Sucking blood or stealing hearts?

Vampires seem to be having an identity crisis in recent history. Once, they were amoral, blood-sucking ghouls that struck fear into people's hearts at night. Now, they are melancholy eternal lovers who aren't murderous, just misunderstood. Have these creatures of the night been slandered and for lack of a better word, "wussified"? Or is this merely the natural progression of life…I mean, undeath?

I will admit that I have never read "Twilight." I have no desire to. It doesn't sound like my cup of tea. I am familiar with the general narrative arc, though, and I am not writing this article to bash the book series (lest I incur the wrath of the fan base). No, I thought it would be interesting to do a character study, to see how Count Dracula could transform to Edward Cullen.

It might be a very natural progression. You see, vampires have always been highly sexualized.  They often serve as a mirror of the unrepressed erotic anxieties of the time. Trust me, this English major has discovered that more than one-half the critical essays you find on Bram Stoker's "Dracula" incorporate sexuality. When you think about it, that's kind of strange, considering these things are technically supposed to be dead–yuck. 

Speaking of Bram Stoker's "Dracula," what a good place to start! The Transylvanian count is often described as a very charming, charismatic individual. Nevertheless, there is something offsetting about him,whether it be the pale skin, his nocturnal habits or lack of a reflection. Also, he has not one but three voluptuous "wives" who make a pass at his visiting real estate agent at one point. I can assure you they were not interested in having "fun" with the man the way he was hoping. 

The term "wife" is pretty loose here. Never once is it insinuated that Dracula has relations with them. They seem like "slaves" or "minions" more than anything else. Of course, when Dracula moves to England he puts his moves on local women. Let's say he leaves them breathless. 
He succeeds in turning one undead and fixes his sights on Mina Harker, making various trips to drain her blood. At one point during her conversion Dracula makes a cut in his own chest and forces Mina to drink from it. It's not romantic, it's not consensual. In fact, it seems disturbingly like rape.

It's pretty easy to figure out one of the main themes of "Dracula." The straitlaced Victorian English were sexually repressed to the extreme. The Count reflected their anxiety about promiscuous sex and prostitution (hence the vampirism being spread like a disease).
But what about Edward Cullen? The glittering dreamboat doesn't seem a thing like Dracula. He doesn't want to suck people's blood. He is sensitive toward Bella. He doesn't want to turn her because of what he perceives as the consequences (exile and damnation), even if it does mean they could be together forever. Although they both have a strong sexual desire, Edward shows trepidation about taking it to the next level. That bloodsucker is offering something many human men are afraid of: commitment. 

It seems like Edward, instead of being a bogeyman created by sexual repression, might be expressing the desire of women who want something more. Having premarital sex has become more or less acceptable in our society. It's not too uncommon to have had multiple partners either because of a feeling of sexual liberation or past relationships gone sour. 
While there might be a liberating feeling about open sexuality, sometimes a woman just wants a guy to stick around. It's like that old psychology adage, "Men want quantity, and women want quality." 

Edward is a genuinely sensitive man who has returned to good old-fashioned quality. And not just that undead. Look at franchises like "True Blood" or "The Vampire Chronicles." Sucking blood has taken back seat to stealing hearts, and the change happened quite naturally.
But I still can't get over the fact he glitters.