the whole concept off as ambiguios reasoning.

What is the objective of those who profess to be vampires? Is it to impress their brand of vampire on the mundanes?

i think the plural should be jadi :P to be associated with those freaks the jedi :P

or masons or what ever other group you would add them to.

What happens when "true vampires" are so common, that people become simply indifferent.

Perhaps when goth (as people assumed goth to be) became so common, the next retreat for some was to profess to be "vampires".

Dabbler, I would have to agree with much you say. Usually I don't bother calling out those who profess to be vampires. But lately some in the forum are begging for it. Some claim symptoms of vampirism to be pale skin, sensitivity to light, in ability to tan, trouble sleeping at night etc. This just described my red headed wife with twin babies at home.

I personally think its all silly, When I think of vampires I think of the immortal being of myth, Just like dragons, Fairies, and Angels. I just wonder when people are gonna start calling themself real fairies, dragons, and angels?
Just cause some gifted people can maniplulate energy, and some drink blood, why do they have to use the title of vampire?
As someone once told me that they are a real energy vamp and they can drain energy from me at a noticeable level, I have always given such an opportunity to make me a believe...but they always bailed on me..

What i find amusing is that people have an issue with being called mudane as if it's a bad thing to be on some level of plain or common. People want to be called something fancy, something to make themselves seem more than just ordinary. Granted not everyone IS ordinary but there is nothing wrong with the term. That essentially is putting it into other's minds that being mudane is unacceptable here. Is that what we want people to feel now? I can't say i'm too happy about that.

I guess if one can admit to being Mundane when calling another that,it wouldnt be so bad.But when used in the context that is so often used here,it insinuates that the one saying it is someone divine or supernatural.Like BM said.. Ubstankin, Idont.
Hey,I may be a fish,but fresh fish dont stank.;0
I dont feel like being called a name that suggests I do.
Anyway,what I have noticed here is someone will start off professing an insinuating they are a Vampire,naming traits that,actually,alot of peeps have,throwing out every argument they can find in attempt to be validated.But after awhile their position weakens,they run out of resource and then I see the same peeps almost bashing Newbies who are doing the very thing they did.They become Jaded.

What is the intent of those who profess to be vampires?

Is it to convince others that vampires are not fictional
fabrications?

I guess so or maybe they think you have to say you're a vampire to be accepted on this site.

How many times can people present claims that have no supporting sources?

There is not a supporting source for everything.

Is it reasonable to suspect that some who profess to be vampires are simply thriving on the attention (positive, or negative)?

Yes because that's what some do.

When a skeptic questions a claim of someone who professes to be a vampire, there is contravery.. yet when another person who professes to be a vampire calls another out it is glossed over.. why is this so?

After awhile won't claiming to be a vampire become blasa'?

I don't know maybe they can't stand it. I had people ignoring me because I told them I am not a vampire and read journal entries where it was written that non-vampires shouldn't be on here, which I find insulting.

Still though, for me even though someone has vampire attributes for me they're not a vampire, cause for me the vampire is the myth, for me they just have a condition and I don't see them as superior or inferior than me.

PsiDreamer, but if we don't have pride in our label then we might as well call ourselves Amish. I'm all about inclusion and don't want to offend the plain and modest among us, so I'm totally open to a Jaded Amish sub-category of the Jadeds.

i would have to side mostly with my coven master on this.
frankly all this labeling does is create a mythos that you have to live up to. i've found most of those that are into such vampiric arts
1) greatly overstate their abilities
2) are so concerned with meeting the definitions of their particular label they cant see anything but that label as being correct.

furthermore, i dont do NOT believe we need more labels like jaded, or jadettes, this is not an ICP concert, nor should we stoop to yet more name calling based on percieved deficencies in other people or groups.

Aren't vampires jaded anyway? I mean, they live for a long time and see everything - good and bad. They get used to the way the world is, and are many times bored.

As my response to any questionable claims; if the claim is indeed true, it requires not MY belief to sustain it.

Exactly Isis. What's in a name? How does that go, by any other name would smell as undead? Humanity is the vampire race. The entire planet is made up of parasitic species. Some are just more successful at it than others. So rather than deny that vampires exist, the jaded are denying their very own nature.

and id also like to add i would think of an aerosmith song everytime i saw the phrase "jaded" on this site.

I am often reminded of Tinker bell in Peter Pan, begging the Wendy to believe in fairies.. because if noone believes in Fairies, then fairies vanish..

I believe the idea behind that is that if nobody believes in them, then they won't believe they exist even if they saw them, essentially making them not exist to most people. But that wouldn't actually make them not exist. And I do believe that is the current situation. Many people don't believe in vampires so they don't know a vampire even if they're standing next to them. Ignorence is bliss to some.

That makes no sense Sara.. please elaborate. What is being ignored? What is the obvious material (not personal experience) that is being ignored?

Not being ignored Dab. ignorence (the state of being ignorent) as in not knowing. If I misspelled it I'm sorry, but I don't believe I did. And If you don't believe in something you are ignoring it's existance anyways.

Sorry that is flawed reasoning.

Maybe flawed to you but that's your opinion and you've a right to it. As it's my opinion that it's what the fairy thing in peter pan meant.

here's how your flawed, There is no "vampire 101" it is not taught. How can people be ignorant to something that is not in curriculm.. experiences do not translate to academic standards.

attention seeking and posturing for some.. though yes, there are Life-stylers and those who drain, in other way's.. but 'yes Dabbler', interesting thread.

There isn't a class for everything dab. Some things are taught through experience. And ignorence isn't always bad. Everyone is ignorent of quite a bit. If you haven't been taught, whether by others or by experience, you're ignorent on the subject.

I find a percentage of those who identify with vampires to be excellent company. I have found a substancial account for vampires on this site, a well researched supported account.

All the reast is as you state posturing. I enjoy a freak show as much as (if not more then) the next person, but in the end it is all presentation.

There is nothing plain or common about me. No, I'm no vampire but I have done many things in life that sets me apart from others. This is why I would take offense to being called mundane.
Vampires live a long time do they? This is the sort of comment that make skeptics disbelieve. Those that continue to blur fiction and nonfiction in conversation will continue to be the reason why people will never accept real lifestylers.
Ignorance not ignorence, now you are learned in proper spelling of the word.

How interesting this thread is going, so much discussion yet so little time for others to understand what is really going on in the thread when it stay's on topic.

My apologies for not responding to this thread ~Dab~, as you have made it way to easy for me in the long run to add conjecture. I will speak with you in private message mayhaps, unless you want a really really long post from me.

Though I do have to say that I agree with you in the thick of things as usual regarding this thread. Most who do profess to being vampire have no idea what they bloody hell they are talking about or ascribing to and most always go along with the crowd mentality and keep things within the standards of normal answers such as the ones that you have already provided, because they have no true way of answering them.

Like I said, I could go on forever on this one, so I will let it be what it is.

Thanks for the spelling correction danzig :)

Thanks for the support Malky.

Someone mentioned about believing that vampires really do exist, well just like fairies and dragons they are all mythical, and no one knows if any of them really exist. Wether humans wish to use titles of vampires doesnt make me believe that all the mythical tales of vampires were based on humans giving themselves the title of vampire.
If you go back to the ancient definition of a vampire is not merely a human who drinks blood or manipulates energy, but an entirely different species.
And I dont understand why people wish to be called something they are not?
I think its a matter of maturity, And jaded heh, isnt anyone with false claims?

it would be much more appropriate if instead of them saying:

"I am a Vampire/Vampyre"

they said:

"I practice Vampirism"

the latter if what i use to describe what i do when i drink blood rather then proclaim to the world I'm a creature of the night.

Also if you say you practice it, people would be more likely to ask what do you mean by that rather then just writing you off as a lunatic for saying you not human, or above humans, or altered in some ways. i know this will mostly fall of deaf ears but it was worth a shot saying it.

thats basically how i would approach any type of further labeling of people in this society. its a little off topic my apologies.

perhaps those doing the claiming have went off their meds?

Actually Malky.....i would probably take people more seriously if they did say it the way that you just did. I would have more respect for those that said it in those terms instead of saying "i'm a vampire". lol

Many claim to say they are to fit in a society that they want acceptance in, some live the style in which they believe Vampires live.

Yet profession of any culture or society club is based on actions and appearnace and not the thought or ideals of others.

Well stated Malky.. after a while the whole disclaimer "I am vampire.. but not like in the movies, or lore.." must get redunant.

People can relate more to personal practices.. based on beliefs, or ideals.

Only problem with that is it's basicly stating that one lives that way by choice and not because of who they are. Some of us live that way by need, not because we want to. I definitly don't want to feel the need to drink someone's blood nor do I want to feel the way I do when I don't give in to the cravings. But I don't really have a choice on that do I? It's who I am.

It is something you have convinced yourself of, with input from other sources.

Maybe, maybe not. Doesn't matter really. All that matters is that I've always felt extremely tired and weak most of the time my entire life, then I got the cravings for blood and next thing I know I feel great all the time as long as I feed once a week.

Yet that could well be a placebo effect.

Why not state the reason why you feel the need for blood ~Seraconnor~, mayhaps then the audience would understand your ailment?

What else about your practice stimulates you? It is not necessarily blood exclusivly, even addicts find a rush in venturing to the corner. The stimulation of taboo activity.. the emotional content of ritual with people that
share your ideals, or that you are introducing to your practice..

Depending on the time vampires are the in thing, (like in today society). It comes across that being a vampire is a cool thing to be. And as such ppl will claim that they are a vampire to just be cool.

Does it really mean because you drink blood that you are a vampire, like if i cut myself, I suck/clean the blood away, does that mean I am a blood drinker or in fact a vampire....I dont believe so.

I completely agree Doctor. I personally see a vampire who feeds on others, mostly through blood, out of an actual need for it either physically or mentally. I do not believe that someone who drinks blood to be cool is a vampire.

The mental capacity for drinking blood is termed as "Renfields Syndrome", this is refered to quite alot within this thread, thus is why I brought the term to attention.

Actually SS, unless I'm mistaken, "renfields syndrom" is the psychological need to drink your own blood. I don't remember it being applicable to the blood of others.

Clinical Vampirism

Also called simply Renfield syndrome and traditionally known as clinical vampirism [1] [2] [3], though not currently categorized in the DSM-IV, is a mental disorder used to describe an obsession to drink blood. [4] The term was first coined by Richard Noll and is named after Dracula's insect-eating assistant, Renfield, in the novel by Bram Stoker. [2] [5] [6] The term has been used in both psychiatric and fictional literature, as well as on television, where it was briefly mentioned in an episode of CSI titled "Committed" (Season 5, Episode 21). [7] [2]

referenced link may be found: here

Hmm interesting. Good post. I have learned something new on RS then.

I think that is whole question about Vampire, is it really just because you drink blood or is there more to it. Is being a vampire what we see in the movies, TV or read in books. I remember that there was an uproar with Twilight because the vampire was sparkly etc. Who says that it cant be, it is just a different story then what we have grown up with.

We have this idea of what a vampire should be because it has been drummed into us over the years because of what we see on TV, movies and books.

I think we have already become blaize about what a vampire is or should be. Today if you dress in black have fangs (bought from shops or designed) and drink blood it is easy to say 'I am a vampire'.

That's actually something I've noticed and wondered about. In the VC I've noticed a lot of people who go to fangsmiths to get fangs put in. Mine are sharp enough on their own to break skin to feed if I need to, but there are easier and less marking ways that I prefer to use. Why the big hype with getting fake fangs permananly put in?

yeah I have wondered that also, I have seen ppl whose teeth can be mistake as real fangs. Why even bother about getting fangs at all. I am sure that anyones teeth can break the skin and draw blood if need be.

to further point out, there are alot of things we practice in life that we aren't given a choice about, unless we want dire consequences.

prime example hygiene, yes you can let it slide if you want but praticing good hygiene is more accepted and most of the time needed, or else you may be fired by an employeer etc.

also alot of people that grow up with a religion aren't given a choice, hebrew and catholics are like that. how is that different ? its something you get to have a choice about but not as a young person you dont. your restricted to practicing it for your own benefits. the only difference is that its forced by outside forces not inner conflicts.

sorry to be a little off topic.


and fang obsession, tsk tsk, whats the point, its about the most unhealth way to get blood from a donor. all it does is make you look like you need mental help, its one thing as a dress up device, but i saw a kid locally that was just walking around downtown with them on, of course someone called the cops on him for disturbing the peace.


once more someone playing a role based on a label caused problems.

"to further point out, there are alot of things we practice in life that we aren't given a choice about, unless we want dire consequences."

This makes a little bit of sense to me, but only in certain situations as with hygiene as pointed out. But it would be contradictory to state that a dire consequence is related to religious practice. The individual has always had choice when it comes to religion. They can back away from it or go forth with it once they understand the concept of it. It is not like they will suffer direly if they back away from it, unless some ignorant individual had taught them otherwise, false truths and all that.

I think though that the critisisms of this threads posters regarding those who have visited fangsmiths can reach a finish. Who cares if they wear fangs or not. It is their choice in the end. it is like critisising an "emo" for being too damned emotional. Mayhaps they have something mentally wrong within their lives that they cannot cope with. Leave them be, they have done nothing wrong.

I too will stick up for the little man on occasion...

I think people who profess to be vampires are indifferent to the claims of others on the basis of faith. People with faith belief in something even if it cannot be validated with scientific proof and at times even debunked with scientific investigation.

If we looked at vampirism as a religion "Vampires" do nothing that any other religion does not do. People have been trying to convince others that Jesus Christ is the son of "God" for an extremely long time. Where is their supporting evidence to be found? There is no scientific proof that Jesus Christ was the son of God. Yet billions world wide believe he is.

We could compare the current trend of people claiming to be vampires to those who converted to Christianity under the rule of the Roman Emperor Constantine. The antagonist then being Constantine, the antagonist now being pop culture. Possibly in a thousand years Vampirism may be the most popular "religion" in the World. So yes claiming to be a vampire may very well become blase.

I think the discussing of vampires in a critical, synical way has gone the way of the dodo. Instead of trying to research the machinations of it, society instead chooses to interogate those who claim the path in a very critical fashion without first trying to understand why it has become a phenom in the first place.

As well, those who would claim the phenom almost never do their research ahead of time and most always come off as contradictory or unlearned, and quite frankly stupid and naive to some truths that are out there. Do you research first before claiming something, otherwise society will look at you as if you are an idiot or something.

I like the notion of the jadette and the jadi:)

I am with another like me, we researched we compared,
despite our differings paths to this same one conclusion.

We are the same in any objective mind so the notion we
should become judgy with all the latest Fans, the role
players, the inquisitive the mad and the sad...

Is in my submission, a perfectly natural reaction.

What is in a word? a label?...just a subjective image based upon experience, or more often...lack of it.

Grinz*

It is just that, a word. Words have meanings to describe what society sees in front of them, to become better understood with it on an approachable level. Scholarly in the accademia of the person, place or thing.

The individual already understands themselves to a certain point, but they gain a better understanding through research that revolves around stereotyping and credentials. This is the way of education. At some points, the stereotypes become negative and thus are taken out of context IE emo, meaning emotional; therefore the subject becomes critisized for their stereotypical way of dress.

As with all environmens, words are taken fro granted and as such, the educational process has been eliminated which makes part of society ignorant to the facts that begrudge them from understanding.

Thus, society has become to critical to understand what is real from what they want to believe through exposure from media, books and their elders that taught them from day one about modern truths rather then what needed to be displayed as a true learning process.

"So you're a vampire, now what? Where to from here."

ie.. in a room of ten people, 6 subscribe to your claim.
Now what? What is the benifit to those who subscribe to your personal conviction?

What practical purpose does subscribing to someones (often vague ) interpretation of being a vampire serve?

As Lolita stated, regards to religion, most religions (upon conversion) provide "insurance" in the after life.

What about subscribing to vampires? Or alien beings for that matter?

Thank you ~Dab~ for ascribing to my thought process... I have been asking this question alot lately.

I do read the occasional, "Mundanes are Afreared' of what we ("vampires") are." So the implication is that once one subscribes.. then you are not longer afeared'?

I find it hard to fathom why someone would go to extremes to try and be something they are not. ie the boy with the fangs. Yes as a dress up no problems but to go through life with the changes you made on a wim, you have to put up with that choose for ever. Sorta like tattoos once you have it thats it unless you pay out heaps of money to fix it.

But to each their own, that the thing about us humans we can make a choose and we have to live by it. I think vampires have become a big hit these days because of all the tv shows and books that have started to hit the market. It is the in thing and as such ppl want to be a part of the band wagon.

I dont think it hurts anyone and it is bringing vampires to the fore instead of a taboo topic.

Popular things in the media regarding vampires or what ever, only takes the individual away from the truth...

"There is no spoon..." - The Matrix

Those who prey upon jaded people, know that routine
or none-phenomenal beliefs, are ripe with thrill seekers. sadly the ideals are warped to flatter the individuels into other suspect activity.

Fanatics recruit from the rank of Othodox, they seek the antsy people.. the ones that want an emotional.. as well as social esteem buzz.. in moderation any practice or belief fills a social need, but when is one to invested?

I think when the "twilight" thing blows over then it will become blasa and irrelevant again.
Some profess to be vampires because they think it is "cool" or because they want attention.
Others, as I agree with one of the other posts, are just to tired to justify who we are to others. It becomes irritating.

Re dab "what practical purpose does its serve to be reognised, (or labelled)"

I have thought about this...mmm

not an easy line of thought to follow...what indeed?

Subconciously I believe many seek acceptance, even if they would never admit it, even it was from just a few.

Like the gays coming out in the 60's.

Better to stay quiet? or is it?

No they all want that chance to say "I told you so."

.. as if validates their existence??

Non-answer Fallin' Star.

But thanks for acknowledging the question.

My name is Karmine. I was made Vampire on March 31st 1855. I have found that most people are not open to our existence because it is just too overwhelming for them, and so we continue to be shrouded in mystery and misunderstanding. The popularity of Vampire fiction in the mainstream media right now has only made our existence even less credible, as many misconceptions are being popularized due to artistic license. Simply put, a Vampire is a Revenant - someone who dies and returns to the world of the living. Lazarus of Bethany is an example of a corpse that returned from the grave.

Ixnay on the Lazarusnay, Karmine. This is your last warning. Fictional vampires are the perfect camouflage. When will you ever learn that lesson?

The fact that Karmine can't distinguish between fiction and fact enough to know Lazarus is biblical mythology certainly calls into question his claim to being an immortal "vampire." And if he truly wishes to be acknowledged as such, I for one, would be happy to do so... if he would first provide the legitimately evidences supporting his claim.


- Upir'

Where does one go after subscribing to such claims made by a person..

What significances does believing (being convinced by such a claim) serve?


"so.. perhaps you are as you claim to be.. what next?"

Dramatic pause

"a reality show that educates people?"

How about a talk show..

So.. Your a Vampire.. What Of it.

Even those who identify as vampires are seen being critical of others that claim to be vampires, and that, isconsistant with ideology, and dogma.

dabbler, while as usual I agree with the general tenor of your argument here, yet your final statement above does not always follow logically or factually: "Even those who identify as vampires are seen being critical of others that claim to be vampires, and that, isconsistant with ideology, and dogma."


If someone claiming to be something extraordinary actually provides the solid and legitimate evidence backing such claims up... there is no inconsistency should they later criticize others who make equally extraordinary claims yet refuse to provide any such evidence while wholly expecting and, in some cases, demanding that others accept their claims as well and with no questions asked.

True... it is extremely rare that such persons be found as provide just such scientific evidence. Thus in 99.9% of the cases, your statement will tend to be accurate. Yet, there are those extremely rare cases in which one "identifying as a vampire" might just happen to have the scientific evidences fully backing their claim up. And in such extremely rare cases, there is no inconsistency at all that they should criticize others making similar claims without any such evidences.


- Upir'

Not trying to attack anyone, but many people DO indeed lie to get attention... unfortunately this makes it difficult for real sangs and psis to express who they really are to people because of the large amounts of lies that are around... like:

-being hundreds of years old
-being unable to go in the sun
-Have super powers [strength/ self healing/ ext.]
-Having no need to sleep
-Having to need to eat food
-Turning into animals [lol]

A vampyre is very much real... though it's not only a physical... but a mental and spiritual growth as well... Nothing magical and super romantic and super beautiful and super strong like a character out of a book... but a person... just how a person can be a witch... or a person can be a saint.

People hear "Vampire" and think of all the myths people tell and lie about. So it upsets people because they are false and sound ridiculous... and make it seem like it's a joke... when it's not. It's a lifestyle and way of being for some people... and to have that mocked and looked down upon because of people who want attention is quite annoying.

GoC,

Indeed people here do lie in making outrageous and unsubstantiated claims... as evidenced in only this forum topic, alone. And this jades all of us toward all who makes such claims, and rightly and justifiably so.

Yet... this should not have us, in a way, "dumbing down" what a vampire is such that anyone and everyone can claim to be a "vampire" by simply claiming to adopt a particular "lifestyle" or path or "discipline." To re-invent what a Vampire is by such convenient revisionist definitions succeeds only in minimizing the extraordinary history behind the "Vampire" as well as his well-documented unique characteristics for which he was historically (not fictionally) known... and then reducing all such to a sort of "club" any and all can be members of so long as they abide by the regs, policies, rules, and "lifestyle" mandates as dictated by the very same self-proclaimed authorities ("Sires") who invented all such to begin with.

One cannot become a "Vampire" as one becomes a witch or a saint clearly because, historically, this was not how one was defined as a Vampire. This has nothing whatsoever to do with what a REAL Vampire was... or is.

Every now and then we hear from someone who is actually a native of Eastern Europe, someone who intimately knows and lives the environs that spawned the Vampire legends. And they have oft commented here how entirely erroneous so much of what is said here is about Vampires. Yet, no one listens to a word they say. They comment here politely, are ignored, and the discussions continue about "lifestyles" and the latest Hollywood fictional portrayals.

This, also, seems to be an additional level of "jading" that occurs here when we hear from Romanians, Bulgarians, etc.

Just sayin'...


- Upir'

I never said anyone can BECOME a vampyre...
I was comparing the witch and saint in the aspect that
they are still human, but have also a spiritual growth that is needed...

I started above that there is also a physical aspect of being a vampyre... and I understand that clearly... You seemed to have misunderstood me

But I don't believe people can be turned, or can choose to be something that they are not.... but that doesn't make a vampyre some supernatural being.... Vampyres are simply different...

Vampyres there are more than one kind of vampire, i understand that... but I have to disagree that blood isn't directly related... Many vampires would eat the hearts of other humanbeings and animals, not just a sexual desire. I grew up in Russia where many stories and articles were VERY popular in my town. Vampires have a direct link to blood in in east europe. It has been a huge part of the tradition and history of the vampyre.




In the article "The Romanian Folkloric Vampire" by Jan Perkowski, published in the September 1982 issue of the journal, East Europe Quarterly, there is the following tale recorded by the eminent Romanian linguist, Professor Emil Petrovici, in the Romanian town of Ohaba, in southwestern Transylvania, on June 21, 1936:
-----"Once a strigoi turned into a handsome young man and a young girl fell in love with him. They were married, but the girl also wanted a religious wedding. He rejected this idea. Her parents insisted, so he agreed to go to the church, but when they emerged from the church he looked at his wife in a strange way, baring his teeth. She became afraid and told her mother about it. Her mother said, 'Don't be afraid. He loves you. So that's why he bared his teeth.' When their parents came to visit them, they couldn't find them. They had locked themselves in, but the people could see them through the window. He was sucking her blood. When the people saw it, they shot him through the window."

In the same article, there is another anecdote involving eating the heart.. This one was recorded by Professor Petrovici on June 21, 1933 at the village of Bals in the Romanti district of the
Romanian province of Oltenia, in the eastern part of former Wallachia:
-----“They say that a corpse leaves his grave as a moroi and feeds on his relatives. He prefers their hearts. The solution is to exhume him and if he is ruddy in the face, you have to stab his heart with something sharp like a needle, a pin, or a nail.”.

Another example is one from trial testimony recorded in the Croatian coastal city of Dubrovnik in 1737. The defendants were from the island of Lastova, about 60 miles by sea from Dubrovnik. Earlier that year, there was an outbreak of severe “diahrea” on the island of Among
the defendants were a band of vigilante style vampire hunters, who believed the epidemic was due to vampirism, and parish priests accused of cooperating with them. The trial began on October 14. On the next day, a man, evidently an Italian, named Lovro Lucenta testified:
------“I was on Lastovo about 16 years ago and gathered coral...Many people died on the island at that time...Vampires (kosci) would enter houses at night, and they would chew on people’s hearts, because they feed on the hearts and innards of the living and drink their blood, above all those with whom they’ve had a quarrel....”

On page 32 of in his book Vampires, Death, and Burial (Yale University Press, 1988, Paul Barber gives other examples of vampire bites associated with blood sucking together with his source of information for each:

* Among the Russians, they leave a small wound in the area over the heart. Source: Lowenstimm, Aug. Aberglaube und Strafrecht. Berlin, 1897. p. 96.
* Among the Kashubes, it is said that the vampire chooses the area of the left breast. Source: Mannhardt, W. "Uber Vampyrismus", Zietschrift fur deutshe Mythologie und Sittenkunde 4 (1859), p. 260.
* In Danzig (now Gdansk, Poland) they bite on the nipple. Source: Mannhardt, W., same article as above, p. 264.
* In the district of Krain in Romania, vampires both suck blood and create new vampires by doing so. Source: Mannhardt, W., same article as above, p. 264.
* In Romania, the bite is in never on the neck but usually on the chest over the heart. More rarely, the victim is bitten over the eyes. Source: Cremene, Adrien. Mythologie du Vampire en Roumanie . Monaco: Editions du Rocher, 1981, p. 100.

Personally I struggle with the concept that unless it is written about and well documented it is false.
After all, history teaches us the Victor writes the truth and nine out of ten times that "truth" is false propanganda.

Therefore a logical one should consider "who won?"
If indeed the otherkin lost then it should be cut and dry yet rumours with circumstancial evidence persist?

Yet all emphatic evidence was lost and discredited...

I mean, who could possibly desire such an outcome?

Just asking.

Thanks Upir point well made. That was a sweeping statement, that could have used specifics.

G,

I feel you may be able to tackle my previous question,

What significance is served by the General population in subscribing to the ideal that vampires exist. Once again I see the Vampyre used,

So vampyres practice vamperism, but are not vampires? Just ritual?

Wouldn't it be reasonable to suggest that a percent of Peeps who ID as vampires want people to be intimadated?

The same people who are afraid of indifference to their interpretation of mythical creatures?


Personally I have significant data from Upir to settle on.

I receive other ideals by varied degree.

GoC.

Do you ID as a Strigo? if so why doesn't the Strigos declare themselves Strigo? I note you use the Vampyre distinction, please don't reply that it is just a prefered spelling, as it is obviously used as a distinction.


AN..

AN..

As vague ever. Yet I am curious about your glancing references.

Well done, GoC!

Finally, someone who has taken the time to actually read some of the same accounts and books that I have! How wonderfully refreshing!

The true authorities that need to be read by all who seriously love and study Vampirism have got to be Perkowski, Barber, Dundes, and more recently, McClelland. There are many others worthy of mention, as well. But the first three are the Vampire Trifecta of true Vampiric scholarship.

And... as Barber, himself, concludes after examining and considering carefully the many anecdotal accounts and hearsay evidence is as follows:

"Vukanovic, whose Serbian Gypsy vampire beliefs is one of the most detailed studies that we have, never once mentions blood-sucking. This supposed trait seems to be merely a folkloric means of accounting for two things: unexplained deaths and the appearance of blood on the mouth of a corpse."
(Vampires, Burial, and Death: Folklore and Reality, pg. 100)
- Dr. Paul Barber

This was his conclusion after his own scholarly study of all the many tales, which forms the foundational basis for the rest of his entire book in which he details wonderfully exactly how the medical ignorance of the people in those areas concluded falsely the evidences before them. Oh... indeed... SOMETHING was going on! But, what they had concluded regarding it all was patently in error, as Dr. Barber quite effectively and comprehensively explains throughout his book "Vampires, Burial and Death: Folklore and Reality."


So... what really WAS going on, then?

This is the question that, when fully examined, begins to be answered once the erroneous assumptions and conclusions (as Barber clearly identifies and then counters with the facts) have been factually discredited and proved false... and what remains is then more carefully considered.

And what always remains... always... after the false blood-drinking trait (with all its attendant fangs and "demonic" aspects) are discarded... is the "insatiable sexuality" that would appear to have been the root cause of the false "evil" traits that were added on afterwards so as to scare women and enrage men.

For example... let's look at the "strigoi" account you provided:

In it we have a man who was... different... and apparently loved a local girl long enough to wish to marry her, as she apparently wished to do as well given that there is no indication that she was forced into the marriage by parents or society.

What would be the point of this man doing so if all he wanted to do was to drink her blood?

Why marry his intended victim when he could have simply "attacked" her at any time, drank his fill, and moved on? Surely if that had been his actual intent, he could have found a way to attack her or kidnap her and thus have her entirely at his mercy. Why marriage... except he honestly loved her. Doesn't make much sense, now does it?

Okay, so he marries her and they then go to their home and ... as it is claimed ... "they had locked themselves in." The tale states that their parents had gone to visit them... yet immediately thereafter, it is "the people" who peer at them through a window. Why were there "people" there if only the parents had gone to visit them? "The people" then interpreted... or chose to interpret... what they saw as the "strigoi" (as they insultingly choose to call him) "drinking her blood" and so, they shoot him dead.

This also begs the questions: Can the "undead" be shot dead?! Supposedly, even in those times, the answer is a resounding "no." They must be staked, burned, decapitated, etc. But shot? Hardly.

None of this makes much sense as the tale is told, now does it?

The murder was probably real... the reasons behind it, however, were not.

What seems far more likely, given the circumstances described, is that "the people" took such exception to this particular man marrying one of their women that, after the marriage and, thus, after sex had occurred (probably only engaged in after marriage in those times), something about the sexual relations between this "strange" man and his new wife either scared and/or outraged the local populaces such that they were driven to, upon verification of the sort of sex this man exhibited with this local girl, ... murder.

Thus... they came en masse to spy on this man and his wife through their windows. And, upon verification of the claim by directly observing the man as he made love to his wife, chose to shoot him through the window... and blame it on his supposedly sucking her blood. And it was this that actually happened.

This explains why the man married the girl first and why "the people" then spied on the newlyweds as they were in very close proximity to one another behind their locked doors... thus prompting them to murder the husband. And why they later then used common superstitions to justify the murder.

My profile's full explanation of what truly was going on fits this scenario like a glove... as it also does almost all of the oldest accounts attributed to "vampires."


And finally... lest it be forgotten... only a few decades ago, Jews and witches alike were accused of stealing babies and then eating them. Why? To both enrage the populations to murderous intent and then to justify the atrocities committed against them as a result of the outrage such false claims engendered.

So also where "Vampires" are concerned.

Thanks again for using actual vampire scholarship in your response, GoC !!!


- Upir'

I am more of a realist by nature and my answer would be that it may be a spiritual acknowledgement and people here may feel more open about revealing a side of themselves that they may not be able to anywhere else. There are a lot of things in the world that cannot be easily proven to another, for every experience is a personal one.
I have met quite a few people in my time that call themselves vampire but it wasn't something they easily came out with. Most honest individuals are not very bold about their natures because they don't have to be. They probably don't feel they need to prove to another who or what they are.

Some Romanian folklorists today contend that Romanians never attributed blood drinking to what has been interpreted by Westerners as Romanian vampires (the revenants given such names as strigoi, moroi, pricolici, and varcolac and who often match Slavic vampires in many ways).

All of the citing on this to the contrary given by the French scholar Adrien Cremene in his Mythologie du Vampire en Roumanie are from articles written by Romanians in Romanian academic journals or trace ultimately back to such a source.

Understand that I am not here to sway... but it seems we both have similar sources but are getting very different message out of them... I also understand that no matter how hard we fight our cases... we honestly do not know FOR CERTAIN one way or the other....all we can go by are the accounts of others.... so if someone were to go by my account 400 years from now... vampyres DO consume blood... and if they were to go by YOUR account, They do not. I am simply throwing out the option that maybe, there is more than just 1 type of "vampire" that just because we don't agree don't mean it isn't real or it hasn't happened.

I will agree to disagree and take your sources as what it's worth as I hold mine to equal standing.

This will be life debating over religion when no one really knows who "GOD" is.

Some vampires do consume blood according to superstition. It is not true of every country or every ethnicity that has originated such stories.. I have done a lot of research myself. I am 63 and I read volumes of resources and even read up on the authors and what other scholars had to say about their writings and sources. I have found things from authors, scholars, ethnologists that totally clash. It gets tedious dredging up citations for things someone has learned over a lifetime. Some of these writers go in with preconceived ideas and do not show the whole picture but those things that prove their theories or come close to it. For one, folklore is handed down orally so after hundreds of years they are not representative so much of the original idea once they get into writing. This was apparent by a study that was done on the Vrydolakas. The Leanan Sidhe in Ireland drain those of their lifeforce they come in close contact with and on the Isle of Man called Lhiannan Shee there, they enchant their victims and slash their throats with their long nails and supposedly drink their blood. They have been identified as vampires, yet also unseelie fairy-folk.

I think many get tired of being questioned. No one, whatever they may claim to be, knows everything. All they can tell you is how they feel. I hate to say this but because of the proliferation of information on the internet, many have locked horns because some of the information is erroneous even by some who have done research for years. They are chalked off as loony. I know of one in particular in Europe who did extensive research and his beliefs and conclusions are different than most so even after he cited source after source, no one listened.

It is like anything else. They can't answer because they don't know. It is just that some think they know and are colored by fiction or some website they read where someone came up with some crazy idea. They didn't know what caused fibromyalgia and now they say it is over active nerves...they didn't know what caused schizophrenia and now they say damaged genes. I consider it a condition one is born with and it exhibits differently from person to person. Some of the more paranormal stuff is a personal issue but the reversed circadian rhythm seems to be pretty pervasive, photo sensitivity but not bursting in flames...that is fictional, sensory hypersensitivity. The main thing is the blood drinking controversy as to whether it is really necessary as opposed to energy. They have taken pictures that show energy exchanges and other things. Some are elitist and some think anyone who isn't a vampiric is fodder which is so dumb.

I believe it is a condition but beyond that it is personal belief by personal experiences and you will find people of all ages and walks of life including scholars, teachers, psychologists and you name claiming this condition. No one is perfect, and no one knows all the answers including those posting here. It's a very controversial topic and most have too much folklore, superstition and fiction in their heads to really move on past what others might be experiencing. It isn't a religion but for some there is a very spiritual tie for them. You could call it sects or what have you and many (I would say most) don't dress up or are they Goth. Those that do these things will stand out and it has become the yardstick that most measure those that believe they are vampires. Only a small segment of people are open about this, the rest prefer to stay in the shadows and even some of those do not like the tell all attitude going on at this time by some from the vampire community.


Read here:

http://www.vampirefilmfestival.com/Joseph_Laycock.html

Well to cut through the BP stylee documents and that which were written to muddy the waters...LOL
(gotta love the oil slick jokes) Erm, where was I ?
Oh yes, I have posed questions to those here who are wanna bees and more often than not they fail at the first hurdle.
All these documents just seem to give rise to a form of psychosis . I cannot help but feel some of you are victims rather than researchers. The last lady who made her point was far wiser and that is probably what long term research rewards you with, Bows to my lady.

P.S.*Grinz, inference, that's coz we're smarter than you!

This thread has been automatically closed for length.