this is probably going to be my last DAHMER take on this channel. it will also be the last appearance of Punxsutawney Phil, who is a coward and a fraud EDIT: Thank you to the commenters who pointed out a short scene that takes place in the show in which Dahmer *does* mock/boast about his crimes to inmates while in prison - I can't believe I missed it despite numerous rewatches before and during the making of this video, but appreciate the heads up. DAHMER (2022) Should Not Exist: th-cam.com/video/5EADSfqtxXk/w-d-xo.html Check out Monster Men: The Bureau th-cam.com/video/qVwR4H9eNTw/w-d-xo.html GUEST TH-camRS Sophie From Mars: th-cam.com/users/SophiefromMars Big Joel: th-cam.com/users/BigJoel 💰 PATREON @ www.patreon.com/jacksaint 👛 TIPS @ ko-fi.com/lackingsaint ✍ TWITTER @ twitter.com/lackingsaint 👥 PUBLIC DISCORD @ discord.gg/BjVfT4JR66
I havent read it , but its apearently really good and its dan wells "i am not a serial killer" that is about a tnager in a smallercity who like has disturbing thoughts and hae worries he could become on and is sympathic and get a bit of that out by working and helping in a morgue, an th dedication to not end up there is tested when a demon serial kiler goes arounnd and he is th one who can stop him, bcau h knows how he works somewhat. Ithink he latr gain a bette coping mechanism for his mor disturbing desires to deal with them. An its ympathic but i think very much how not to go there. And seriously why not mae that a show?!
@@sammyvictors2603 Also seems to be people linking how terrible they feel about themselves to a serial killer which imo is normal when you feel like you’re the lowest of the low, but to then negate empathy for the victims or to actively be offended by criticisms of a serial killer and their portrayal is just on another level.
Something about an actor winning a golden globe for portraying a serial killer whilst the only remaining survivor of said serial killer is homeless and struggling with drug addiction really rubs me the wrong way.
As a huge fan of Evan Peters i'm so conflicted, like i won't deny i am genuinely happy he finally got some meaningful recognition after a decade of amazing performances, but i really wish it wasn't for this role. Still have some hope he won't be referred to as the guy who played Dahmer or worse, simply Dahmer. Not only for the obvious reasons, but because i know these kind of roles (realistic or real bad guys) really take a toll on him and affect his mental health in serious negative ways
@@drakewickman2079The normal thing to say to an insane person is nothing. To suggest someone's culture somehow invalidates their opinion is both disgusting and insane
How anyone can simp for someone who has committed such heinous crimes is beyond me. To accuse someone of being "offended" by empathising with the victims and their families is equally baffling.
@Spaceboy When someone accuses another of being offended, wtf do they want, an award for being thick skinned, or to validate their misconceived notion that a empathy is somehow an inferior "feeling"? It's adjacent to the classic "man up" or "grow a pair". Gotta be a manly man or you ain't nuthin!
Because white culture is built around loving and glorifying horrible evil people. We see this in basically every us president and across the pond to the queen of England. These horrible people are awarded every excuse in the book while their victims are at best ignored and at worst blamed.
if they they themselves were not offended i some way then they wouldn't be arguing. they are literally offended that you are offended. also the cringe thing, i always saw that as a personal flaw based in my inability to respect peoples passions.
as someone who’s had intrusive thoughts for most of my life, people using intrusive thoughts to defend an actual serial killer and indirectly comparing people who have intrusive thoughts to serial killers makes me really fucking angry
exactly. they think they're being sympathetic and hyper-"woke" (sorry woke is honestly such a cringe word) to defend people with mental illnesses (ei "do better") but in comparing murderers to the mentally ill it further stigmatizes them and confuses people into thinking anyone discussing their struggles with intrusive thoughts could be more capable of violence than anyone else.
Yea, when I have intrusive thoughts that are awful, they make me feel like shit. They make me judge myself for even having them. I certainly don't start making a plan to act them out.
Mentally ill people are more likely to be abused than to be abusers. I don't understand why people try to defend such a monster, and when they try to justify it with illness similar to my own it sickens me.
they're such wildly different things by definition. A serial killer isn't having intrusive thoughts, they're just having thoughts that they then act on. Intrusive thoughts are, y'know, intrusive, inherently unwanted and not reflective of your own desires
The censorship “argument” is so bonkers to me. Are we not allowed to dislike anything anymore without being accused of being authoritarian book burners? You can’t just… say a piece of media is irresponsible and you don’t like it without being dogpiled by serial killer simps accusing you of actually thinking the media should be BANNED and DESTROYED NO MORE BAD TV SHOWS. When I critique the game of thrones season finale I’m not limiting free speech, I’m using my free speech to say that season 8 sucked ass.
@@Tsukiru What I find especially telling is that this *exact same argument*, with the *exact same tone*, gets trotted out no matter the tenor of the criticism. MovieBob can crucify something, Big Joel can very quietly and calmly walk through something, Jack can do a review like his Dahmer analysis that really shows a lot of careful thought and constantly acknowledges the complex feelings. It doesn't matter. Anything beyond thoughtless lavishing praise is viewed as mean. In writing, anyone who reacted this way would be viewed as the weak person incapable of taking criticism. So I have generally had this entire freeze peach line of reasoning poisoned for me, and Jack's video is a great reason why. Anyone who reacted to Jack's video with anything besides a "I do get where you are coming from, but shouldn't creators still be able to explore what they think is necessary?" or "While marketing is constantly a thing, I do think the show did put effort into not just being salacious" or any other nuanced take is demonstrating that they are reacting from screaming, uncontrollable emotionality, not reason and not empathy.
@@Tsukiru I think an important part of "let people enjoy things" is that that only really applies if the thing is harmless. And a show about the horrific murders of real people that doesn't respect their surviving family and friends, and instead further contributes to their trauma, isn't harmless. Anyone saying "let people enjoy things" in response to people pointing that out should think about how the victims' loved ones deserve to be allowed to enjoy things too - to enjoy their lives without having to see their personal tragedies sensationalized and themselves portrayed in such a heartless way.
I talked about that with a manga called made in abyss with how the the story and art was amazing but the sexual fan service revolving around 11 year old and shit was so uncomfortable and drove me away and I got dog piled for it.
People are really defending a serial killer who killed and raped seventeen real humans, with "Intrusive thoughts exists, you should not be judged for it". Yeah, idiot, intrusive thoughts exists, I know that, I have them regulary. Mostly about hurting myself, sometimes about hurting others. The reason I'm not in prison is because they STAY thoughts, I don't act on them. You can't judge people on their thoughts but you can definitely judge them if they act according to these thoughts!
EXACTLY. The reason D*hmer doesn't get off with this excuse is because he didn't stop at the thoughts - not that I believe he had intrusive thoughts in the first place.
FOR REAL god i fucking hate people who try to use the "intrusive thoughts" argument when trying to defend real genuine traumatising crimes people commit! i have ocd, i have horrible intrusive thoughts. but the reason they're intrusive is because i don't want them, and like you already said, they stay thoughts! people enjoying fantasising about r*ping and murdering people, and then acting on that desire, is NOT what an intrusive thought is, it's literally the opposite!
intrusive thoughts come from a place of fear, its also our brains way of reminding us of what we dont want to do. Our brain is very funky and cant handle "dont think of x" thoughts, because it has to bring UP x thought to remind us NOT to think about it. Its paradoxical. Pair having these thoughts and having OCD/thinking youre a bad person, and you usually give ominous meaning to these thoughts "why would i think that? i must be bad", (instead of understanding these thoughts are a product of our paradoxical brain capacities as well as reinforced by repeated fearful charged reactions to them; the more you try to suppress and deny a thought "dont think of x" the MORE you think of it because again, paradox) and need some kind of sense of control to soothe the fear, some ritual to make the alarm in your brain switch off to feel safe (compulsion). That is like, not at all what a fantasy and acting on that fantasy/desire is. I hope my rant helps, i have had OCD for many many years and even though i struggle, i do have some understanding of whats going on with intrusive thoughts+ OCD.
what's next, no seriously what is next, I mean if not wanting SERIAL KILLERS to be glorified is woke now then fucking hel I wouldn't mind being woke, serial killers are seen by most normal people as some of the most evil people in the world, so if it's litterally be on the side of serial killers or be woke then yeah fine I guess I am woke, christ is this really what internet discourse has come to
Sometimes I’ll think about “what would happen if I made a bomb, how would I even get the material?” Then proceed to not build a bomb, not harm anyone, and instead bake sugar cookies and feel 10000% better about myself. Just bake out the anger bro
as someone with OCD and who has experienced intrusive thoughts, and watched your first video on this, i genuinely didn't get the impression you were talking about intrusive thoughts at all: like you said, there is a MASSIVE difference between unwillingly having disturbing thoughts you would never act on, vs having disturbing thoughts, and planning them out and acting on them. intrusive thoughts are defined by the person having the thoughts finding them disturbing because theyre something the person would never do/act on; the problem is when you WANT to act on those thoughts, and like you said, genuinely plan out acting them out.
Nor should adults need the distinction explained to them. This is one of the things that bothers me the most in the world about these kinds of conversation. I shouldn't *need* to say "I'm not calling for censorship, I just..." *If I didn't say it, you shouldn't act as if I did* .
Noone is making that argument that this is happening, but I'd like to introduce the term "dogwhistle" to you to explain what's wrong with your line of reasoning. Sometimes, the authors true intention is spoken in such a way that the average person wouldn't understand it, but someone engaged with their ideology might. For example: citing certain crime statistics in the United States (13/50) to indicate that black people only make up 13% of the population, but commit 50% of the crimes could be considered a racist dogwhistle. This statistic is usually cited by racists who expect their core audience to read between the lines and expect the general audience to take it at face value. In other words, the racists in the audience would see it and say "yes, because there's something different about black people". And that's exactly the intent of the author.
Seriously. People who have intrusive thoughts DON'T LIKE THEM, that's what makes them INTRUSIVE, if they were just thoughts or even liked thoughts they would just be thoughts of a bad person, it's your own feelings about them and the lack of actively thinking them that makes them not your fault
Do not romanticize real life serial killers Just don’t I don’t understand why people just can’t except that Its fuckin weird and disrespectful to the people who were ACTUALLY MURDERED By this person
Even if someone does that, they should recognize that it's not some grand character trait. They're not more insightful or smarter or more aware of human nature. They just have some dark preferences. It's a kink, basically (I know people who really like this kind of dark, stalkery fantasy). And anyone who conflates "I have a kink" with "I should be able to indulge in it with no feedback and no limits" is a danger, no matter what it is.
I'm like half a minute in, but the commenter claiming that a youtube video has 'further split society' made me need to pause the video so I didn't cover up the sound with my laughter.
@@joaquinbaume1291 Yikes. I know a bizarrely high number of people who had very Child Called It upbringings--and I know zero serial killers. A shitty childhood does not justify eating people or drilling into their skulls to try and make your own zombie-sex-slave.
On Dahmer planning out his crimes, it’s almost even worse in the fact that yes, he had some concept of his actions being “wrong”, but that was why he would get blasted drunk before murders, to lower his inhibitions and be able to commit his murders. That’s not sympathetic or representative of any kind of guilt that matters, it’s a clear indicator that he knew his actions were evil and did them anyway. It’s sympathetic only insofar as it hints at a hypothetical Jeffrey Dahmer who might not have become a serial killer, but we don’t have that Dahmer and mourning that hypothetical version of him over his real victims is gross, not empathetic.
That's something that fascinates me. There's another serial killer who was asked in prison whether he felt pity towards his victims, and he said: "Oh, no. If I had thought about it that way, I couldn't have done it. I had to turn that part of my brain off." or something to that effect. The reason that I find it fascinating is that in a sense, he's more aware of his morality than most people. It isn't some passive thing that just exists within us and guides us toward some blessed goal. It's a framework that we tinker with to make ourselves happier. Or perhaps more accurately, to reduce conflicts between us and our in-groups. But once people adopt an identity of an in-group where sadism is a norm, they'll do the same thing; sadism becomes a moral norm. These serial killers don't need anybody, but they understand that a clear conscience isn't a result of being innocent, but of determination. And those of us who don't want sadism to become a social norm need to understand this aspect of morality: it's made up, and malleable. It still matters, though, because more compassionate and inclusive values simply produce a better society. We just need to incorporate in our strategy the understanding that people aren't guided by morality, but by how they want to be seen, either by themselves, or their in-groups.
Have you seen the "Pop Culture Detective" on sexual assault being played for laughs in films? One of the videos features a clip of (for some reason beloved) actor Will Ferrell excusing playing rape for laughs with that kind of logic. But maybe I am misremembering and it was someone else. Maybe Will Ferrell only complained about people being overly serious about having an issue with rape being played for laughs in films. Edit: Moved parenthesis to correct place.
@@Shapeplusform There several videos on the channel on related topics: - Sexual Assault in Men ... 1&2 - The Ethics of Looking and ... - Stalking for Love - Abduction As Romance - Born Sexy Yesterday - The Adorkable Misogyny of ... - The Complicity of Geek Masculinity ... - Predatory Romance ... That's literally more or less the full list depending on where you draw the line.
people forget that censorship is not just someone saying "this thing shouldn't have been made", it occurs when an authority figure (the goverment, a schoolboard, a company that runs a platform, etc) systematically prevents or limits the people that they have power over from expressing certain ideas. in today's social media and polical landscapes we tend to throw around words a lot, watering them down until they become vague talking points, instead of the complex concepts that have rich histories tied to them and wide societal and cultural implications that they are. (edit: fixed spelling) (edit 2: fixed spelling, again lmao)
To be fair, I can understand a steelmanned version of their argument. I've had friends who can concede the point that criticism is not censorship and still argue that there is value to an approach that goes beyond merely avoiding censorship per se to actually truly allowing people to speak without criticism. The problem is that the argument is self-refuting. It suffers from unrestricted comprehension. If I can't criticize you, you can't criticize me for criticizing you. Free speech is going to include people disagreeing. That's exactly the reason why sensible people differentiate so harshly between censorship and criticism. Censorship is the denial of free speech. Criticism *is* free speech. And it remains free speech even when it calls for boycotts, or calls for people to not watch with or engage with a property, or calls for someone to be socially ostracized. There's no easy solution to that problem.
I copying this into my notepad++ to copy paste it around since that would be easier than arguing with morons who don't get it - and just don't want to grow up and censor themselves online even though they do that themselves in the real world all the time.
I dont even think a company running platform deciding what's allowed counts as proper censorship. they own the platform, they make the rules. it works just the same in a shop, no-one is entitled to practice free speech in a privately owned business like a grocery store.
I read that comic made by someone who he went to highschool with Dahmer and it did NOT fall on the trappings the show (or the films) did at all. Not only was the author careful not to glorify him, the story was from his perspective and he acknowledged the fact that his empathy for Dahmer ends the moment that he hurts someone.
Yeah, Sophie pretty much sums up why I stopped being interested in true crime. Also because most of the most famous cases are not "criminal masterminds" as media has led us to believe but escaped capture (or put off capture) either through police negligence, corruption, racism, or incompetence. It's just boring after a time.
Kemper is helpful here. dude was buddy buddy with cops. knew many by their first names, hung out at cop bars. he wasnt a brilliant guy, he just swam in their circles and paid attention. no geniusness needed when youre on a first name basis with the local PD and seen as an upstanding and insightful young man.
So much this. I was an avid true crime lover but the longer I was part of the community the clearer it became that these are more often crimes against women or minorities that go unpunished for far too long due to police negligence or apathy. It became actually sickening and I had a reckoning that made me completely turned off by the genre completely.
@@DaughterofDiogenes Fool. That's why people watch. To learn to not do it and learn the traits of what these psychos are like to avoid it happening to others. You people are weak.
It’s less about being smart in how they commit the crime itself and more about how they chose the victims. It’s gross how brazen killers can be when they pick the kind of victims society doesn’t ‘see’.
"It's okay to be sympathetic, Dahmer went through ALOT." " It says a lot about a person whose sympathies lie with a sadistic serial killer over the victims of said killer.
@@lyokianhitchhiker That you're an intellectually balanced, empathetic individual who recognizes that all of us are little more than the variables that make us who and what we are. Or, at least, that's my best guess.
@@JoeNoshow27 admittedly, empathizing with both the perp & the victims comes naturally to somebody who got into criminal history from school shootings.
important note: many mass shooting survivors advocate for no notoriety, meaning that names/faces of shooters don't get shown in the news, which I think goes hand in hand with this issue. If you would consider removing the picture/name of the parkland shooter, that would be really helpful
@@lyokianhitchhiker that you're a human being. as long as you don't make excuses for his actions and everything that comes with it there's nothing wrong with it. i feel sympathy for child jeffery dahmer but i don't feel sympathy for adult jeffrey dahmer. there's so much misinformation out there about him. he was not remorseful. he made body parts out of mashed potatoes to mock his victims. the man that killed him killed him because of how much he mocked his victims and would be victims.
Did these people read Roger Ebert's collections of 0-star film reviews and think Roger wanted to ban every movie he hated?? I am genuinely mindblown at how many people will hear someone criticize and then they will fly off the handle and go "W-why do you want to *CENSOR* because it *OFFENDS* you or you dislike it, snowflake??" It is so pervasive.
The title of the video was "Dahmer shouldn't exist". I got his argument but I can understand how some people could take that away from the previous video if they didnt actually watch it
Person 1: "This piece of media should not exist" Person 2: "That's censorship! This piece of criticism should not exist!" Person 1: "Oh okay so you're censoring me now"
What I find so hilarious is that they constantly accuse everyone else of offended emotionality when they are the ones acting from offended emotionality. It's a total failure of self-awareness, empathy and thought.
The culture wars are invented. Those in charge are trying to divide us. No one actually gets 'cancelled' unless they kill/ violently assault someone or are publicly accepted to be a paedophile. I hate JK Rowling's transphobic views, but her Harry Potter franchise is still in roaringly good health. Bill Cosby has been cancelled.
so baffling that you can say "wow i don't like when tv shows try to get you to empathize with a real life serial killer and then exploits the deaths and traumas of his victims and their families" and people will call you a woke sensitive snowflake for it like ????
There's a negative reaponse in some people who prefer not to be critical of media and art, when they encounter media analysis. The critical thinking skills required to come to the conclusion that "hey maybe this show is harmful." Is too much for some people.
@@robertbcardoza empathy is fine. the key aspect of this is " exploits the deaths and traumas of his victims and their families" it's important to be empathetic. (which, btw, is not the same as sympathy)
Tangentially related to the main subject, but when Sophie talked about walking tours recounting the Ripper murders, it reminded me that we got lucky to get tour guides who did their very best not to sensationalize the event. Instead, they went out of their way to highlight how gross and exploitative the other tours we could see around us were and use that to ask us, "Why did you come on this tour in the first place?" Their ultimate conclusion was that we should be commemorating the victims in a respectful way without getting lost in the sauce of the mystery of the killer.
I was going to say that's weird, but then I remembered ghost tours. Kinda the same thing. It'll be the worst backstory of gory crime or crimes, then a bunch of jokes and ghost fun. It's like the victims and killers have become celebrities through the spreading of gruesome details and the minimization that these are real people.
Tbh I'd love to be on a ripper tour that explained the victims lives. Like what else do you talk about, realistically? "He killed xyz woman here....alright now to the next spot" you can purple prose it up but focusing on Jack is limited because we don't know jack shit about him. I know some were moms, how many of their kids survived without their moms sex work? How did this event haunt them? Did they ever blame themselves? After all you'll be off the streets faster when working for 1 person vs 4.
@@charmander466 ghost tours are such a weird grey area. a lot of the time, they're fabricated, but sometimes they're, excuse my language, inspired by real events and that's just... it's wrong, but at the same time it seems fine because the ghosts are usually so old. like, "a woman died here in 1896" seems very different than "a woman died here in 1996", even though in both cases there was a death. it feels surreal, even if it did happen, when it was "in victorian times" or "back in the 1920s". is time bias a thing?
As someone who has dealt with severe OCD and incredibly violent and taboo intrusive thoughts that have in turn traumatized me, i am offended that people keep making this link between people who are genuinly violent and desire for those things to happen.
Ikr these intrusive thoughts are sometimes so disgusting to us that we judge ourselves for even having them. They're considered intrusive because we DON'T WANT THEM THERE.
I’m afraid to live alone because my intrusive thoughts are so overwhelming sometimes and many of them are self destructive. So yeah it’s totally awesome to see people making that argument lol. You go girls! Make us feel even more unsafe with ourselves for the thoughts we cannot control and do not want or act on!
"we shouldnt do this cuz it will hurt the FEELINGS of some rando" tf, this person just said the victims' family and survivors were "some rando"? I hope I misunderstood the meaning and who this "rando" was supposed to be, because this is the most fucked up argument I've seen of someone trying to defend this tv show.
That only proves how little those people care about the families and victims. These people are the scum of the true crime community, and, frankly, why I left as a whole.
i have OCD, which causes a lot of intrusive thoughts. the people reducing serial killers' impulses to intrusive thoughts made me kinda mad tbh. i would NEVER act on my intrusive thoughts. it's nothing i want to do. more than anything it's like my brain is harassing me and not allowing me to relax
The whole notion of "This person did something so extremely bad that it can only be explained by mental illness" is so absurdly dangerous. No, people can just do extremely bad things. They are capable of doing horrific things. You can't just label something "mentally ill behaviour" because it's horrific behaviour.
The whole point of intrusive thoughts is that having them is distressing. Not at all the same as having the impulse to hurt others (which also isnt bad as long as it isnt acted on, I'm not about to support thought crime lol)
This is why I like the show “I Survived A Crime” because there’s no thirsting or sympathizing with the murderers and the survivors give their consent while spreading awareness on how to protect yourself
_"It's a show that keeps implying there's a reason why it exists, but it never actually conveys what that reason is."_ Exactly, they just had the awareness that they needed to appear like it wasn't purely true crime exploitation. So they just threw every theme at the wall and hoped something might stick.
The whole thing of people being like "You're shaming people for having intrusive thoughts" is so stupid. If you have intrusive thoughts you know the whole reason they're called intrusive is because you don't want them. You don't agree with them. You know they are bad. If you act on/want to act on them they aren’t intrusive
@@lyokianhitchhiker by definition then it’s not an intrusive thought. An intrusive thought is specifically defined by a thought you do not want to act on/you don’t truly believe. Once you act than it’s just a “bad” thought. Not intrusive. Words mean things
@@saskiaosbourne3095 I was trying to account for the possibility that the person having the thoughts didn’t want to act on them, but acted on them anyway.
i live in ohio. i recently left my old job, but there was a teenage girl i worked with that was obsessed with dahmer because of the netflix series and she said she purposely went to drive past his old home every day just so she could “feel his vibes” there. being intrigued is one thing, but i really felt like that was bordering on crossing a line lol.
Welp, the only positive thing about it is that when those people become walking red flags, at least you know who to avoid. Trash walks itself out. Fuck that deranged murderer and fuck every single of his "fans".
As an aside, I avoided the movie but have read the comic "My Friend Dahmer" which is basically what Jack described. Derf's view on him is as chilling and raw as you'd expect- filled with a lot of that highschool-age inappropriateness and bluntness from the characters while obviously never being about Dahmer's actual crime spree. The tone works because it captures all the unease and terror of realizing someone you "knew" in highschool did something absolutely horrible later, and wishing that you'd seen the signs or even thought it was 'funny'. Derf Backderf's opinion on the real Dahmer is still very damning and he has no interest entertaining the "Dahmer's actually a hero"-narrative. If you read notes in his annotated version he says at least twice that Jeffrey looses all sympathy points upon committing Steven Hick's murder, and how he wishes Dahmer would have killed himself before that ever happened. Harsh words, until you remember "oh yeah he's Jeffrey Dahmer" and you realize that's as sympathetic a person who knew him as a kid and hated him as an adult should have to finding out what he did.
The Dahmer stuff was my first video of yours, and I have to say…I’m glad I was one of the “new people” brought in. Really do appreciate your content chief
The comic My Friend Dahmer focuses a lot on Dahmer's alcohol drinking in high school and the systemic failures that allowed a teen with the obvious problems Dahmer had to be missed by teachers and guidance councilors. Not sure if that aspect has been mentioned in any other media.
Those comments send me. Reactionaries' inability to comprehend the concept of subjectivity and the very idea of video essays just being people on the internet sharing their opinions on things they find interesting is absolutely exhausting. Like imagine seeing every video title, every statement, every anecdote and believing what the author is saying is from a point of absolute authority and that those that disagree are inferior to them. Really goes to show the kind of frighteningly authoritarian wavelength that these sorts like consume their content.
Yeah, because that's exactly what they think. We tell on ourselves constantly. They don't live in a world where you can make a loving, careful, designed criticism. Everything is social shame or social approbation. It's emotional immaturity.
It's almost like knowledge of the trauma caused by actually following through on those "intrusive thoughts" is a primary force stopping people from doing them, and shouldn't be diminished.
Tbh he didn’t go through a huge amount, as callous as it may sound he had a fairly dysfunctional upbringing but nothing massively traumatic that would trigger any of that.
"Dahmer went through a lot" yeah a lot of victims. Everyone who knew him growing up says he had a completely normal life until he *chose* to become a murderer.
@@elh3492I think the colon(?) operation he had as a toddler might have been so traumatic that it played the same part in forming his dysfunction that child sa does for most serial killers. He experienced immense pain in and around his sexual organs for weeks to the point where he thought his p*nis would have to be amputated. Not saying this to justify his actions of course, just wanted to point it out bc the lack of a central traumatic evebt in Dahmer's childhood often gets brought up as somewhat of a headscratcher
@@alisonpurgatory85 what I mean is , his upbringing was pretty‘normal’ for its time, parents arguing , volatility etc quite ‘normal’ back then , i think sometimes we look for blame where there isn’t.
a note on the arguments about intrusive thoughts. i have a lot of intrusive thoughts. One might say my mind is constantly spitting really bad takes at me. But the important thing to recognize here is not the presence of these thoughts alone, but how i respond to them. I do not act on these thoughts because i understand them as bad. Dahmer, on the other hand, did act on these thoughts. They aren't just "intrusive thoughts" at that point. They have graduated to his motivations for taking action. and the action was murder. it's genuinely dangerous to frame that sort of thing as "just intrusive thoughts" because you are giving people like me an excuse to stop fighting back against my brain's bad ideas. You are minimizing the harm those intrusive thoughts can have on my psyche and my soul, and it's kinda disgusting to me. I wish these people would understand that not everybody is just a Jeffrey Dahmer in waiting, and that some of us are actively battling internal forces which push us to do things we know are bad. "oh they're just intrusive thoughts, everybody has them." "Yeah but Dahmer ACTED on them, and that's a critical difference between an intrusive thought and a motivation." These arguments seem to forget what Dahmer did for the purpose of argumentation. It's chilling and gross.
I think there's even more to it than that. Just thinking about it as intrusive thoughts really ignores the way that people with extreme antisocial disorders and personalities are distinct.
@@fredericchristie3472 i agree. in my case i HAVE such a condition, but i wasnt clear in my speech. my antisocial stuff is something i am working on and i was fortunate not only to receive help and support in this, but also recognition and validation from my support network. i think it's relevant that many many people who would frame Dahmer as simply "having intrusive thoughts" are failing to recognize the complete picture, very obviously, but there's also an insidious minimizing of their intention to act and their willingness to act that i think cannot be reasonably ignored. you can be like me, even, having an antisocial mood disorder, have dangerous intrusive thoughts, and do something productive and not-destructive with them instead of treating them as reasonable thoughts. and that was my point.
What frustrates me is they could've done a very poignant show about the victims, have each episode portray the life of one victim and what they were like and the relationships they had with their friends and families, their hopes and dreams and what they wanted in the future, and then have every episode end as they meet Dahmer, never showing his face or voice or anything identifying maybe nothing more than a shadow, just showing the world the people he took away from it and the loved ones left behind to suffer because of it
Yes, but those are normal people, and therefore they're no more interesting to learn about than the people next door. Dahmer, on the other hand, is a highly unusual person and therefore much more interesting. Of course, it's a good thing that people like him are highly unusual. The fact that many of us find him interesting is just because murder *isn't* normal.
Half of the arguments coming from people mad about the video seem to exclusively be about the title of the original video. It's not even about the content. It's just about the semantics of saying something shouldn't exist. I kind of doubt that these people even watched the video at all or are/were interested in understanding what was being said.
They literally don't watch. I suspect this is even provable beyond just noting that any test of it (like someone putting a timecode in their video for a point people will ignore) is done: I bet metrics would show it.
As a trauma survivor who used to be somewhat into true crime (never this kinda shit & never idolizing, but still), I used to explain it away with the "needing to be aware" (of the type of bad shit people do to others), it was a kind of hypervigilance i guess - but eventually i realized like, wait a second, I‘m already aware these things happen, this is just making me feel like shit 😅 So I quit engaging w it and i feel better tbh. I recommend anyone also thinking they‘re into it for that reason to do some introspection in that regard!
People WANT to be able to find some basis for sympathy. They don't want to believe that there are murderers who enjoy doing horrific things to other people.
Like....it's a serial killer. It's okay to understand they too are a human, but that doesn't mean you humanize them. Yes, he had a shitty childhood. That doesn't mean you then feel bad for HIM over the people he hurt. It simply means he had a bad childhood.
Except that they don't *want* to sympathize with the victims, or at least some don't. This isn't some universal bleeding heart mindset. Because if it were, then the shock of seeing the victims would end it or complicate it. There are people hiding the fact that they fundamentally empathize with Dahmer *and no one else in the story* by calling for empathy without giving that context.
i do understand the feeling yes some people are like that but some people try tl sympathize with the evil because it sometimes that people do bad things because they dont understand we have to come to a limit considering anybody who does wrong doing as some very horrificly bad person will result in punsihments rather than rehabilitation and being not harsh enough causes you to be devils advocate im not defending the people that sympathize with such person but i understand that this feeling they have can be needed
This would have been a good series...if the childhood, family life and lost potential of the murdered men and boys was the focus in each episode then we see how that was just snuffed out by Dahmer (not literally see the murder). The point would be not to focus on the killer to give us an entire history and background to him. So it is the victim and their family's loss we'd be feeling. (and #abolishthepolice)
Imagine just the impact if the show had the same Dahmer-centric episodes but then each one of those was accompanied by a full-length episode about the victim and the community they came from.
If you're looking for a piece of media that does this, that focuses on the grief and anger of families after the murder of their loved ones, the limited series Four Lives by the BBC does this. It does lose some points because unfortunately it still features the killer, although it could be argued its done in a way that highlights the negative/suspicious aspects of the killer and he is actively framed as a wolf in sheep's clothing. The show does not display the actual act of a crime but rather the aftermath, and the reactions of loved ones, bystanders and the community. That is the main focus of Four Lives, it highlights the lives of the victims before their deaths but its done in a way that paints them as ordinary people you'd meet on the street or in the mall. Another thing Four Lives does well is to empathize with the anger, grief, confusion and fear of the families, friends and people in the wider community who are affected by the deaths of their loved ones/victims. You can genuinely see it in the performances and interactions. I'm (not) surprised that people haven't talked about this show because it doesn't glamourise the killer, and instead it redirects its focus and attention to the family and community over the monster. Additionally, it shows you how preventable the deaths are too, the police are portrayed as incompetent/unwilling to actually help out the families and community. Again, the performances in this show highlight this to a T, and it never focuses too much on the police - it does feature them but they are never the focus. It gets to a point when the family members do actively question and get angry with the police for their conduct of the investigation or lack of conduct (episodes 2 and 3 highlight the aloofness of the police a lot!). It's only three episodes, but I think the strongest episode is the first one. Again I want to stress Four Lives isn't a perfect show and does sometimes fall into the same traps of 'show based on real events' but it's arguably more empathetic towards the victims families than D*hmer is/will ever be.
"Netflix gave me more entertainment than this British youtuber guy person, therefore the former is right and good and the latter is wrong and bad". That's all there is to it in many cases.
Because Jack the Ripper was mentioned: I listen to Bad Women, the first season of which was specifically about the women who were killed by him. Turns out, even the idea that most of them were sex workers is wrong, because surprise surprise, sexism and classism and the utter lack of standards among police at the time caused the image of them to be extremely skewed. And the show's host openly criticizes detectives who are still trying to solve the case/clinging to old stereotypes about women of the time.
I think If you see yourself in the character in the show, you should be kinda pissed the first time you've felt represented is by a serial killer, not holding onto it as something you're glad exists
To be fair, there is an argument to be made that even flawed representation is still representation. To be even fairer, the natural argument should then be to point that out.
I think you're right with the stuff about a lot of people essentially conflating knowing more and more about something, especially very minute details, with understanding it better. With a lot of media, you have fans who can list all kinds of information but seem to not actually get the obvious message
Sophie's serial killer segment was very enlightening. Because while I enjoyed Mindhunter, I never really understood what the world had gained through this supposedly pioneering research. I guess the answer was capital punishment propaganda. 🙄
I have faith that it will get better. This extreme sensitivity on the part of those who project their sensitivity onto everyone else will start to decline because the entitlement that drives it won't be socially accepted anymore. That's actually why they fight so hard. If they can keep pretending this is new, everyone criticizing them is just someone who fits in a box they can ignore, then they can keep thinking they are normal and everything is okay. Over time that will be punctured.
There is no end to human stupidity. There's so many examples being shown that morons are so loud. These Dahmer fan idiots are also added as that example.
Jeffrey Dahmer: * literal serial k*ller * "Oh, such a tormented, poor soul!" Jack Saint: "This series about Dahmer isn't a great idea" "How dare you, MONSTER!"
The thing about intrusive thoughts is: they are intruding. Not wanted. Unpleasant to experience. If you think something, then plan and try to achieve it, those thoughts were quite welcome, which is a very different problem
@@lyokianhitchhiker that's not an intrusive thought. People with intrusive thoughts might worry about that, but that's just a manifestation of the stress said thoughts cause. The real harm done by intrusive thoughts is to the one thinking them
@@lyokianhitchhiker I understood that. They are called intrusive because they cause stress and discomfort to the person thinking them. Them being repulsive and undesirable to that person is the characterizing feature. If you have thoughts that you then act on, especially ones that take long term planning and dedication, then those are not intrusive thoughts, and you have an entirely different problem
GOD thank you sm for going off like that abt the "intrusive thoughts" comments, shit like that really pisses me off. having intrusive thoughts and actively indulging in violent fantasies are two VERY different things, and people trying to conflate the two does more harm than good
My mother was very abusive to me when I was a kid. I used to have intrusive thoughts about hurting her (thoughts like "stab her with a knife!" for example). I've never acted on them! And I haven't grown up to kill people. It's usually me who gets hurt due to my trauma. Those commenters really have the nerve to compare people with psychological issues to a literal serial killer.
Same thing with my dad. He also went on to be a very loving and caring father. Overall he is just a *wonderful kind person*. He does have those intrusive thoughts, he never acts on them. He has told me some of those concerning intrusive thoughts, and he has been nothing but kind to me, and everyone in our extended family. Except for when they told my mom to beat my brother. He got pretty mad then. I believe in you, and everything you have going forward. I don't know what is in the cards for you, but love well, and you will be loved.
I hate that people make the argument of dahmer having 'gone through a lot' like there haven't been people who went through much much worse and didn't kill anyone
I was always under the assumption it was the combination of reaching a breaking point & having psychological issues he never got help for no matter how hard he tried to get said help had a lot to do with it. It wasn’t 1 or the other of those things, it was the 2 together
@@lyokianhitchhikeri get the desire to humanize and analyze the guy, but i dont think your reply really adds anything to what op said. the point is many people go through horrible shit and have their own breaking points and are never able to get proper help for it but they still don’t harm people. not saying you’re defending dahmer but maybe replying with “well you see it’s a combination of these two things that lead to his actions” is kinda reductive to what the issue here is. like we get it, if he had a better childhood and teenage years maybe he would’ve been able to stop all of this but the fact is he didn’t. it’s pointless to consider what could’ve been. taking dahmers case as a way to advocate for more resources to help people is a good thing but it’s not worth repeatedly saying “here’s what went wrong”. there will always be people out there who harm, id say it’s more worthwhile to focus on fixing larger scale issues that affect potential VICTIMS than killers. people wish he didn’t do what he did because he was an autonomous person who no matter what the circumstance ruined several lives. again i don’t mean to imply you’re defending his actions, but this kind of rhetoric isn’t what’s going to help people affected by these situations get through them. side note- “no matter how hard he tried” is part of my problem with the rhetoric. it’s one thing to hyperfocus on what he went through, it’s even worse to act like he truly cared about not harming people. if he did he wouldn’t have, or would’ve at least turned himself in.
@@jopdog with the "no matter how hard he tried" aspect, I was implying not getting help for his mental issues lead him to snap in such a way as to start doing such things in the first place, more than anything. Anyway, I’m 1 of those people who sympathizes with both the criminal & the victims.
I like how that one person said to have sympathy for people with intrusive thoughts while fundamentally misunderstanding what an intrusive thought it. It's intrusive because the person having them doesn't want them!! Comparing that to having WANTED violent thoughts is exactly the opposite of what acceptance of intrusive thoughts should look like, because a person's intrusive thoughts are often manifestations of their biggest fears or past traumas.
I had violent feelings like that once. They were never quite as bad as that might sound, but it was something of an issue. I ended up being helped a lot by Hotline Miami, which _does_ do a lot to make its (fictional) murderers sympathetic. I had some irrational, religiously-predicated feelings of guilt and self-loathing that were not reflective of reality--but nevertheless, learning to look at the worst possible people with empathy made me revise how I looked at myself. I... still struggle, sometimes. But I try to remember how I felt when Richard--the game's expository judgement character--didn't yell at me. I try to remember how I felt listening to the dissonantly-serene music on the title screen. I try to forgive myself and let go. I haven't seen Dahmer. I'm sure it's fetishistic as hell, and I don't really plan to watch it. But, in the abstract, I _do_ think there's some value to the cultural idea of unconditional sympathy. In a vaccum, with no other stakes, I think it's valuable to ask an audience to engage authentically and _kindly_ with really bad people. Not in an idealizing, anti-heroic way--but in a reflective way. I don't think real people are good candidates for this kind of representation. I don't think real-life tragedies should be trivialized like that, and the last thing I want is to make it harder for actual victims to control their life-circumstance by mythologizing the people who hurt them. And yet, again--in the abstract--I think it's a good thing to communicate the idea that human suffering is tragic even when it happens to bad people.
Thank you for this. I struggled with violent thoughts in my teens - never acted on them beyond like shoving someone, but I got so angry I felt like I could do more than that. And I felt like a monster. I felt like “normal people” would never understand or accept me. It didn’t help that I got treated like a bad dog a lot, constantly yelled at and had my mistakes shoved in my face. Not for doing aggressive things, either, stupid shit like expressing myself wrong and doing badly in school. I think the idea of unconditional sympathy is so important for people in situations like I was. I wasn’t a nice person, but it’s incredibly hard to show kindness when it’s rarely shown to you. The idea that being understood was even a possibility helped a lot. If I thought I’d never be treated with anything but disgust, I never would’ve started going to therapy. Why would I sign up for having yet another person scream at me? I do agree though that true crime isn’t the place for that. Connecting to the idea of someone through fiction only works when it IS fiction. And this response is a mess, I’m sorry, I’m just really happy to see someone else talking about making space for empathy even when it isn’t necessarily “deserved.”
The only negative comments I agree with is that it is indeed an L to be br*tish. Sometimes videos leave their intended audience and it's a bit of a shitshow. Anyway, good video.
@@Puerco-Potter the problem is not all opinions are built the same and if your opinion boils down to going ballistic at the thought of people criticizing a piece of media that you like, you should probably step into the real world more often.
@@paulkroner6549 I don't actually care about the opinions of people. Is just funny how some "woke" people defend cancelling someone (targeting thousands of tweets and comments, plus videos to some person) for a tweet or comment, yet when someone they like get the exact same treatment they don't think it is okay... Is funny, just funny. For me is bad in all instances... I don't care for Jack's opinion really...
@Spaceboy I am against dog piling of any kind, there is nothing contradictory about it. I don't like when they do it BUT I am ALSO against the dog piling the woke left does all the time. Is tiring and traumatic to the person and I don't think any actions justify it. It's funny to me when it happens to 'woke' people because they usually defend that behavior.
Whatever nebulous positive impact this show could or does have, I just cannot understand how retraumatizing the victims' families to any degree could ever be an acceptable consequence for a conscientious person.
The "intrusive thoughts" defense is doubly frustration because some intrusive thoughts are actually a *consequence* of all that media-encouraged trauma and fear Jack was talking about in the previous video. I've been struggling with intrusive thoughts for my whole life, and they are anxieties not desires. Like if I'm walking down the street near a a child and get an intrusive thought along the lines of "I shouldn't be around that child because I might suddenly become a predator for no reason" that's an anxious thought rooted in an irrational level of fear. Fear that I probably wouldn't have if I hadn't been beaten over the head with the old "anyone could be dangerous!" narrative in my own childhood.
the growing obsession with "true crime" in recent years is very concerning & I feel like shows like Dahmer exemplify that - there is no valuable message beyond the monetization and exploitation of very real traumatic events (which actively harms victims & victims' loved ones). also, as someone originally from PA - the part of the video about harrisburg had me crying, its nice to see someone enjoys it there
It’s wild to me that they sex all the dude serial killers up but the portrayal of Aileen Wurnos involved “uglification” of former model Charleze Theron.
I found the show to be a sensitive portrayal of both the killer and his victims, intent on examination and analysis more than judgement. I only questioned the use of the line "It's Dahmerin' time!" before each and every murder.
I also did find the extensive God Emperor Dahmer dream sequence and resultant side plot to be a little unnecessary, but still, absolute masterpieces, 18/10.
I did read those My Friend Dahmer comics and the one thing I will say about them is that they make Dahmer completely and absolutely unappealing as a focus of the narrative. The art style lends itself to depicting him as thoroughly sterile and sometimes gross. He's a loser, not in a poor little meow meow way, but in a disgusting guy way. He drinks constantly through the day, he pretends to have a mental disability for funsies, he commits to the bit well beyond the point of it having been humourous. *He's cringe* And that I did appreciate. That the comics sort of refuse to frame Dahmer as anything other than what he was: an awful desperate human being.
That intrusive thoughts argument pisses me off. I've struggled with extremely violent intrusive thoughts every single day since before I am comfortable telling anyone other than my psychiatrist. It's not fun, it's not quirky, at least once a day my mind is filled with images, sounds, and thoughts that genuinely make me sick to my stomach. I would not be comfortable telling someone this irl, but under a pseudonym, I will even admit that my mind sometimes hooks onto a specific person I see while out in public, as a potential 'victim'. This is not a brag or a competition about who has it worst, if you struggle with intrusive thoughts on any level, I feel you, I wouldn't wish that shit on my worst enemy. My point is, even for those of us who struggle with violent thoughts and feelings, there are a hundred other things that have to go wrong at the same time, before someone actually commits a murder, not the least of which being the act of CHOOSING to kill. Even a schizophrenic psychopath makes a choice, perhaps on a deeper, more subconscious level, but I am still confident choice is the deciding factor in all human affairs. If you genuinely don't think you can stop yourself, then you still have the choice to open up to a psychiatrist, if you tell them you are afraid you are going to hurt someon, they will take you seriously and take the steps necessary to prevent that from happening. You ALWAYS, have a choice, even when it's just between a rock and a hard place.
I have the dahmer frames too I didn't even think of it i just thought they looked like old man glasses and it'd be funny to be a young guy with old man glasses anyway I hope these frames can break the reputation theyve been unfortunately given
Yeah, aviator-style sunglasses are still common enough that you can find them at freaking drugstores. My brother owns a pair and I'm not even sure if he's ever heard of Dahmer. Aviators with clear lenses look kinda dorky and old, tho.
I am disgusted by the portrayal of Dahmer in the show. I HIGHLY encourage everyone who watched the show to do additional research on Dahmer. The show hardly touched on what he actually did.
im glad he went so hard on the intrusive thought “feedback” cause i saw that shit in the actual comment section and it was such an asinine argument im pretty sure i lost brain cells lmao
The media has a way to influence people's minds. Before the dahmer show, no one thought about glasses shaped like that were a link to dahmer. But after the show's release, I feel sorry for every guy who normally wears those kind of glasses
You can acknowledge the role of trauma in Dahmer's decent into psychopathy and wish Dahmer hadn't been traumatized without using it as an excuse or sympathizing with him. Do I wish Dahmer hadn't had a traumatic childhood? Yes. Do I sympathize with him? No. Because trauma doesn't commit crimes, people do. I feel sympathy for the victims and their families, because they have immense pain to carry due to the horrific actions of Dahmer.
My biggest issue with the people whinging about the validity of intrusive thoughts is that it’s frequently the exact caliber of person whose impulses go no deeper than “teehee Im gonna eat a leaf!!” They don’t have distressing intrusive thoughts, so they miss the baseline that “intrusive” means “unwanted and upsetting.” I’ve had violent thoughts brought on by childhood trauma since I was a teenager. I don’t roll up my sleeves and go hunting for victims about it. I deal with my distressing thoughts by taking a deep breath if I can and focusing on the distress or disgust I feel. I can use that as a grounding point. I am not a monster because I have strange and upsetting thoughts, and I know I am not a monster because they leave me shaken and upset, they are things I would never do. It’s disrespectful as hell to be told that serial killers are sympathetic to people because they’re indistinguishable from people like me in anyone’s eyes.
For the longest time I’ve admired Henry, but I always thought, “Oh wow those scripts must take ages to figure out how to word perfectly.” But holy shit he’s actually just that well spoken in the wild. Mad respect.
Want to just add that this is not just a ‘Gen Z’ thing. RedLetterMedia hates this show for most of the same reasons and Mike is easily 74 years old. Turns out, bad, exploitative television makes people with good taste angry, regardless of age
There's a very dangerous rabbit hole of people who watch true crime and trials and becoming fans of criminals and murderers. It stems from many things, it could be wanting to understand the criminal and their background or even morbid curiosity of how they were able to commit their crimes and how they were never stopped along the way. Media has been, for a very long time, glamorizing these criminals, whether it's through news, tv shows or movies. The problem is unlike fictional characters, these were real people that harmed and killed real people. I like Jason Vorhees because he's an unstoppable killing machine that doesn't exist and he kills people that don't exist, and also I root for the people that they to stop him. Jeffery Dahmer and other people like him that let their thoughts grow to the point of violating and murdering others are real and they're scarier than any movie monster because they're real. The media may not have a responsibility to specifically admonish such people and their horrible acts but you, as a viewer, have a bigger responsibility to understand why these awful and horrible pieces of shit don't deserve any sympathy.
The intrusive thought thing baffles me because like: I grew up on the west coast of Canada where there are a lot of mountains, ever since I was a kid whenever I walked up one I would get intrusive thoughts to jump off. You know what I have never done in my life? Followed through on that thought.
I said this on the original video, and I'll say it again. Publicizing the names and faces of serial killers and School Shooters puts them on a pedestal and encourages people to follow in their footsteps for the fame.
Highlighting how it's a disservice to compare those who suffer from violent intrusive thoughts to serial killers is very important. It's already taboo to talk about them openly, we don't need freaks who romanticize murderers comparing us to them.
@@troythedeconstructionist1382 Are you serious? Where is your empathy? Do you really not care about the people who had their relatives murdered by a serial killer?
@@troythedeconstructionist1382 having empathy for people who you don't know is in fact normal human behavior. Just because you don't have any doesn't mean everyone else is faking it. As they say in my country: "Cree el ladrón que todos son de su condición"
@@troythedeconstructionist1382 This is nonsense. You're just overintelectualizing the fact that you don't care about murder victims to try to make it seem like it's everyone else who has a problem
If you are critical of something or think it is bad, that is not cancelling it! It is just criticism. This is like Trumplickers who cry about their "freedom of speech", but really just mean they want to say whatever they want without anyone telling them they are lying or wrong.
Oh man now I really want Sophie to interview the author/researcher who all these dude “Ripperologists” hassled after her recent book concentrating on the victims & their lives + circumstances.
To every truecrime baby out there who doesn't know it yet: If you spend all your days obsessed with murder and serial killers and the worst shit imaginable that a human can do to another human, you aren't mature just like people who post gorethreads on 4chan aren't mature, you are just hurting yourself and going to make your behavior worse with time.
On top of all the major factors that y'all talked about in both videos, a lot of people also have such a huge issue with anyone criticizing something they like, no matter what it is. And honestly, I never really understood that impulse. The TV shows you watch and enjoy don't define your personality and identity. But they can reflect on some personal and social assumptions or inclinations, and that's always worth thinking about and engaging critically with. I wish it wasn't so common to react so defensively toward critiques.
Thank you, I agree with both of your videos. As someone with OCD, intrusive thoughts are not something we want to act on. I never took your first video to lump people like me in with people like him. I don't understand how anyone got that impression. Most people with mental issues that cause intrusive thoughts are TERRIFIED of the intrusive thoughts. Thanks for not painting people with mental differences as bad or dangerous.
The comic very much conveyed that Dahmer was very much a unnerving and a bit of a creep for a good while before he killed anyone. I still remember the pages where the author learned he was taking roadkill to mess with.
In all fairness, I’m sure a lot of kids who did that went on to become well-adjusted members of society. It’s just the ones who became murderous psychos we hear about
As someone who struggles with intrusive thoughts, I didn’t think you were calling people like me out at all. The whole point of intrusive thoughts is that we don’t want to think them and we know it’s bad to think them. Most people who struggle with them take steps not to act on them. Robert Crumb always said that his some of his more, well, R-rated comics were an outlet for intrusive thoughts so he could get them out of his system. If anything, arguing that Dahmer’s approach to killing is in some way an an extension of intrusive thoughts feel really ableist.
The only ppl that should have a say in this are the members of the victim's family... like all this discourse is interesting but ultimately irrelevant in my eyes compared to their trauma. Idgaf if netflix did the best cinematography, script, performance, whatever. If the families didn't give consent to this, it's wrong
Omg, Jack Saint was in my brain for a second. When he talked about media that completely offends him on a personal level I just said: "Yeah, like Sky High" along with him, haha.
Nah they just need to be given pet snakes that have not been fed for a while. Then we'll see how much they love dangerous things when they are the the target of their ire.
What?! Are you saying I shouldn't root for the serial killer?! But he's just like me fr fr! Literally 1984. Seriously though, I can't believe "you shouldnt' really empathize with a serial killer" is a hot take.
![[Full] 4 ต่อ 4 Celebrity EP.920 | 3 พ.ย. 67 | one31](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KwiW2M_kAg4/mqdefault.jpg)
this is probably going to be my last DAHMER take on this channel. it will also be the last appearance of Punxsutawney Phil, who is a coward and a fraud
EDIT: Thank you to the commenters who pointed out a short scene that takes place in the show in which Dahmer *does* mock/boast about his crimes to inmates while in prison - I can't believe I missed it despite numerous rewatches before and during the making of this video, but appreciate the heads up.
DAHMER (2022) Should Not Exist: th-cam.com/video/5EADSfqtxXk/w-d-xo.html
Check out Monster Men: The Bureau
th-cam.com/video/qVwR4H9eNTw/w-d-xo.html
GUEST TH-camRS
Sophie From Mars: th-cam.com/users/SophiefromMars
Big Joel: th-cam.com/users/BigJoel
💰 PATREON @ www.patreon.com/jacksaint
👛 TIPS @ ko-fi.com/lackingsaint
✍ TWITTER @ twitter.com/lackingsaint
👥 PUBLIC DISCORD @ discord.gg/BjVfT4JR66
punxsutawney phil debate when
The Phil stans are about to come for you...... you're just hating on him for clout 😒😒😒😒😒
I havent read it , but its apearently really good and its dan wells "i am not a serial killer" that is about a tnager in a smallercity who like has disturbing thoughts and hae worries he could become on and is sympathic and get a bit of that out by working and helping in a morgue, an th dedication to not end up there is tested when a demon serial kiler goes arounnd and he is th one who can stop him, bcau h knows how he works somewhat.
Ithink he latr gain a bette coping mechanism for his mor disturbing desires to deal with them. An its ympathic but i think very much how not to go there. And seriously why not mae that a show?!
Many of the people talking shit to you want to fuck Dahmer... Stop caring, pleaseeee. You haven't done anything wrong, u a gud boi.
Honestly they needed way more of the kitchen prison type scenes
If you made Dahmer fans mad, you did something right
so strange since they think having no emotional reaction to the show is such a feather in their caps 🤔
Do you think they all (serial killer fans) suffer from Hybristophilia? Aka Bonnie and Clyde syndrome.
fr
@@sammyvictors2603 Perhaps. Or could be seeing their own personalities within how Peters’s Dahmer acted.
@@sammyvictors2603 Also seems to be people linking how terrible they feel about themselves to a serial killer which imo is normal when you feel like you’re the lowest of the low, but to then negate empathy for the victims or to actively be offended by criticisms of a serial killer and their portrayal is just on another level.
Something about an actor winning a golden globe for portraying a serial killer whilst the only remaining survivor of said serial killer is homeless and struggling with drug addiction really rubs me the wrong way.
Welcome to capitalism.
I know this is a tired joke at this point, but imo it's cuz of how real this hell is.
As a huge fan of Evan Peters i'm so conflicted, like i won't deny i am genuinely happy he finally got some meaningful recognition after a decade of amazing performances, but i really wish it wasn't for this role. Still have some hope he won't be referred to as the guy who played Dahmer or worse, simply Dahmer. Not only for the obvious reasons, but because i know these kind of roles (realistic or real bad guys) really take a toll on him and affect his mental health in serious negative ways
Didn't he throw a homeless guy of a bridge
Your silence on the criticism of being British is deafening.
Truly, there is no greater sin than being br*tish 🤢
That one was the only valid one and it I think he realizes that
@@drakewickman2079he snuck that one in there at the end and thought we wouldnt notice! pretty telling
@@drakewickman2079The normal thing to say to an insane person is nothing. To suggest someone's culture somehow invalidates their opinion is both disgusting and insane
@@Stettafireit’s a joke. Europeans and westerners shit on each other all the time.
How anyone can simp for someone who has committed such heinous crimes is beyond me.
To accuse someone of being "offended" by empathising with the victims and their families is equally baffling.
@Spaceboy
When someone accuses another of being offended, wtf do they want, an award for being thick skinned, or to validate their misconceived notion that a empathy is somehow an inferior "feeling"?
It's adjacent to the classic "man up" or "grow a pair".
Gotta be a manly man or you ain't nuthin!
Because white culture is built around loving and glorifying horrible evil people. We see this in basically every us president and across the pond to the queen of England.
These horrible people are awarded every excuse in the book while their victims are at best ignored and at worst blamed.
if they they themselves were not offended i some way then they wouldn't be arguing. they are literally offended that you are offended. also the cringe thing, i always saw that as a personal flaw based in my inability to respect peoples passions.
Fun fact that's not quite related- you usually never hear sjw’s moaning about anti-sjw’s, because they actually could grow a pair
@@James_Rustled that’s a real nice argument, why don’t you back it up with a source?
as someone who’s had intrusive thoughts for most of my life, people using intrusive thoughts to defend an actual serial killer and indirectly comparing people who have intrusive thoughts to serial killers makes me really fucking angry
LITERALLY SAME! I have had intrusive thoughts my whole life and its so infuriating and demonizing honestly to see people do that.
exactly. they think they're being sympathetic and hyper-"woke" (sorry woke is honestly such a cringe word) to defend people with mental illnesses (ei "do better") but in comparing murderers to the mentally ill it further stigmatizes them and confuses people into thinking anyone discussing their struggles with intrusive thoughts could be more capable of violence than anyone else.
Yea, when I have intrusive thoughts that are awful, they make me feel like shit. They make me judge myself for even having them. I certainly don't start making a plan to act them out.
Mentally ill people are more likely to be abused than to be abusers.
I don't understand why people try to defend such a monster, and when they try to justify it with illness similar to my own it sickens me.
they're such wildly different things by definition. A serial killer isn't having intrusive thoughts, they're just having thoughts that they then act on. Intrusive thoughts are, y'know, intrusive, inherently unwanted and not reflective of your own desires
The censorship “argument” is so bonkers to me. Are we not allowed to dislike anything anymore without being accused of being authoritarian book burners? You can’t just… say a piece of media is irresponsible and you don’t like it without being dogpiled by serial killer simps accusing you of actually thinking the media should be BANNED and DESTROYED NO MORE BAD TV SHOWS. When I critique the game of thrones season finale I’m not limiting free speech, I’m using my free speech to say that season 8 sucked ass.
@@Tsukiru imo "let people enjoy things" and "let people dislike things" can exist in equal measures
It's only free speech when you agree with them. That is literally their norm.
@@Tsukiru What I find especially telling is that this *exact same argument*, with the *exact same tone*, gets trotted out no matter the tenor of the criticism. MovieBob can crucify something, Big Joel can very quietly and calmly walk through something, Jack can do a review like his Dahmer analysis that really shows a lot of careful thought and constantly acknowledges the complex feelings. It doesn't matter. Anything beyond thoughtless lavishing praise is viewed as mean. In writing, anyone who reacted this way would be viewed as the weak person incapable of taking criticism. So I have generally had this entire freeze peach line of reasoning poisoned for me, and Jack's video is a great reason why. Anyone who reacted to Jack's video with anything besides a "I do get where you are coming from, but shouldn't creators still be able to explore what they think is necessary?" or "While marketing is constantly a thing, I do think the show did put effort into not just being salacious" or any other nuanced take is demonstrating that they are reacting from screaming, uncontrollable emotionality, not reason and not empathy.
@@Tsukiru I think an important part of "let people enjoy things" is that that only really applies if the thing is harmless. And a show about the horrific murders of real people that doesn't respect their surviving family and friends, and instead further contributes to their trauma, isn't harmless. Anyone saying "let people enjoy things" in response to people pointing that out should think about how the victims' loved ones deserve to be allowed to enjoy things too - to enjoy their lives without having to see their personal tragedies sensationalized and themselves portrayed in such a heartless way.
I talked about that with a manga called made in abyss with how the the story and art was amazing but the sexual fan service revolving around 11 year old and shit was so uncomfortable and drove me away and I got dog piled for it.
People are really defending a serial killer who killed and raped seventeen real humans, with "Intrusive thoughts exists, you should not be judged for it".
Yeah, idiot, intrusive thoughts exists, I know that, I have them regulary. Mostly about hurting myself, sometimes about hurting others. The reason I'm not in prison is because they STAY thoughts, I don't act on them. You can't judge people on their thoughts but you can definitely judge them if they act according to these thoughts!
EXACTLY. The reason D*hmer doesn't get off with this excuse is because he didn't stop at the thoughts - not that I believe he had intrusive thoughts in the first place.
THANK YOU
FOR REAL god i fucking hate people who try to use the "intrusive thoughts" argument when trying to defend real genuine traumatising crimes people commit! i have ocd, i have horrible intrusive thoughts. but the reason they're intrusive is because i don't want them, and like you already said, they stay thoughts! people enjoying fantasising about r*ping and murdering people, and then acting on that desire, is NOT what an intrusive thought is, it's literally the opposite!
Intrusive thoughts r way different than genuine suicidal/homicidal thoughts too like daaamn these dahmer fans gotta get informed
intrusive thoughts come from a place of fear, its also our brains way of reminding us of what we dont want to do. Our brain is very funky and cant handle "dont think of x" thoughts, because it has to bring UP x thought to remind us NOT to think about it. Its paradoxical. Pair having these thoughts and having OCD/thinking youre a bad person, and you usually give ominous meaning to these thoughts "why would i think that? i must be bad", (instead of understanding these thoughts are a product of our paradoxical brain capacities as well as reinforced by repeated fearful charged reactions to them; the more you try to suppress and deny a thought "dont think of x" the MORE you think of it because again, paradox) and need some kind of sense of control to soothe the fear, some ritual to make the alarm in your brain switch off to feel safe (compulsion).
That is like, not at all what a fantasy and acting on that fantasy/desire is.
I hope my rant helps, i have had OCD for many many years and even though i struggle, i do have some understanding of whats going on with intrusive thoughts+ OCD.
Dahmer fans hate you? Keep it up, king 👑
If true crime “stans” hate you, you’re doing great at being mentally healthy
Self care is disagreeing with Dahmer fans
"dahmer fans" is such a gross thing. i hate that so much. gross.
never in my life did i think i'd hear "Dahmer went through a lot!!" in the voice of Elmo
Same here 😭😭
Elmo: “Elmo loves you! Except for Dahmer, Elmo doesn’t like you.”
I have intrusive thoughts and go "oof that was a bad thought" and move on with my day WITHOUT KILLING ANYONE.
Ikr not killing people is so woke
Like the Angry Jack videos pointed out, these people are showing a tremendously overtuned sense of their own guilt and importance.
Committing felonies to own the libs
Dahmer fans are just dumb because they are unable to comprehend a simple concept of respecting a victim's families wishes
what's next, no seriously what is next, I mean if not wanting SERIAL KILLERS to be glorified is woke now then fucking hel I wouldn't mind being woke, serial killers are seen by most normal people as some of the most evil people in the world, so if it's litterally be on the side of serial killers or be woke then yeah fine I guess I am woke, christ is this really what internet discourse has come to
Sometimes I’ll think about “what would happen if I made a bomb, how would I even get the material?” Then proceed to not build a bomb, not harm anyone, and instead bake sugar cookies and feel 10000% better about myself. Just bake out the anger bro
as someone with OCD and who has experienced intrusive thoughts, and watched your first video on this, i genuinely didn't get the impression you were talking about intrusive thoughts at all: like you said, there is a MASSIVE difference between unwillingly having disturbing thoughts you would never act on, vs having disturbing thoughts, and planning them out and acting on them. intrusive thoughts are defined by the person having the thoughts finding them disturbing because theyre something the person would never do/act on; the problem is when you WANT to act on those thoughts, and like you said, genuinely plan out acting them out.
Nor should adults need the distinction explained to them. This is one of the things that bothers me the most in the world about these kinds of conversation. I shouldn't *need* to say "I'm not calling for censorship, I just..." *If I didn't say it, you shouldn't act as if I did* .
As someone else who's had intrusive thoughts, yeah I just kind of thought that was a non sequitur.
Noone is making that argument that this is happening, but I'd like to introduce the term "dogwhistle" to you to explain what's wrong with your line of reasoning.
Sometimes, the authors true intention is spoken in such a way that the average person wouldn't understand it, but someone engaged with their ideology might. For example: citing certain crime statistics in the United States (13/50) to indicate that black people only make up 13% of the population, but commit 50% of the crimes could be considered a racist dogwhistle. This statistic is usually cited by racists who expect their core audience to read between the lines and expect the general audience to take it at face value. In other words, the racists in the audience would see it and say "yes, because there's something different about black people". And that's exactly the intent of the author.
Seriously. People who have intrusive thoughts DON'T LIKE THEM, that's what makes them INTRUSIVE, if they were just thoughts or even liked thoughts they would just be thoughts of a bad person, it's your own feelings about them and the lack of actively thinking them that makes them not your fault
Same. Too many people use psychological terms/conditions without even remotely understanding what they’re talking about.
Do not romanticize real life serial killers
Just don’t
I don’t understand why people just can’t except that
Its fuckin weird and disrespectful to the people who were ACTUALLY MURDERED
By this person
Even if someone does that, they should recognize that it's not some grand character trait. They're not more insightful or smarter or more aware of human nature. They just have some dark preferences. It's a kink, basically (I know people who really like this kind of dark, stalkery fantasy). And anyone who conflates "I have a kink" with "I should be able to indulge in it with no feedback and no limits" is a danger, no matter what it is.
@@fredericchristie3472 damn right
I'm like half a minute in, but the commenter claiming that a youtube video has 'further split society' made me need to pause the video so I didn't cover up the sound with my laughter.
Grow up, General Z.
General Z at it again, dividing society by disliking a popular TV show!!
for me it was "dahmer went through a LOT."
@@joaquinbaume1291
Yikes.
I know a bizarrely high number of people who had very Child Called It upbringings--and I know zero serial killers.
A shitty childhood does not justify eating people or drilling into their skulls to try and make your own zombie-sex-slave.
These are almost certainly the same people who would insist that we stop dragging politics into things.
On Dahmer planning out his crimes, it’s almost even worse in the fact that yes, he had some concept of his actions being “wrong”, but that was why he would get blasted drunk before murders, to lower his inhibitions and be able to commit his murders. That’s not sympathetic or representative of any kind of guilt that matters, it’s a clear indicator that he knew his actions were evil and did them anyway. It’s sympathetic only insofar as it hints at a hypothetical Jeffrey Dahmer who might not have become a serial killer, but we don’t have that Dahmer and mourning that hypothetical version of him over his real victims is gross, not empathetic.
That's something that fascinates me. There's another serial killer who was asked in prison whether he felt pity towards his victims, and he said: "Oh, no. If I had thought about it that way, I couldn't have done it. I had to turn that part of my brain off." or something to that effect. The reason that I find it fascinating is that in a sense, he's more aware of his morality than most people. It isn't some passive thing that just exists within us and guides us toward some blessed goal. It's a framework that we tinker with to make ourselves happier. Or perhaps more accurately, to reduce conflicts between us and our in-groups. But once people adopt an identity of an in-group where sadism is a norm, they'll do the same thing; sadism becomes a moral norm. These serial killers don't need anybody, but they understand that a clear conscience isn't a result of being innocent, but of determination.
And those of us who don't want sadism to become a social norm need to understand this aspect of morality: it's made up, and malleable. It still matters, though, because more compassionate and inclusive values simply produce a better society. We just need to incorporate in our strategy the understanding that people aren't guided by morality, but by how they want to be seen, either by themselves, or their in-groups.
Well said
@@GuerillaBunny God this was really well said, I wish I could watch a video expounding on THAT!
Dahmer is “awareness” in the same way that step-sibling porn is “raising awareness” of sa
Have you seen the "Pop Culture Detective" on sexual assault being played for laughs in films? One of the videos features a clip of (for some reason beloved) actor Will Ferrell excusing playing rape for laughs with that kind of logic. But maybe I am misremembering and it was someone else. Maybe Will Ferrell only complained about people being overly serious about having an issue with rape being played for laughs in films.
Edit: Moved parenthesis to correct place.
@@camelopardalis84 great recommendation, thank you!
@@Shapeplusform There several videos on the channel on related topics:
- Sexual Assault in Men ... 1&2
- The Ethics of Looking and ...
- Stalking for Love
- Abduction As Romance
- Born Sexy Yesterday
- The Adorkable Misogyny of ...
- The Complicity of Geek Masculinity ...
- Predatory Romance ...
That's literally more or less the full list depending on where you draw the line.
@@OctopusWhoSeesAll I love your taste in channels
Lmao the cast of Dahmer got treated bad, normally people who do porn get treated bad, and the only reason they made it was for money
His ass is NOT beating the BRITISH allegations
No need to respond to crazy people
people forget that censorship is not just someone saying "this thing shouldn't have been made", it occurs when an authority figure (the goverment, a schoolboard, a company that runs a platform, etc) systematically prevents or limits the people that they have power over from expressing certain ideas.
in today's social media and polical landscapes we tend to throw around words a lot, watering them down until they become vague talking points, instead of the complex concepts that have rich histories tied to them and wide societal and cultural implications that they are.
(edit: fixed spelling) (edit 2: fixed spelling, again lmao)
To be fair, I can understand a steelmanned version of their argument. I've had friends who can concede the point that criticism is not censorship and still argue that there is value to an approach that goes beyond merely avoiding censorship per se to actually truly allowing people to speak without criticism.
The problem is that the argument is self-refuting. It suffers from unrestricted comprehension. If I can't criticize you, you can't criticize me for criticizing you. Free speech is going to include people disagreeing. That's exactly the reason why sensible people differentiate so harshly between censorship and criticism. Censorship is the denial of free speech. Criticism *is* free speech. And it remains free speech even when it calls for boycotts, or calls for people to not watch with or engage with a property, or calls for someone to be socially ostracized. There's no easy solution to that problem.
yeah as a russian it always makes me laugh (nervously) when people use that word so lightly
I copying this into my notepad++ to copy paste it around since that would be easier than arguing with morons who don't get it - and just don't want to grow up and censor themselves online even though they do that themselves in the real world all the time.
ArE yOu CeNsOrInG mE fRoM uSiNg ThE wOrD “cEnSoRsHiP” hOwEvEr I wAnT?!?
I dont even think a company running platform deciding what's allowed counts as proper censorship. they own the platform, they make the rules. it works just the same in a shop, no-one is entitled to practice free speech in a privately owned business like a grocery store.
I read that comic made by someone who he went to highschool with Dahmer and it did NOT fall on the trappings the show (or the films) did at all. Not only was the author careful not to glorify him, the story was from his perspective and he acknowledged the fact that his empathy for Dahmer ends the moment that he hurts someone.
Too bad that graphic novel got dragged by Dahmer show.
I was thinking of that exact quote while I watched this! Great book, it genuinely helps you understand it in a deeper way without being disrespectful
Yeah, Sophie pretty much sums up why I stopped being interested in true crime. Also because most of the most famous cases are not "criminal masterminds" as media has led us to believe but escaped capture (or put off capture) either through police negligence, corruption, racism, or incompetence. It's just boring after a time.
Kemper is helpful here. dude was buddy buddy with cops. knew many by their first names, hung out at cop bars. he wasnt a brilliant guy, he just swam in their circles and paid attention. no geniusness needed when youre on a first name basis with the local PD and seen as an upstanding and insightful young man.
So much this. I was an avid true crime lover but the longer I was part of the community the clearer it became that these are more often crimes against women or minorities that go unpunished for far too long due to police negligence or apathy. It became actually sickening and I had a reckoning that made me completely turned off by the genre completely.
@@DaughterofDiogenes Fool. That's why people watch. To learn to not do it and learn the traits of what these psychos are like to avoid it happening to others. You people are weak.
It’s less about being smart in how they commit the crime itself and more about how they chose the victims. It’s gross how brazen killers can be when they pick the kind of victims society doesn’t ‘see’.
Lmfao that's no joke, so many got away for so long cause the cops are so effin LAZY 🤣🤣
“I think we confuse curiosity for something profound” is something you could really do a whole dissertation on
fr. no joke.
one of the best, truest things i've heard in my life, that quote.
Feel the same way about Tiger King
"It's okay to be sympathetic, Dahmer went through ALOT." "
It says a lot about a person whose sympathies lie with a sadistic serial killer over the victims of said killer.
Mine lie with both. What does that say about me?
@@lyokianhitchhiker That you're an intellectually balanced, empathetic individual who recognizes that all of us are little more than the variables that make us who and what we are.
Or, at least, that's my best guess.
@@JoeNoshow27 admittedly, empathizing with both the perp & the victims comes naturally to somebody who got into criminal history from school shootings.
you can empathize with both you should empathize with every human or else ur empathy is weirdly conditional and inauthentic
Nah I’m good if you kill someone that on you that was your choice no excuses or empathy
important note: many mass shooting survivors advocate for no notoriety, meaning that names/faces of shooters don't get shown in the news, which I think goes hand in hand with this issue. If you would consider removing the picture/name of the parkland shooter, that would be really helpful
What does it say about me that I sympathize with both the killer & their victims?
@@lyokianhitchhiker That your priorities are fucked.
@@lyokianhitchhiker Well I would judge you because only one of those groups planned and murdered people
@@lyokianhitchhiker that you're a human being. as long as you don't make excuses for his actions and everything that comes with it there's nothing wrong with it. i feel sympathy for child jeffery dahmer but i don't feel sympathy for adult jeffrey dahmer. there's so much misinformation out there about him. he was not remorseful. he made body parts out of mashed potatoes to mock his victims. the man that killed him killed him because of how much he mocked his victims and would be victims.
Did these people read Roger Ebert's collections of 0-star film reviews and think Roger wanted to ban every movie he hated??
I am genuinely mindblown at how many people will hear someone criticize and then they will fly off the handle and go "W-why do you want to *CENSOR* because it *OFFENDS* you or you dislike it, snowflake??" It is so pervasive.
Its easier to change the other person's argument than to engage with it.
The title of the video was "Dahmer shouldn't exist". I got his argument but I can understand how some people could take that away from the previous video if they didnt actually watch it
Person 1: "This piece of media should not exist"
Person 2: "That's censorship! This piece of criticism should not exist!"
Person 1: "Oh okay so you're censoring me now"
What I find so hilarious is that they constantly accuse everyone else of offended emotionality when they are the ones acting from offended emotionality. It's a total failure of self-awareness, empathy and thought.
The culture wars are invented. Those in charge are trying to divide us. No one actually gets 'cancelled' unless they kill/ violently assault someone or are publicly accepted to be a paedophile. I hate JK Rowling's transphobic views, but her Harry Potter franchise is still in roaringly good health.
Bill Cosby has been cancelled.
so baffling that you can say "wow i don't like when tv shows try to get you to empathize with a real life serial killer and then exploits the deaths and traumas of his victims and their families" and people will call you a woke sensitive snowflake for it like ????
it's just that tehy can't see beyond the dimension of "it's a tv show". it's like how sci-fi "isn't political, it's just a book bro"
There's a negative reaponse in some people who prefer not to be critical of media and art, when they encounter media analysis. The critical thinking skills required to come to the conclusion that "hey maybe this show is harmful." Is too much for some people.
They have no critical thinking skills that's why they default to words like "woke", "snowflake", and "triggered"
Why not? Serial killers are humans too, what’s wrong with empathizing with them?
@@robertbcardoza empathy is fine. the key aspect of this is " exploits the deaths and traumas of his victims and their families"
it's important to be empathetic. (which, btw, is not the same as sympathy)
Tangentially related to the main subject, but when Sophie talked about walking tours recounting the Ripper murders, it reminded me that we got lucky to get tour guides who did their very best not to sensationalize the event. Instead, they went out of their way to highlight how gross and exploitative the other tours we could see around us were and use that to ask us, "Why did you come on this tour in the first place?" Their ultimate conclusion was that we should be commemorating the victims in a respectful way without getting lost in the sauce of the mystery of the killer.
I was going to say that's weird, but then I remembered ghost tours. Kinda the same thing. It'll be the worst backstory of gory crime or crimes, then a bunch of jokes and ghost fun. It's like the victims and killers have become celebrities through the spreading of gruesome details and the minimization that these are real people.
Tbh I'd love to be on a ripper tour that explained the victims lives. Like what else do you talk about, realistically?
"He killed xyz woman here....alright now to the next spot" you can purple prose it up but focusing on Jack is limited because we don't know jack shit about him.
I know some were moms, how many of their kids survived without their moms sex work? How did this event haunt them? Did they ever blame themselves? After all you'll be off the streets faster when working for 1 person vs 4.
@@Squirreltasticqueen There were literally other tour guides in top hats and flowing capes making the Ripper into a soectacle.
@@natsmith303 ew
@@charmander466 ghost tours are such a weird grey area. a lot of the time, they're fabricated, but sometimes they're, excuse my language, inspired by real events and that's just... it's wrong, but at the same time it seems fine because the ghosts are usually so old. like, "a woman died here in 1896" seems very different than "a woman died here in 1996", even though in both cases there was a death. it feels surreal, even if it did happen, when it was "in victorian times" or "back in the 1920s". is time bias a thing?
As someone who has dealt with severe OCD and incredibly violent and taboo intrusive thoughts that have in turn traumatized me, i am offended that people keep making this link between people who are genuinly violent and desire for those things to happen.
Ikr these intrusive thoughts are sometimes so disgusting to us that we judge ourselves for even having them. They're considered intrusive because we DON'T WANT THEM THERE.
i can relate to this. my mind throws some fucked up, violent or bigoted shit at me sometimes. but guess what, it stays in my fucking head.
I’m afraid to live alone because my intrusive thoughts are so overwhelming sometimes and many of them are self destructive. So yeah it’s totally awesome to see people making that argument lol. You go girls! Make us feel even more unsafe with ourselves for the thoughts we cannot control and do not want or act on!
I used to have severe OCD. I am free from it now. Trust me freedom is possible. I could give you any advice on how to heal from OCD if you want.
@@ryno4ever433 True, I used to have severe OCD, but I’ve recovered. It’s true no one wants them.
"we shouldnt do this cuz it will hurt the FEELINGS of some rando"
tf, this person just said the victims' family and survivors were "some rando"?
I hope I misunderstood the meaning and who this "rando" was supposed to be, because this is the most fucked up argument I've seen of someone trying to defend this tv show.
I hate how it has come to a point where people are calling their families "randos" those people need to grow up
They probably mean Jack, actually. But yeah, it’s just a way to avoid engaging with the substance of what he’s saying.
That only proves how little those people care about the families and victims. These people are the scum of the true crime community, and, frankly, why I left as a whole.
“It’s ok to be sympathetic, dahmer went through a lot”
What about the victims? Should we not be sympathetic towards them?
I'm sympathetic with both
i have OCD, which causes a lot of intrusive thoughts. the people reducing serial killers' impulses to intrusive thoughts made me kinda mad tbh. i would NEVER act on my intrusive thoughts. it's nothing i want to do. more than anything it's like my brain is harassing me and not allowing me to relax
No literally. That made me so mad.
The whole notion of "This person did something so extremely bad that it can only be explained by mental illness" is so absurdly dangerous. No, people can just do extremely bad things. They are capable of doing horrific things. You can't just label something "mentally ill behaviour" because it's horrific behaviour.
The whole point of intrusive thoughts is that having them is distressing. Not at all the same as having the impulse to hurt others (which also isnt bad as long as it isnt acted on, I'm not about to support thought crime lol)
This is why I like the show “I Survived A Crime” because there’s no thirsting or sympathizing with the murderers and the survivors give their consent while spreading awareness on how to protect yourself
What about shows that do both? Do those exist?
@@lyokianhitchhiker idk of any, I only saw I Survived A Crime recently
_"It's a show that keeps implying there's a reason why it exists, but it never actually conveys what that reason is."_
Exactly, they just had the awareness that they needed to appear like it wasn't purely true crime exploitation. So they just threw every theme at the wall and hoped something might stick.
The whole thing of people being like "You're shaming people for having intrusive thoughts" is so stupid. If you have intrusive thoughts you know the whole reason they're called intrusive is because you don't want them. You don't agree with them. You know they are bad. If you act on/want to act on them they aren’t intrusive
What if you act on them without having a desire to?
@@lyokianhitchhiker That's not a thing.
@@EtherealDoomed What if the thoughts weren’t wanted, but got acted on anyway?
@@lyokianhitchhiker by definition then it’s not an intrusive thought. An intrusive thought is specifically defined by a thought you do not want to act on/you don’t truly believe. Once you act than it’s just a “bad” thought. Not intrusive. Words mean things
@@saskiaosbourne3095 I was trying to account for the possibility that the person having the thoughts didn’t want to act on them, but acted on them anyway.
"Dahmer fans had thoughts"
False advertising.
xD
i live in ohio. i recently left my old job, but there was a teenage girl i worked with that was obsessed with dahmer because of the netflix series and she said she purposely went to drive past his old home every day just so she could “feel his vibes” there. being intrigued is one thing, but i really felt like that was bordering on crossing a line lol.
That's crazy, I don't feel like I'd have been able to not call that out to her.
How do you stalk a person without stalking a person i guess?
Uh, no. I would have tried to get as far away as possible, lest she share her "murder-vibes" with me.
She is sick. I would have told her.
Welp, the only positive thing about it is that when those people become walking red flags, at least you know who to avoid. Trash walks itself out.
Fuck that deranged murderer and fuck every single of his "fans".
As an aside, I avoided the movie but have read the comic "My Friend Dahmer" which is basically what Jack described. Derf's view on him is as chilling and raw as you'd expect- filled with a lot of that highschool-age inappropriateness and bluntness from the characters while obviously never being about Dahmer's actual crime spree. The tone works because it captures all the unease and terror of realizing someone you "knew" in highschool did something absolutely horrible later, and wishing that you'd seen the signs or even thought it was 'funny'. Derf Backderf's opinion on the real Dahmer is still very damning and he has no interest entertaining the "Dahmer's actually a hero"-narrative. If you read notes in his annotated version he says at least twice that Jeffrey looses all sympathy points upon committing Steven Hick's murder, and how he wishes Dahmer would have killed himself before that ever happened. Harsh words, until you remember "oh yeah he's Jeffrey Dahmer" and you realize that's as sympathetic a person who knew him as a kid and hated him as an adult should have to finding out what he did.
Me after finding out a kid I'd known since childhood grew up to fall down alt-right psycho pipeline (of the violent crimes variety)
The Dahmer stuff was my first video of yours, and I have to say…I’m glad I was one of the “new people” brought in. Really do appreciate your content chief
Glad you're here Jack, good to see you, the password to the Furry orgy in the back room is 'Praxis'
Based community
I don't know why but your name made this comment way funnier to me.
The comic My Friend Dahmer focuses a lot on Dahmer's alcohol drinking in high school and the systemic failures that allowed a teen with the obvious problems Dahmer had to be missed by teachers and guidance councilors. Not sure if that aspect has been mentioned in any other media.
Those comments send me. Reactionaries' inability to comprehend the concept of subjectivity and the very idea of video essays just being people on the internet sharing their opinions on things they find interesting is absolutely exhausting. Like imagine seeing every video title, every statement, every anecdote and believing what the author is saying is from a point of absolute authority and that those that disagree are inferior to them. Really goes to show the kind of frighteningly authoritarian wavelength that these sorts like consume their content.
Yeah, because that's exactly what they think. We tell on ourselves constantly. They don't live in a world where you can make a loving, careful, designed criticism. Everything is social shame or social approbation. It's emotional immaturity.
Guess it’s just never happened lmao🤷♂️
It's almost like knowledge of the trauma caused by actually following through on those "intrusive thoughts" is a primary force stopping people from doing them, and shouldn't be diminished.
Funny how so many of them call for applauding empathy while showing precisely no value for it.
maybe a hot take but i think it is perfectly ok to call anyone who feels a "kinship" with jeffrey dahmer a fucking creep
"Dahmer went through A LOT"
No he didn‘t go thru enough honestly
Tbh he didn’t go through a huge amount, as callous as it may sound he had a fairly dysfunctional upbringing but nothing massively traumatic that would trigger any of that.
"Dahmer went through a lot" yeah a lot of victims. Everyone who knew him growing up says he had a completely normal life until he *chose* to become a murderer.
@@elh3492I think the colon(?) operation he had as a toddler might have been so traumatic that it played the same part in forming his dysfunction that child sa does for most serial killers. He experienced immense pain in and around his sexual organs for weeks to the point where he thought his p*nis would have to be amputated.
Not saying this to justify his actions of course, just wanted to point it out bc the lack of a central traumatic evebt in Dahmer's childhood often gets brought up as somewhat of a headscratcher
@@elh3492 we don't need to downplay any trauma to condemn Dahmer. A 'fairly dysfunctional upbringing' is still traumatic.
@@alisonpurgatory85 what I mean is , his upbringing was pretty‘normal’ for its time, parents arguing , volatility etc quite ‘normal’ back then , i think sometimes we look for blame where there isn’t.
a note on the arguments about intrusive thoughts.
i have a lot of intrusive thoughts. One might say my mind is constantly spitting really bad takes at me.
But the important thing to recognize here is not the presence of these thoughts alone, but how i respond to them. I do not act on these thoughts because i understand them as bad.
Dahmer, on the other hand, did act on these thoughts. They aren't just "intrusive thoughts" at that point. They have graduated to his motivations for taking action.
and the action was murder.
it's genuinely dangerous to frame that sort of thing as "just intrusive thoughts" because you are giving people like me an excuse to stop fighting back against my brain's bad ideas. You are minimizing the harm those intrusive thoughts can have on my psyche and my soul, and it's kinda disgusting to me.
I wish these people would understand that not everybody is just a Jeffrey Dahmer in waiting, and that some of us are actively battling internal forces which push us to do things we know are bad.
"oh they're just intrusive thoughts, everybody has them."
"Yeah but Dahmer ACTED on them, and that's a critical difference between an intrusive thought and a motivation."
These arguments seem to forget what Dahmer did for the purpose of argumentation. It's chilling and gross.
I think there's even more to it than that. Just thinking about it as intrusive thoughts really ignores the way that people with extreme antisocial disorders and personalities are distinct.
@@fredericchristie3472 i agree. in my case i HAVE such a condition, but i wasnt clear in my speech. my antisocial stuff is something i am working on and i was fortunate not only to receive help and support in this, but also recognition and validation from my support network.
i think it's relevant that many many people who would frame Dahmer as simply "having intrusive thoughts" are failing to recognize the complete picture, very obviously, but there's also an insidious minimizing of their intention to act and their willingness to act that i think cannot be reasonably ignored.
you can be like me, even, having an antisocial mood disorder, have dangerous intrusive thoughts, and do something productive and not-destructive with them instead of treating them as reasonable thoughts.
and that was my point.
I think the point of intrusive thoughts is that you dint want to do them. But your brain wants to make you uncomfortable
Yeah, they weren’t intrusive for him, those were just his thoughts.
What frustrates me is they could've done a very poignant show about the victims, have each episode portray the life of one victim and what they were like and the relationships they had with their friends and families, their hopes and dreams and what they wanted in the future, and then have every episode end as they meet Dahmer, never showing his face or voice or anything identifying maybe nothing more than a shadow, just showing the world the people he took away from it and the loved ones left behind to suffer because of it
Yes, but those are normal people, and therefore they're no more interesting to learn about than the people next door. Dahmer, on the other hand, is a highly unusual person and therefore much more interesting. Of course, it's a good thing that people like him are highly unusual. The fact that many of us find him interesting is just because murder *isn't* normal.
Half of the arguments coming from people mad about the video seem to exclusively be about the title of the original video. It's not even about the content. It's just about the semantics of saying something shouldn't exist. I kind of doubt that these people even watched the video at all or are/were interested in understanding what was being said.
They literally don't watch. I suspect this is even provable beyond just noting that any test of it (like someone putting a timecode in their video for a point people will ignore) is done: I bet metrics would show it.
As a trauma survivor who used to be somewhat into true crime (never this kinda shit & never idolizing, but still), I used to explain it away with the "needing to be aware" (of the type of bad shit people do to others), it was a kind of hypervigilance i guess - but eventually i realized like, wait a second, I‘m already aware these things happen, this is just making me feel like shit 😅 So I quit engaging w it and i feel better tbh. I recommend anyone also thinking they‘re into it for that reason to do some introspection in that regard!
People WANT to be able to find some basis for sympathy. They don't want to believe that there are murderers who enjoy doing horrific things to other people.
Like....it's a serial killer. It's okay to understand they too are a human, but that doesn't mean you humanize them. Yes, he had a shitty childhood. That doesn't mean you then feel bad for HIM over the people he hurt. It simply means he had a bad childhood.
they are deep down terrified that they find too much more in common with the murderer than the victims
It's a form of self-denial of people with sadism. If they can only feel sorry for every psychopath they also hope people will feel sorry for them.
Except that they don't *want* to sympathize with the victims, or at least some don't. This isn't some universal bleeding heart mindset. Because if it were, then the shock of seeing the victims would end it or complicate it. There are people hiding the fact that they fundamentally empathize with Dahmer *and no one else in the story* by calling for empathy without giving that context.
i do understand the feeling
yes some people are like that
but some people try tl sympathize with the evil because it sometimes that people do bad things because they dont understand
we have to come to a limit
considering anybody who does wrong doing as some very horrificly bad person will result in punsihments rather than rehabilitation
and being not harsh enough causes you to be devils advocate
im not defending the people that sympathize with such person
but i understand that this feeling they have can be needed
This would have been a good series...if the childhood, family life and lost potential of the murdered men and boys was the focus in each episode then we see how that was just snuffed out by Dahmer (not literally see the murder). The point would be not to focus on the killer to give us an entire history and background to him. So it is the victim and their family's loss we'd be feeling.
(and #abolishthepolice)
Imagine just the impact if the show had the same Dahmer-centric episodes but then each one of those was accompanied by a full-length episode about the victim and the community they came from.
If you're looking for a piece of media that does this, that focuses on the grief and anger of families after the murder of their loved ones, the limited series Four Lives by the BBC does this. It does lose some points because unfortunately it still features the killer, although it could be argued its done in a way that highlights the negative/suspicious aspects of the killer and he is actively framed as a wolf in sheep's clothing. The show does not display the actual act of a crime but rather the aftermath, and the reactions of loved ones, bystanders and the community.
That is the main focus of Four Lives, it highlights the lives of the victims before their deaths but its done in a way that paints them as ordinary people you'd meet on the street or in the mall. Another thing Four Lives does well is to empathize with the anger, grief, confusion and fear of the families, friends and people in the wider community who are affected by the deaths of their loved ones/victims. You can genuinely see it in the performances and interactions.
I'm (not) surprised that people haven't talked about this show because it doesn't glamourise the killer, and instead it redirects its focus and attention to the family and community over the monster. Additionally, it shows you how preventable the deaths are too, the police are portrayed as incompetent/unwilling to actually help out the families and community. Again, the performances in this show highlight this to a T, and it never focuses too much on the police - it does feature them but they are never the focus.
It gets to a point when the family members do actively question and get angry with the police for their conduct of the investigation or lack of conduct (episodes 2 and 3 highlight the aloofness of the police a lot!). It's only three episodes, but I think the strongest episode is the first one.
Again I want to stress Four Lives isn't a perfect show and does sometimes fall into the same traps of 'show based on real events' but it's arguably more empathetic towards the victims families than D*hmer is/will ever be.
Imagine getting worked up over some British fella's critique of another ine of Netflix's true crime drama shlock pieces.
"You are literally cancelling Dahmer, a Netflix show thousands have watched, by pointing out some bad aspects about it."
Don't correct the spelling errors. It fits perfectly.
"Netflix gave me more entertainment than this British youtuber guy person, therefore the former is right and good and the latter is wrong and bad".
That's all there is to it in many cases.
Because Jack the Ripper was mentioned: I listen to Bad Women, the first season of which was specifically about the women who were killed by him. Turns out, even the idea that most of them were sex workers is wrong, because surprise surprise, sexism and classism and the utter lack of standards among police at the time caused the image of them to be extremely skewed. And the show's host openly criticizes detectives who are still trying to solve the case/clinging to old stereotypes about women of the time.
I think If you see yourself in the character in the show, you should be kinda pissed the first time you've felt represented is by a serial killer, not holding onto it as something you're glad exists
Hell yeah I had a similar thought as Sophie I'm cool now 😎
To be fair, there is an argument to be made that even flawed representation is still representation.
To be even fairer, the natural argument should then be to point that out.
I think you're right with the stuff about a lot of people essentially conflating knowing more and more about something, especially very minute details, with understanding it better. With a lot of media, you have fans who can list all kinds of information but seem to not actually get the obvious message
Sophie's serial killer segment was very enlightening. Because while I enjoyed Mindhunter, I never really understood what the world had gained through this supposedly pioneering research. I guess the answer was capital punishment propaganda. 🙄
I literally can't believe this video had to be made, that these things needed to be explained... but... it's the society we live in.
I have faith that it will get better. This extreme sensitivity on the part of those who project their sensitivity onto everyone else will start to decline because the entitlement that drives it won't be socially accepted anymore. That's actually why they fight so hard. If they can keep pretending this is new, everyone criticizing them is just someone who fits in a box they can ignore, then they can keep thinking they are normal and everything is okay. Over time that will be punctured.
There is no end to human stupidity. There's so many examples being shown that morons are so loud. These Dahmer fan idiots are also added as that example.
actually it's just the internet
Jeffrey Dahmer: * literal serial k*ller *
"Oh, such a tormented, poor soul!"
Jack Saint: "This series about Dahmer isn't a great idea"
"How dare you, MONSTER!"
The thing about intrusive thoughts is: they are intruding. Not wanted. Unpleasant to experience.
If you think something, then plan and try to achieve it, those thoughts were quite welcome, which is a very different problem
What if you act on them without having a desire to do so?
@@lyokianhitchhiker that's not an intrusive thought. People with intrusive thoughts might worry about that, but that's just a manifestation of the stress said thoughts cause.
The real harm done by intrusive thoughts is to the one thinking them
@@verager2493 I’m saying the 1 having the thoughts may be the 1 acting on them unwillingly.
@@lyokianhitchhiker I understood that.
They are called intrusive because they cause stress and discomfort to the person thinking them. Them being repulsive and undesirable to that person is the characterizing feature.
If you have thoughts that you then act on, especially ones that take long term planning and dedication, then those are not intrusive thoughts, and you have an entirely different problem
@@verager2493 You’re also assuming this guy's thoughts weren’t intrusive.
GOD thank you sm for going off like that abt the "intrusive thoughts" comments, shit like that really pisses me off. having intrusive thoughts and actively indulging in violent fantasies are two VERY different things, and people trying to conflate the two does more harm than good
I don’t think he was indulging in violent fantasies so much as letting the intrusive thoughts win
My mother was very abusive to me when I was a kid. I used to have intrusive thoughts about hurting her (thoughts like "stab her with a knife!" for example). I've never acted on them! And I haven't grown up to kill people. It's usually me who gets hurt due to my trauma. Those commenters really have the nerve to compare people with psychological issues to a literal serial killer.
Same thing with my dad. He also went on to be a very loving and caring father. Overall he is just a *wonderful kind person*. He does have those intrusive thoughts, he never acts on them.
He has told me some of those concerning intrusive thoughts, and he has been nothing but kind to me, and everyone in our extended family. Except for when they told my mom to beat my brother. He got pretty mad then.
I believe in you, and everything you have going forward. I don't know what is in the cards for you, but love well, and you will be loved.
Hope you're doing well ❤
It’s the same thing for me too
I hate that people make the argument of dahmer having 'gone through a lot' like there haven't been people who went through much much worse and didn't kill anyone
I was always under the assumption it was the combination of reaching a breaking point & having psychological issues he never got help for no matter how hard he tried to get said help had a lot to do with it. It wasn’t 1 or the other of those things, it was the 2 together
@@lyokianhitchhikeri get the desire to humanize and analyze the guy, but i dont think your reply really adds anything to what op said. the point is many people go through horrible shit and have their own breaking points and are never able to get proper help for it but they still don’t harm people. not saying you’re defending dahmer but maybe replying with “well you see it’s a combination of these two things that lead to his actions” is kinda reductive to what the issue here is. like we get it, if he had a better childhood and teenage years maybe he would’ve been able to stop all of this but the fact is he didn’t. it’s pointless to consider what could’ve been. taking dahmers case as a way to advocate for more resources to help people is a good thing but it’s not worth repeatedly saying “here’s what went wrong”. there will always be people out there who harm, id say it’s more worthwhile to focus on fixing larger scale issues that affect potential VICTIMS than killers. people wish he didn’t do what he did because he was an autonomous person who no matter what the circumstance ruined several lives. again i don’t mean to imply you’re defending his actions, but this kind of rhetoric isn’t what’s going to help people affected by these situations get through them.
side note- “no matter how hard he tried” is part of my problem with the rhetoric. it’s one thing to hyperfocus on what he went through, it’s even worse to act like he truly cared about not harming people. if he did he wouldn’t have, or would’ve at least turned himself in.
@@jopdog with the "no matter how hard he tried" aspect, I was implying not getting help for his mental issues lead him to snap in such a way as to start doing such things in the first place, more than anything. Anyway, I’m 1 of those people who sympathizes with both the criminal & the victims.
I like how that one person said to have sympathy for people with intrusive thoughts while fundamentally misunderstanding what an intrusive thought it. It's intrusive because the person having them doesn't want them!! Comparing that to having WANTED violent thoughts is exactly the opposite of what acceptance of intrusive thoughts should look like, because a person's intrusive thoughts are often manifestations of their biggest fears or past traumas.
People sure like serial killers I guess lmao
only if they are played by conventionally attractive white men. Too bad that's what keeps happening!! smh
I had violent feelings like that once. They were never quite as bad as that might sound, but it was something of an issue.
I ended up being helped a lot by Hotline Miami, which _does_ do a lot to make its (fictional) murderers sympathetic. I had some irrational, religiously-predicated feelings of guilt and self-loathing that were not reflective of reality--but nevertheless, learning to look at the worst possible people with empathy made me revise how I looked at myself.
I... still struggle, sometimes. But I try to remember how I felt when Richard--the game's expository judgement character--didn't yell at me. I try to remember how I felt listening to the dissonantly-serene music on the title screen. I try to forgive myself and let go.
I haven't seen Dahmer. I'm sure it's fetishistic as hell, and I don't really plan to watch it. But, in the abstract, I _do_ think there's some value to the cultural idea of unconditional sympathy. In a vaccum, with no other stakes, I think it's valuable to ask an audience to engage authentically and _kindly_ with really bad people. Not in an idealizing, anti-heroic way--but in a reflective way.
I don't think real people are good candidates for this kind of representation. I don't think real-life tragedies should be trivialized like that, and the last thing I want is to make it harder for actual victims to control their life-circumstance by mythologizing the people who hurt them.
And yet, again--in the abstract--I think it's a good thing to communicate the idea that human suffering is tragic even when it happens to bad people.
Thank you for this. I struggled with violent thoughts in my teens - never acted on them beyond like shoving someone, but I got so angry I felt like I could do more than that. And I felt like a monster. I felt like “normal people” would never understand or accept me. It didn’t help that I got treated like a bad dog a lot, constantly yelled at and had my mistakes shoved in my face. Not for doing aggressive things, either, stupid shit like expressing myself wrong and doing badly in school. I think the idea of unconditional sympathy is so important for people in situations like I was. I wasn’t a nice person, but it’s incredibly hard to show kindness when it’s rarely shown to you. The idea that being understood was even a possibility helped a lot. If I thought I’d never be treated with anything but disgust, I never would’ve started going to therapy. Why would I sign up for having yet another person scream at me?
I do agree though that true crime isn’t the place for that. Connecting to the idea of someone through fiction only works when it IS fiction. And this response is a mess, I’m sorry, I’m just really happy to see someone else talking about making space for empathy even when it isn’t necessarily “deserved.”
The only negative comments I agree with is that it is indeed an L to be br*tish. Sometimes videos leave their intended audience and it's a bit of a shitshow. Anyway, good video.
Insulting an entire culture is not cool
God forbid you should have an opinion. Keep doing what you do! 🤩
Other people have opinions too and the right to express it. What's the problem?
@@Puerco-Potter the problem is not all opinions are built the same and if your opinion boils down to going ballistic at the thought of people criticizing a piece of media that you like, you should probably step into the real world more often.
@@paulkroner6549 I don't actually care about the opinions of people. Is just funny how some "woke" people defend cancelling someone (targeting thousands of tweets and comments, plus videos to some person) for a tweet or comment, yet when someone they like get the exact same treatment they don't think it is okay... Is funny, just funny. For me is bad in all instances... I don't care for Jack's opinion really...
@Spaceboy I am against dog piling of any kind, there is nothing contradictory about it. I don't like when they do it BUT I am ALSO against the dog piling the woke left does all the time. Is tiring and traumatic to the person and I don't think any actions justify it. It's funny to me when it happens to 'woke' people because they usually defend that behavior.
@@Puerco-Potter no one brought up right or left here but it's funny how y'all conservaturds still get offended but like to pretend you're not.
Whatever nebulous positive impact this show could or does have, I just cannot understand how retraumatizing the victims' families to any degree could ever be an acceptable consequence for a conscientious person.
The "intrusive thoughts" defense is doubly frustration because some intrusive thoughts are actually a *consequence* of all that media-encouraged trauma and fear Jack was talking about in the previous video.
I've been struggling with intrusive thoughts for my whole life, and they are anxieties not desires.
Like if I'm walking down the street near a a child and get an intrusive thought along the lines of "I shouldn't be around that child because I might suddenly become a predator for no reason" that's an anxious thought rooted in an irrational level of fear. Fear that I probably wouldn't have if I hadn't been beaten over the head with the old "anyone could be dangerous!" narrative in my own childhood.
Intrusive thoughts are not intrusive thoughts if you ACT on them. At that point they are crimes.
People literally think a goddamn serial killer decided to let the intrusive thoughts win
the growing obsession with "true crime" in recent years is very concerning & I feel like shows like Dahmer exemplify that - there is no valuable message beyond the monetization and exploitation of very real traumatic events (which actively harms victims & victims' loved ones).
also, as someone originally from PA - the part of the video about harrisburg had me crying, its nice to see someone enjoys it there
It’s wild to me that they sex all the dude serial killers up but the portrayal of Aileen Wurnos involved “uglification” of former model Charleze Theron.
I'm just waiting until the Sally McNeil biopic so we can have the uncomfortable Step On Me Muscle Murder Mommy moment.
Because people think that attractive women can’t be evil.
I found the show to be a sensitive portrayal of both the killer and his victims, intent on examination and analysis more than judgement. I only questioned the use of the line "It's Dahmerin' time!" before each and every murder.
I also did find the extensive God Emperor Dahmer dream sequence and resultant side plot to be a little unnecessary, but still, absolute masterpieces, 18/10.
Honestly it kinda lost me at the musical number
I did read those My Friend Dahmer comics and the one thing I will say about them is that they make Dahmer completely and absolutely unappealing as a focus of the narrative. The art style lends itself to depicting him as thoroughly sterile and sometimes gross. He's a loser, not in a poor little meow meow way, but in a disgusting guy way. He drinks constantly through the day, he pretends to have a mental disability for funsies, he commits to the bit well beyond the point of it having been humourous. *He's cringe* And that I did appreciate. That the comics sort of refuse to frame Dahmer as anything other than what he was: an awful desperate human being.
is there a place to read it for free? i can’t find anything
That intrusive thoughts argument pisses me off. I've struggled with extremely violent intrusive thoughts every single day since before I am comfortable telling anyone other than my psychiatrist.
It's not fun, it's not quirky, at least once a day my mind is filled with images, sounds, and thoughts that genuinely make me sick to my stomach. I would not be comfortable telling someone this irl, but under a pseudonym, I will even admit that my mind sometimes hooks onto a specific person I see while out in public, as a potential 'victim'.
This is not a brag or a competition about who has it worst, if you struggle with intrusive thoughts on any level, I feel you, I wouldn't wish that shit on my worst enemy. My point is, even for those of us who struggle with violent thoughts and feelings, there are a hundred other things that have to go wrong at the same time, before someone actually commits a murder, not the least of which being the act of CHOOSING to kill.
Even a schizophrenic psychopath makes a choice, perhaps on a deeper, more subconscious level, but I am still confident choice is the deciding factor in all human affairs.
If you genuinely don't think you can stop yourself, then you still have the choice to open up to a psychiatrist, if you tell them you are afraid you are going to hurt someon, they will take you seriously and take the steps necessary to prevent that from happening.
You ALWAYS, have a choice, even when it's just between a rock and a hard place.
I have the dahmer frames too I didn't even think of it i just thought they looked like old man glasses and it'd be funny to be a young guy with old man glasses anyway I hope these frames can break the reputation theyve been unfortunately given
Yeah, aviator-style sunglasses are still common enough that you can find them at freaking drugstores. My brother owns a pair and I'm not even sure if he's ever heard of Dahmer. Aviators with clear lenses look kinda dorky and old, tho.
I'm just glad you included Sophie's French Inhale because it was VERY cool
I am disgusted by the portrayal of Dahmer in the show. I HIGHLY encourage everyone who watched the show to do additional research on Dahmer. The show hardly touched on what he actually did.
im glad he went so hard on the intrusive thought “feedback” cause i saw that shit in the actual comment section and it was such an asinine argument im pretty sure i lost brain cells lmao
The media has a way to influence people's minds. Before the dahmer show, no one thought about glasses shaped like that were a link to dahmer. But after the show's release, I feel sorry for every guy who normally wears those kind of glasses
You can acknowledge the role of trauma in Dahmer's decent into psychopathy and wish Dahmer hadn't been traumatized without using it as an excuse or sympathizing with him. Do I wish Dahmer hadn't had a traumatic childhood? Yes. Do I sympathize with him? No. Because trauma doesn't commit crimes, people do. I feel sympathy for the victims and their families, because they have immense pain to carry due to the horrific actions of Dahmer.
My biggest issue with the people whinging about the validity of intrusive thoughts is that it’s frequently the exact caliber of person whose impulses go no deeper than “teehee Im gonna eat a leaf!!”
They don’t have distressing intrusive thoughts, so they miss the baseline that “intrusive” means “unwanted and upsetting.”
I’ve had violent thoughts brought on by childhood trauma since I was a teenager. I don’t roll up my sleeves and go hunting for victims about it. I deal with my distressing thoughts by taking a deep breath if I can and focusing on the distress or disgust I feel. I can use that as a grounding point. I am not a monster because I have strange and upsetting thoughts, and I know I am not a monster because they leave me shaken and upset, they are things I would never do.
It’s disrespectful as hell to be told that serial killers are sympathetic to people because they’re indistinguishable from people like me in anyone’s eyes.
For the longest time I’ve admired Henry, but I always thought, “Oh wow those scripts must take ages to figure out how to word perfectly.” But holy shit he’s actually just that well spoken in the wild. Mad respect.
Want to just add that this is not just a ‘Gen Z’ thing. RedLetterMedia hates this show for most of the same reasons and Mike is easily 74 years old.
Turns out, bad, exploitative television makes people with good taste angry, regardless of age
There's a very dangerous rabbit hole of people who watch true crime and trials and becoming fans of criminals and murderers. It stems from many things, it could be wanting to understand the criminal and their background or even morbid curiosity of how they were able to commit their crimes and how they were never stopped along the way. Media has been, for a very long time, glamorizing these criminals, whether it's through news, tv shows or movies. The problem is unlike fictional characters, these were real people that harmed and killed real people. I like Jason Vorhees because he's an unstoppable killing machine that doesn't exist and he kills people that don't exist, and also I root for the people that they to stop him.
Jeffery Dahmer and other people like him that let their thoughts grow to the point of violating and murdering others are real and they're scarier than any movie monster because they're real. The media may not have a responsibility to specifically admonish such people and their horrible acts but you, as a viewer, have a bigger responsibility to understand why these awful and horrible pieces of shit don't deserve any sympathy.
The intrusive thought thing baffles me because like: I grew up on the west coast of Canada where there are a lot of mountains, ever since I was a kid whenever I walked up one I would get intrusive thoughts to jump off. You know what I have never done in my life? Followed through on that thought.
I said this on the original video, and I'll say it again. Publicizing the names and faces of serial killers and School Shooters puts them on a pedestal and encourages people to follow in their footsteps for the fame.
i don't really agree with that
Highlighting how it's a disservice to compare those who suffer from violent intrusive thoughts to serial killers is very important. It's already taboo to talk about them openly, we don't need freaks who romanticize murderers comparing us to them.
The idea that the families of people who were murdered and cannibalized are "just some rando" makes me lose a little hope for humanity
@@troythedeconstructionist1382 that's a horrible thing to say
@@troythedeconstructionist1382 Are you serious? Where is your empathy? Do you really not care about the people who had their relatives murdered by a serial killer?
@@troythedeconstructionist1382 having empathy for people who you don't know is in fact normal human behavior. Just because you don't have any doesn't mean everyone else is faking it.
As they say in my country: "Cree el ladrón que todos son de su condición"
@@troythedeconstructionist1382 This is nonsense. You're just overintelectualizing the fact that you don't care about murder victims to try to make it seem like it's everyone else who has a problem
@@troythedeconstructionist1382edgy 10 year old alert
If you are critical of something or think it is bad, that is not cancelling it! It is just criticism. This is like Trumplickers who cry about their "freedom of speech", but really just mean they want to say whatever they want without anyone telling them they are lying or wrong.
Right wing freedom. Read: "treat others how I want"
Oh man now I really want Sophie to interview the author/researcher who all these dude “Ripperologists” hassled after her recent book concentrating on the victims & their lives + circumstances.
To every truecrime baby out there who doesn't know it yet: If you spend all your days obsessed with murder and serial killers and the worst shit imaginable that a human can do to another human, you aren't mature just like people who post gorethreads on 4chan aren't mature, you are just hurting yourself and going to make your behavior worse with time.
On top of all the major factors that y'all talked about in both videos, a lot of people also have such a huge issue with anyone criticizing something they like, no matter what it is. And honestly, I never really understood that impulse. The TV shows you watch and enjoy don't define your personality and identity. But they can reflect on some personal and social assumptions or inclinations, and that's always worth thinking about and engaging critically with. I wish it wasn't so common to react so defensively toward critiques.
Most psychopaths aren't killers and most killers aren't psychopaths
True
Thank you, I agree with both of your videos. As someone with OCD, intrusive thoughts are not something we want to act on. I never took your first video to lump people like me in with people like him. I don't understand how anyone got that impression. Most people with mental issues that cause intrusive thoughts are TERRIFIED of the intrusive thoughts. Thanks for not painting people with mental differences as bad or dangerous.
The comic very much conveyed that Dahmer was very much a unnerving and a bit of a creep for a good while before he killed anyone. I still remember the pages where the author learned he was taking roadkill to mess with.
In all fairness, I’m sure a lot of kids who did that went on to become well-adjusted members of society. It’s just the ones who became murderous psychos we hear about
As someone who struggles with intrusive thoughts, I didn’t think you were calling people like me out at all. The whole point of intrusive thoughts is that we don’t want to think them and we know it’s bad to think them. Most people who struggle with them take steps not to act on them. Robert Crumb always said that his some of his more, well, R-rated comics were an outlet for intrusive thoughts so he could get them out of his system.
If anything, arguing that Dahmer’s approach to killing is in some way an an extension of intrusive thoughts feel really ableist.
The only ppl that should have a say in this are the members of the victim's family... like all this discourse is interesting but ultimately irrelevant in my eyes compared to their trauma. Idgaf if netflix did the best cinematography, script, performance, whatever. If the families didn't give consent to this, it's wrong
I always thought my friends that idolize serial killers on t-shirts, posters, collectible cards and social media posts were cringe as fuck.
You keep spitting facts in all your recent videos its given me a lot to think about wrt peoples (and my own) relationship with social media ty
Omg, Jack Saint was in my brain for a second.
When he talked about media that completely offends him on a personal level I just said:
"Yeah, like Sky High" along with him, haha.
This may seem harsh to a vocal minority, but Dahmer stans need to be excommunicated from society.
Nah they just need to be given pet snakes that have not been fed for a while. Then we'll see how much they love dangerous things when they are the the target of their ire.
What?! Are you saying I shouldn't root for the serial killer?! But he's just like me fr fr! Literally 1984.
Seriously though, I can't believe "you shouldnt' really empathize with a serial killer" is a hot take.
I think a lot of the empathizing with violent criminals comes more from understanding what made them that way than anything