In an earlier post, one stated that they hated the taste of blood, yet would like to be a vampire. They then asked if they were abnormal. This I personally found kind of redundant.

My reply was as follows:

"Alot of people, in some way, are inticed by the idea to be a vampire. That's normal as far as I have observed.

I'm sure not all 'vampires' (theoretically speaking, that is) particularly liked the taste of blood before becoming a vampire. They were mere mortals, as we all are (maybe a few exceptions, hah). Once they became a blood drinker, In my opinion, that's when the fancy and thirst for blood grew. It's pretty much common sense ;] "

I am simply wondering what others think about my, shall I say, theory. I would like to know what your theory on the thirst for blood is. Do you believe "they" have it before becoming a blood drinker? Or do you believe, as I do, that it would come after?

I'm new, by the way. Everyone's opinion is quite welcomed & appriciated. Thanks!

Welcome to the forum, it's nice to see new faces.

Now, about your "theory".
So, you think that people don't want blood before the vampirism. If I'm wrong, correct me after this post.

Alright, here's what I'm thinking, many people, as you will notice on this site, love blood. They can't get enough of it really. So, before becoming a vampire the love of blood is common. I would think that some people think that they need to become vampires because they want blood so much. Others, aren't given the opportunity to think it over. They find revulsion, and maybe only until later want it. For instance, when you're 5, you have asparagus, but as you grow up your taste buds change and you don't mind, so you eat it anyway. That last part is rather what I thought you meant about the blood drinking. So, I think your theory is partially correct.

And again, welcome.

Oh, I definatly know what you're saying. I know many who enjoy the taste of blood. I, myself, like the taste of my own. What I meant was, that even if one dosn't fancy blood before, once one is turned, that's when the yerning for it kicks in. It was twards those who don't exactly like the taste of blood to begin with. She asked if she was abnormal to not like the taste, but want to be a vampire. I said I'm sure not all 'vampires' fancied the taste before hand. I hope that makes sense, heh.

Thanks for your views and opinions. I agree pretty completely with what you said ;]

I'd have to say I find ur theory incorrect as I do not believe in turning,
one is eaither born a vampire or isn't a vampire...

but thats subject to sooooooooo many debates...

I think I have to agree with Escoban...

A vampire is born a vampire, one doesn't turn into one, like being smart, if you are borned a fool, you will always be a fool...

You are or you, just aren't...

But that theory is, just...

Common...

Ah, but see, referring the classical vampire, that was what my theory is based on.

Now, if we go Escoban route, if you're a vampire and you don't like blood, I'm guessing your just screwed.

You could be absolutly right. We all have our opinions on wether you are born it, or changed. Thanks for the opinion. Something to think about =]

ah, but only in the classical vamp section will we take ur psot as talking about classical vamps ;)


and I don't think anyone that's born a sang would not like the taste of blood, the problem would be if ur allergic, that can happen even to a vamp...

Escoban, why is classical not taken seriously in the Bloodlust general section? To me, it doesn't make sense to rule out the Classical when if I look at your way, I shouldn't consider modern either because it has it's own section. Just a thought.


Maybe they're feeling a little rebellious?

Well, I agree and disagree with u two...

Bloodlust and all its subforums were made to talk about vampires, lore, classical, psi and modern as the subforums are named, bloodlust is general discussion and the subforums are more... specialized...

So, look in all the bloodlust section or pm and admin...

Clearwitch, Sire, Archangel, Nemessis Chylde...

They may be able to help you better than any of the topics...

well it's nto that classical is ruled out entirely here,
but u have to say ur talking about classical or most of us will assume ur talking modern...

that's how I see it anyway...

Ravager is right.

Classicals is not for discussion about classicals, wether they exist or not, it's for sharing experiences and stories. It's a place where you can tell if you are a classical vampire, or have met/seen one. You don't have to provide proof, and you don't have to expect to be contradicted, it's a place for sharing, not judging.

If you want to debate the existance of classicals, or the lifestyle of them, or any such things, Bloodlust main would be the right place. This place is for theories, proof, disprove, etc. Same with HLV/RLV, if you want a debate on wether they are real, take it here.

Modern is set aside for the HLV/RLV/lifestyler discussion, what life is like for them, tips, help, etc. Demanding proofs should be kept at a minimum. You don't have to agree with everything being said, but be courteous and all that. Remember these are real beliefs, real people. You wouldn't demand proof of the existance of God in a Christian forum.

Lore is for the myths, the legends, the history of vampires, Vlad Tepes, Countess Bathory, etc.

Did that help?


*also, Bahamut is also an Admin, our newest addition. :)

thank you clearwitch

that clears up the mist in my head :)