Dahmer – Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story[Netflix]

[MCMLXXXII]

...one of Dahmer's victims escaped and police literally handed him back to Dahmer because they didn't believe him. Whether it was because the victim was a black man, or because Dahmer claimed he was just an upset boyfriend and the cops didn't want to be entangled in a potential gay domestic situation, there was definitely some structural, systematic neglect.

He wasn't caught for so long because his victims were predominantly black, and no one cared.

It's not like they're bringing up structural racism willy nilly in, say, the Zodiac Killer case.

Small rectification, the victim you mentioned was Loatian, not black. Since he was drugged up he couldn't speak comprehensible. The cops in question discarded the concerns of Dahmer's black neighbor and in stead believed everything Dahmer told them. Also out of disgust of his claim that both of them were gay, they didn't want to investigate too much, because in their own words, they'll need a shower.

But you're right about the other stuff.
It took a while before Dahmer got caught because:

1) most victims were African American
2) he was a white male living in a black neighborhood
3) he was gay in a time where it was "accepted" but at the height of the AIDS pandemic and let's be fair, homosexuality still isn't accepted by large parts in the US

[Kathandira]

This show is good as a reminder of what Dahmer actually was: a human monster. Media in the past, mostly documentaries and a certain film (the Jeremy Renner one), often try to shine sympathetic lights on him..

I actually stopped watching after a few episodes because I got the feeling that the story being told was humanizing him too much. I felt like they were attempting to draw sympathy from his birth, upbringing, and medical issues.

Just my personal take though.

[DarkAmbient]

Just finished it. An intense and unsettling watch at times but extremely good. Some outstanding performances from Evan Peters as Jeffrey and Richard Jenkins as his father Lionel. I thought perhaps it was a bit long 10 episodes and could have been cut down a little. I don't think they made him a sympathetic character at all. One of those shows I enjoyed but probably won't watch again for a long time, if ever.

[Fencers]

This is a terrific hit for Netflix. Incredible numbers and ROI. Their best tracking stats since ST4- which was a demographic juggernaut.

Really strong programming for Netflix in the second half of the year.

[MCMLXXXII]

Netflix removed the LGBTIQ+ label for this. Kinda weird because it is a quite essential part of his life.

[Kumorii]

I actually stopped watching after a few episodes because I got the feeling that the story being told was humanizing him too much. I felt like they were attempting to draw sympathy from his birth, upbringing, and medical issues.

Just my personal take though.

Not sure why this is a bad thing. Labeling people as monsters is usually more of a distancing tactic for the person using it more so than a description of the monster per se.
So called "Monsters" are humans, that's the scary part. It's also important to understand them. Who, what, where, when and how are all important questions to understand and more importantly intervene and prevent when signs of certain traits comes up. Sympathy isn't necessarily absolution. But having sympathy and empathy is quite the necessity to understand an individual, where they came from, who they are and how they came to be. All important factors in prevention.

- - - Updated - - -

Netflix removed the LGBTIQ+ label for this. Kinda weird because it is a quite essential part of his life.

Why do they even have the label? So people can avoid it if they don't like it? Or people who identify with it are more drawn to it?
Seems like it's something that shouldn't really matter tbh. So good imo.

[Koriani]

Why do they even have the label? So people can avoid it if they don't like it? Or people who identify with it are more drawn to it?
Seems like it's something that shouldn't really matter tbh. So good imo.

I THINK the intent is the latter - so that people who are looking for LGBTQ+ oriented shows/movies addressing those topics can find them easier; much like tagging something with "romance" or "comedy" or "documentary" or "family friendly." With the overall message trying to help project the idea that they are inclusive friendly and understand audience's members desire to "see themselves" or "shows about people like them" in their media. (At least, that is my impression, I could be reaching they intend any of that.)

Which is why it makes sense they'd remove the tag. Because there's already a huge backlash of the LGBTQ+ community against the portrayal that all serial killers/"crazy killers" (in Hollywood plots etc.) are all gay/trans men. If the idea of the labeling is to guide viewers to "friendly content" and they get guided to the docu-drama about a gay serial killer - it isn't going to make this feel "inclusive" or "friendly" to that population, at all.

I get it. I get why they did it. Regardless that that the label is factual (that he was gay) it doesn't serve the true purpose of what the intent is behind the 'label' on the show. And hell no they don't want that negative media (for leaving it.) They do NOT want the fight on that Hill. (lawl)

Because yes, when the media in question is about a real life murdering psychopath (of any type), then it really does not matter what his (or her) sexual orientation is.

~~
As for me - and my semi-professional study and interest in this field of psychology (serial killers/psychopathy), I'm not decided if I'm even going to watch this one or not. I'm someone who, because it is part of my profession, really prefers to stick to actual, true to life, documentaries about serial killers and not docu-dramas even if they are "80% accurate." As much as I enjoy Evan Peters and am sure he did a phenom job, as he always does, I certainly don't trust Netflix one inch about how 'truthful' they may state they are in telling these stories. And as much as I even may be able to tell in this series what is really 'made up' and what comes from actual, documented, fact - eh, I'm not interested in watching their 'made up' parts and having to figure out which is which. It just muddies the water for me.

Now, I enjoyed the hell out of Mindhunter (wish those guys would all recommit to more! lol) because it was much easier to tell the dramatized bits (all the agent stuff) from the 'factual recounts" (all the serial killer direct interview stuff) and, to me, that is part of what made it so excellent. Because they did take verbatim, at times, from the IRL interview sessions with these killers, which I found fascinating and important (just for viewers to see in general) and kept the more 'fabricated drama' writing to the agent lives. And can enjoy the hell out of Criminal Minds and all the other totally fabricated, mostly not true, media on serial killers out there. Loved the hell out of Dexter, too.

But when you are quite directly, and openly, making your show/movie about a named serial killer who actually exists -- I really prefer the documentary. These are real life people, with real life victims, and the killers do NOT need to be fabricated/built up/portrayed in any sort of positive/romantic/"cool" light. That should be kept for the fictional killers so there isn't this factor of 'mixed messages' with murderers and media.

And that yes, providing context with TRUE portrayal of a killers traumatic childhood helps not for the empathy/sympathy points in a "aww its justified they did it this way" but in a "it is important that we understand how this happens" as a lesson for all of us, as humans. Its important for society. Its important to NOT toss these people into a pile of "They are just Monsters/We cant understand them." (and that's the entire point of why FBI Profiling came about, to STOP the history of that assumption - which was addressed thankfully in Mindhunters heh). You're literally undoing the last 50+ years of Criminology and throwing out several schools of psychology in the process, to avoid "humanizing" these murderers.

And for those of you who might be looking for shows that DO stick to "just the facts" and are well done - There are a few recommendations of the top of my head:

I direct you to the excellent, long running, "EVIL LIVES HERE" series. Netflix had it on its service for a few years (not sure if its still there) and they show it on ID and possibly some other channels, as well. Its still in production too, so not just 'repeats' of a ten year old show. This show, hands down, episode after episode, portrays NOTHING but the factual accounts from surviving FAMILY members (parents, siblings, husband/wives, their children, etc.) of serial killers and murderers in an hour long interview-style show. They don't over-dramatize. They don't make any shit up. Its real and at times, very raw, interviews with people who can give all sorts of context, back stories, and 'understanding' of what it is like to live with such individuals. It can be a VERY HARD show to watch at times, with stories of trauma that might be difficult for some - but that's what makes it such an excellent show. And why it stands out, among all the media i've watched on this subject in 10 years, as one of the best.

I'd also direct people to "The Killer Speaks" - a short-run series that is now ended, and may be more difficult to find than "Evil Lives Here" but its a straight- documentary - interview with the murderers/serial killers themselves "behind the glass" (as they are, obviously, all being interviewed from prisons) along with some expert commentary. Again this can be a 'hard watch' for some people because these interviews are REAL, but are also very educational and insightful for people interested in this area of psychology or criminal justice.

Another more recent production, I believe (?) also on ID right now but I may be mistaken, is "Signs of a Psychopath." These are 30-60 minute, interview-only episodes, with the killers in the /interrogation rooms/ of their arrests along with expert commentary on what the viewer is hearing/seeing unfold. So not after 10 years in prison. Again - not over-dramatized, not fabricated, but straight facts 'live' as the interrogation unfolds.

If I can think of a few others after looking at my history of shows at home I might post those up here - but those are the "best two" in the last few years that really stand out to me. THESE sorts of shows - the actual interview, straight history based, shows can be pretty hard to find and they are in the minority. But the ones doing this 'right', and not just trying to cash in without respect to the truth - can be really educational and fascinating for those of us out there that genuinely are interested in this area of psychology and really want to know "HOW does this happen?"

(Not even getting into the growing amount of research indicating that this level of psychopathy could be actually due to a biological cause - congenital brain defect in a specific region of the brain - rather than what happens to them after birth.)

- - - Updated - - -

That, n stuff like this might inspire next killer?

Sorry, doesn't happen. "That's not how any of this works." =D

People who murder, who kill like /this/, aren't doing it because of any media. Their problems started before they ever turned on a tv. They are doing it because something is fundamentally wrong with their brain and their psychological development and their issues go far, far, deeper than "what I saw on tv." The level of dysfunction and mental illness that has to occur for this sort of crime is not something that is 'brought about' by any sort of media. Nor are any budding killers out there not getting "any ideas about murder" until they watch a tv show.

These are people who's brains broke before they even had verbal skills - possibly (and more and more evidence is showing this) before they were even birthed.

And thank goodness for that! Else all of programming would be regulated to basically 'after school specials' if most humans were actually so influenced by their media.

- - - Updated - - -

Him being regretful of his crimes is one thing. Him knowing full and well what he was doing, that he wanted to do it, is another. Sad that it took him being caught for him to feel bad. I hope this new series reminds people of the monster he was.

Make no mistake - Dahmer doesn't "feel bad" in the way you think. He doesn't "feel bad" or "feel guilty" the way you, or I, or most 'regular humans' might feel. Even if he WANTED to, he doesn't have the capability to feel that sort of emotion the same way the "rest of us" feel it. If he hadn't have been caught, he would not have stopped.

You see this in some serial killers even - their acknowledgement that they are broken people, their understanding they don't belong in society, because they know what they are doing is wrong, and what they are doing is not, and cannot, be allowed by individuals in society. That they agree with why they are in prison and even agree they should be killed, because what they do cannot be acceptable behavior. But they also won't stop without being forced to. If released, they'd be right back to it. Telling how how horrible a human being they are even as they tie up their next victim.

That's the "Broken part" of the serial killer, or psychopaths, brain. They *do not experience* these emotions like other people. They can cry and emote and say all the nice words - but they *do not* feel what it is they say they feel, the way YOU understand that feeling. Its just another manipulation. They can't help themselves, in that manipulation, its how they are *built* to be in the world, but that is all it is. They mirror, they 'puppet' these feelings, that they've been told about and surrounded with by their whole lives - but they do not experience them in the *same way*. That is what allows them to do what they do - what they *enjoy* doing - because they DON'T Feel the same. They may can feel that disconnection and have the insight that its 'evil' and they are 'evil' - but they still don't experience guilt, or shame, or responsibility, the way "most of humanity" does. (Or love, or happiness, or ANY emotion, in a "neuro-normative" way.)

And if he had been freed - he'd have been right back at it.

[RobertoCarlos]

One of the things I noticed about the dahmer case was the poor handling from police in particular because of homophobia so I'm not surprised the series puts a big focus on that. For the longest time they knew he was hunting at the gay bars and they had reports but no one really cared and allowed for more victims

[Al Gorefiend]

I had to watch this as a socially awkward autistic single 31 year old man living alone in a studio apartment, very chilling stuff.

[Khaza-R]

I watched a bit of it. I would agree with some critics that the show attempts to humanize him too much. Some people are just monsters and Dahmer was most definitely one of them.

[RobertoCarlos]

I watched a bit of it. I would agree with some critics that the show attempts to humanize him too much. Some people are just monsters and Dahmer was most definitely one of them.

Think that's a pretty easy click bait title. It doesn't humanize him. He says like 5 times he was born this way.

He has a sweet grandma, his dad is portrayed as a bit selfish but ultimately not the worst dad. His mother is the only cartoonishly evil character and she's rather minor in the series

[vizzle]

I watched a bit of it. I would agree with some critics that the show attempts to humanize him too much. Some people are just monsters and Dahmer was most definitely one of them.

Maybe you should watch all of it. I heard conclusions are best made after you reach the conclusion.

[DarkAmbient]

I don't know what standards of behaviour people have when they complain that Dahmer was humanised too much in the show. He was portrayed to the full extent of his character.

Also, it's important that people like him are not dismissed as some kind of separate monstrous species. That is a form of avoidance. He was human and he did things that some humans do.

[Shadowferal]

That is a form of avoidance. He was human and he did things that some humans do.

Seems the avoidance is from you.
Drilling a hole in a person's head and pouring acid in it isn't "things some humans do." Neither necrophilia, cannibalism, child sex, and serial murder.

[DarkAmbient]

Seems the avoidance is from you.
Drilling a hole in a person's head and pouring acid in it isn't "things some humans do." Neither necrophilia, cannibalism, child sex, and serial murder.

It literally is, why would you say it isn't? And what do you think I'm avoiding?

[Fencers]

Cranked this out last night. It was decent. A bit too tame for my hardcore horror and true crime sensibilities. Though a well-made product.

[Leyre]

Oh, you're one of THOSE guys.

The "Let's hide history away because it's triggering" and "Let's erase the existence of certain oppressed people from everywhere because seeing them and knowing they were oppressed is triggering" people.

Call me when someone has the balls to make a movie/series about america bombing the japanese as graphic as barefoot gen was

[RobertoCarlos]

Call me when someone has the balls to make a movie/series about america bombing the japanese as graphic as barefoot gen was

I'd say that would offend japanese people more than america as they lost out pretty bad.

There's dozens of pearl habor films where the Americans lose

[Raisei]

Oh for fucks sake..why on earth do you believe that a production should benefit from such you can easily learn about for free?

Pretty easy really: Disseminating the Information.

Sure, if you are interested you can read all this on Wikipedia, but you need to have that specific interest first. A Netflix show can generate that interest even in people who might not usually check such things on Wikipedia.

As a MA in History I can tell you that history is sometimes very dry and it isn't easy to get people interested in it. While at the same time I find it incredibly important that people know (their) history, just so they and we as a whole are not doomed to repeat it.

Take for example one of #45s buzzwords "Fake News". I wonder how many people in america that voted for him actually know that this word and it's entire application is taken straight from Adolf. The german word was "Lügenpresse" (lying press or lie press). I would hazard the guess that this is not a well-known fact among those folks. Maybe a Netflix show could change this.

So what I mean is that it doesn't matter in which medium history is disseminated as long as it is. If Netflix manages to teach us about this person then I welcome it and I do not begrudge them the money they make off it (school history books also make someone money), as long as they are not falsifying the accounts for extra drama, which I think they did not do here. I haven't studied the case though, so I can't say that for sure.

There is also the fact that the school system still is not prepared to react to red flags like the ones we see in the show (I asked a friend that works as a teacher). The kind of signs that we see with young Jeff are clear indications that something is very wrong with him and maybe, if he had been send to a psychiatrist as a kid, his victims would still be alive.
And just as we have seen in the show, there are still policemen out there that aren't doing their jobs correctly because of personal prejudices against blacks, gays and what not. A state that is unacceptable.

Shining a light on these facts is not a bad thing by any means.

[Shadowferal]

If the only history you can learn is from a televised program made for profit then I should wonder at how much history is being learned.