Talk:Jeffrey Dahmer

Similarities to Dennis Nielson

Would be good to mention the similarities to Dennis Nielson. Both the victims and crimes and the fact that the police could have prevented this earlier. Also dramatised in TV program Des.

Dahmer a rapist?

I again removed "Category:American rapists", as it doesn't seem to be supported by the article. The closest is some mentions that he fondled their unconscious bodies and with one victim he "drugged him into unconsciousness and performed oral sex on him." Other than these, it seems he either had casual sex before drugging and killing or straight to drugging and killing. The sex was post-mortem.

There is also a contradiction in this text between the bolded part and the last sentence. "He would drug his victim with triazolam or temazepam before or shortly after engaging in sexual activity with them. Once he had rendered his victim unconscious with sleeping pills, he killed them by strangulation" LittleJerry (talk) 00:07, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

He drugged and raped in the gay bathhouses.--Kieronoldham (talk) 00:40, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

That's not in the article. You can't add categories not supported by the article. LittleJerry (talk) 01:18, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

It's clearly obvious that he was a rapist. After all, he frequently raped men. Patachonica (talk) 01:21, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

We all know the definition of rape. Even with euphemistic terms (for example, sticking with the bathhouses alone "For this reason, beginning in June 1986, he administered sleeping pills to his partners, giving them liquor laced with the sedatives. He then waited for his partner to fall asleep before performing various sexual acts"). The trial testimony of Dr. Becker states some victims he "performed anal sex" upon "before and after death", after he'd drugged them.--Kieronoldham (talk) 01:46, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

And does that have anything to do with rapism? Patachonica (talk) 01:56, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

It's not a rape when someone administer sleeping pills and then perform various sexual acts ? Bobbyjbj (talk) 21:07, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Forcing sexual acts upon unwilling partners?--Kieronoldham (talk) 02:03, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes. Does any of that count as rapism? Patachonica (talk) 02:11, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

The penetrative acts against unaware and unwilling individuals alone? Woulda thought so.--Kieronoldham (talk) 04:00, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

He performed sexual acts on unconscious men. That's sexual assault. And even if we remove live men from equation, he raped the bodies of dead men. The category is relevant and I don't understand why it should be removed. CJC-DI (talk) 18:34, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

I think the original claim was that "it doesn't seem to be supported by the article." Maybe the trial testimony of Dr. Becker needs to be added. Currently the only "anal" in the article is in analytical chemist and anthropological analysis? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:39, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

It is supported by the article in my opinion. Not only live men can be raped. Violating the bodies of dead people is still rape. CJC-DI (talk) 18:54, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

No, that's necrophilia. LittleJerry (talk) 15:06, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps we should highlight here the passage(s) that support the claim, to avoid any misunderstanding. My only doubt is the legal definition of rape in the relevant US / State law. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:04, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

The aforementioned bit from Dr. Becker's testimony was specifically about Oliver Lacy. She says, "Jeffrey reported that he did not use drilling on this victim. He drugged him, strangled him, performed anal sex before and after death, posed him and took pictures." The only anal sex in the bathhouses that she mentions was performed on Dahmer and that he didn't like it. CJC-DI (talk) 19:29, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

I meant the passage(s) currently in the article. Sorry for not being clear. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:30, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Well, after doing some googling... Apparently, sex with dead bodies does not constitute as rape in US law. I guess I dropped a ball on that one. CJC-DI (talk) 20:12, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Did you look for more research? Patachonica (talk) 19:41, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

What would you expect that to reveal? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:12, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

How about "American sex offenders" category instead? That one definitely fits Dahmer in US law. CJC-DI (talk) 22:07, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

No objection. Article content certainly supports that one. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:11, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

I agree. Patachonica (talk) 19:08, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Multiple media outlets have reported Dahmer raped soldiers during his period in the service; several include direct quotes from the alleged rape victims. Given that, it would seem Dahmer's inclusion in the category is appropriate, with the question being which of the numerous articles documenting rape claims satisfies the need to substantiate this. "With enough butter, anything is good." ~Julia Child (talk) 15:43, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

This was already discussed. The consensus being it is not reliable. LittleJerry (talk) 23:55, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 September 2022

Netflix has released a new limited biographical crime drama series about Jeffrey Dahmer, it's listed on Wikipedia as well as on IMDb and Netflix itself. I hope this can be added to Jeffrey Dahmer § Television.

Hope this helps! DananaBananah (talk) 13:56, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

 Done ––FormalDude (talk) 14:39, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 September 2022

Adding where Dahmer's dad got his education.

In the page it states: The same year, Lionel earned his degree [reference 24].

Lionel got his PhD in Chemistry at Iowa State University, in Ames, Iowa in 1966. Reference 24 contains that fact. Jlgv94 (talk) 04:22, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

That is really relating to his Dad, though? The article clarifies he was at Marquette at the time of Dahmer's birth. In '62 he enrolled at Iowa State University.--Kieronoldham (talk) 05:35, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, this is just to clarify what degree he got and where (location) he did. It is about his dad, not Jeffrey. Jlgv94 (talk) 17:50, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

The use of youth in reference to his first murder

I feel like the use of "youth" in reference to his first victim is overly pejorative. Dahmer was 18 the victim was 19. The use of youth in American English implies a power gap and implies pederasty. I would replace it with "older boy" VoodooPatches (talk) 21:05, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 September 2022

James Doxtator was a minor. Minors are not prostitutes.

Change “male prostitute” where it is used to describe James Doxtator. Doxtator was 14 years old. A minor can not be a prostitute. A few accurate terms that could be used are- exploited child or youth, trafficked youth K.rae.rae.v (talk) 21:47, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done - unsourced assertion. --Orange Mike | Talk 04:38, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

 Done - K.rae.rae.v, I couldn't find any reliable source supporting that claim about James Doxtator. TanookiKoopa (talk) 00:24, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

There are plenty of sources confirming the fact, including pages 118-119 of The Shrine of Jeffrey Dahmer. It is in a lot of books about the case. Added another ref. to support inclusion.--Kieronoldham (talk) 00:53, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Complete sentences

There’s no good reason for any list entry in this article to be a lazy sentence fragment. Anyone with a mind to copyedit this issue will have my support. Julietdeltalima (talk) 09:28, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 September 2022

Change A to B for the purpose of improved readability (see below):

A:

On November 28, 1994, Dahmer was beaten to death by Christopher Scarver,

B:

On the 28th of November 1994, Dahmer was beaten to death by Christopher Scarver, Rosedaler (talk) 13:37, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

This looks reasonable. The edit has been made. Rosedaler (talk) 14:49, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

The edit was undone because it was a violation of MOS:DATETIES. MarconiCheese (talk) 16:59, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

I understand. Thank you for informing me about date policies. In light of this, I would like to change the date format of the entire article to 4 July 2022 (Day month year) format. Although this may not be the typical American format, it improves legibility in certain parts of the article including where I originally made the request. Rosedaler (talk) 18:15, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Resolved Rosedaler (talk) 02:20, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Jeffrey Dahmer date format

Hi. Thanks for your post on my talk page. I think the readability of the date that was mentioned further down in the Jeffrey Dahmer page could be improved from where it is now because of the current high frequency of commas in that section. So I think removing extra commas where they are unnecessary would improve readability. So I’d like to make the change overall in the article to the 04 July 2022 date format. (This time with proper formatting!) Rosedaler (talk) 17:47, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

I also mentioned this on the article’s talk page. Rosedaler (talk) 18:23, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedians are expected to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style, not their own personal preferences. What may be "readable" to you may be entirely unreadable to 330 million other people. MarconiCheese (talk) 18:43, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, this isn’t a personal preference. I noticed something was hard to read and I wanted to change it. There are plenty of native and non-native English speakers that would benefit from the change. One of the core goals of wikipedia is to give people access to information. To take this to its extreme, if an article is hard to read, or illegible, that makes it functionally useless within Wikipedia’s larger goals. I may be a new user but I understand this. Also, most dates on Wikipedia are indeed formatted as the 4 July 2022 format, in articles as well as in the system interface, like in the dates in signatures by default for American users. I maintain that in the context of the Jeffrey Dahmer article, changing the date format overall to be 4 July 2022 instead of July 4, 2022, would increase legibility and clarity and follows in the spirit of Wikipedia. I’d still like to make the change. Rosedaler (talk) 22:57, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

The article uses the standard American date format as the article is an American case. Similarly, spelling and grammar (jewelry as opposed to jewellery) should conform to American practices/preferences. A British case such as Buck Ruxton would use the standard British date and spelling format.--Kieronoldham (talk) 23:42, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the clarification. Rosedaler (talk) 00:35, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

It was previously clarified for you twice: once on your talk page and once in an edit summary. Apparently you didn't bother to read MOS:DATETIES, which explains why the Wikipedia Manual of Style uses different standards for different countries. MarconiCheese (talk) 01:06, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Your comment is wrong. Rosedaler (talk) 01:15, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

(1.) [1] ; (2.) User talk:Rosedaler. MarconiCheese (talk) 15:24, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Why do we glorify murderers?

This person killed other people on purpose. It’s easier for me to learn about him than it is for me to learn about the people he killed. Let’s talk about their lives and learn about them instead of learning about an evil person. 2600:4040:A492:2A00:318F:CD1:4100:7CC0 (talk) 02:44, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

I suppose then we should delete the pages on Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin as well since they were evil people. /s See further: Wikipedia:RGW Wikipedia:NOTADVOCACY Glenohumeral13 (talk) 07:31, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Not sure which "Dahmer" is the subject in main article

Seems like the author is discussing both Jeffrey and his father without any distinction between the two. Barclin (talk) 10:52, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Could you clarify just how? Thanks.--Kieronoldham (talk) 20:30, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Victim selection as forensic countermeasure

Contesting removing of edit offering "forensic countermeasure" as playing a role in Dahmer's victim selection. The individual who offered the opinion is amply familiar with details of the case and would qualify as expert in a court setting due to expertise as criminal psychologist. That this theory may not have been confirmed by Dahmer directly should not exclude its inclusion since the preceding sentence references a different expert with no evidence that individual talked to Dahmer, either. Given the circumstances of the case, victimology, conduct of law enforcement who responded, etc., this information seems highly relevant and is offered by a qualified individual. "With enough butter, anything is good." ~Julia Child (talk) 16:14, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Preceding sentence reference is made by Jeffrey M. Jentzen. He was the chief medical examiner in Dahmer's case. He was part of the investigation team and was in charge of identifying Dahmer's victims. It was not his job to interview Dahmer, but it was his job to study the remains of his victims, etc. Since he was one of the main experts on the case, referencing his work is appropriate. CJC-DI (talk) 17:05, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

This is pure speculation by an individual who never actually interviewed Dahmer. He never mentioned anything about even remotely believing/knowing police would be "less likely to search for a white suspect when the victims themselves were not white," and he was himself a member of the then-marginalized gay community in Milwaukee, which hardly felt protected by police, but rather persecuted and neglected. As for the term forensic countermeasure, several aspects of Dahmer's crimes classify him as a disorganized offender, progressively. He collected evidence of his crimes he wanted to preserve rather than dispose of it.

There is no shortage of speculation, but in this case, it would need evidence to support it. He was adamant two of the main reasons many of his victims were black was because of the demographics of where he lived and the largely limited search radius where he prowled for victims, and the fact black men were more likely than white or Hispanic guys to have the smooth, hairless torsos he preferred. Testimony at Dahmer's trial indicated his "obsession" was to "body form, not color." In addition to all this, YouTube is not a reliable source anyhow.--Kieronoldham (talk) 00:28, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the details. General question: If YouTube serves as primary source for direct interview, does it still get perceived as unreliable? "With enough butter, anything is good." ~Julia Child (talk) 01:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Video-sharing host sites are generally not considered ideal or reliable sources. Info. can be skewed and edited, and their inclusion lower the quality/reputation of an article. The individual's after the fact opinions (and there are no shortage of opinions from individuals of varying calibers about aspects of Dahmer's crimes, psychology etc.) could also open up a myriad of "maybe this, maybe that" suppositions, elongating the article.--Kieronoldham (talk) 02:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Sure, but if you have a documentary as the medium and the video is hosted on the production channel itself and no other format exists, why would it be perceived differently than another documentary that finds different distribution. I'm not speaking of short clips created by third parties of produced material, to be clear. It's obvious that manipulation and variable quality would be possible in the latter circumstance. This seems to create a bias in favor of legacy media but not all content is produced through such channels anymore. "With enough butter, anything is good." ~Julia Child (talk) 03:06, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Please delete the names of drugs he used, this kind of information should not be made public knowledge.

Please delete the names of drugs he used, this kind of information should not be made public knowledge. As a Society we should ensure, discretion regarding the tools serial killers use. So as to ensure these don't happen again in this world. 2A02:A03F:862D:6C00:194A:CE6D:3AB5:E963 (talk) 21:21, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done Wikipedia is not censored. This is public information, easily discovered. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:30, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Reference to prostitute.

There's no such thing as a fourteen year old native American male prostitute. He's fourteen. He's too young to consent. Mikesmithitsm (talk) 04:56, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

The sources state otherwise. Doxtator went to West Allis with Dahmer for $50 for sex. Legally he was below the age of consent, but he willingly went along. Actually, the main picture of him produced in the media and you'll find online was taken on September 23, 1987 when he was arrested for this offense.--Kieronoldham (talk) 23:59, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

What do the sources say exactly about Doxtator and which ones specifically call him a "prostitute"? WP:RS applies and if the sources are not clear or reliable, the word should be removed. From a cursory search, it doesn't seem to hold much weight as he is more often described as a runaway kid. Mansheimer (talk) 00:29, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Wilson, Dvorchak etc. describe him as such. Dvorchak (p. 58) describes him as one of several boys who habitually hung around the bus stop outside Club 219 offering "the one thing they had of value to the men who frequented the club - their bodies." He was male and, ahem, prostituting himself despite his age. I haven't seen him described as a runaway kid; he lived with his mother, Debra Vega, who reported him missing on Monday January 18, 1988 (Norris p. 147). Nobody is being disrespectful; the sources state this fact.--Kieronoldham (talk) 14:33, 5 October 2022 (UTC)