Vampires rule

Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone – 703 points –
32

You are viewing a single comment

Why? Is it because they could consent? In that case it's a poor argument because it could be argued that anyone who did consent was not in a state of mind where they could do so legitimately.

Yeah, it's a consent thing. Not really for you to decide that, eh? I for one would be totally down to eat some leg if it got amputated because of an accident or something, and I would absolutely ask to keep my own leg for that purpose (not that I would tell the doctor) if one of mine were ever amputated.

More on topic, I would absolutely donate blood to vampires if they were real

Vampires are actually real though, there are some companies in the US that sell young peoples' blood they bought from blood banks to rich people as blood transfusions.

Now it makes sense why most classic depictions of vampires present them as rich people in their own castles.

That's because vampires have always been a metaphor for the rich exploiting and leeching off of the poor.

Somehow this had never occurred to me...

One of my friends in my college days explained it to me. They specifically choose poor people to feed off of, rarely ever high society, and that's how royalty and feudal lords would act back in the day too. Some of the IRL ruling class would even bathe in young women's blood.

And vampires are almost always rich in fiction.

And we all know how the rich treat the poor in real life.

Well ... plus if you're alive that long and can't manage to get rich via compound interest you deserve to be staked.

Okay but arguing that doesn't prove anything other than that you can't imagine a situation where someone of sound mind would want to be eaten. It's one of them catch 182s. Dammit!

1 more...