Jeff Dahmer did not want to be with a person who would move, be energetic, express desires of his own, perhaps suprise him and demand too much of him. Jeff wanted a person who would lie down and permit himself to be stroked and admired, and finally used merely as an aid to masturbation. Obviously these people are not so easy to find so Jeff tried to find replacements so he wouldn’t have to kill. He got a mannequin from a Boston Store. Jeff saw the male mannequin and decided he wanted it. He used a big sleeping bag cover to put it in. He carried it right out of the store after closing time. He never thought of the store maybe having cameras or the possibility of being locked in the store. He got a taxi and took it home.
He used the mannequin to lay with and masturbate but was disappointed with it because it wasn’t like the real thing. “I just went through various sexual fantasies with it, pretending it was a real person, pretending that I was having sex with it.” But it wasn’t enough to satisfy him.
Brian Masters says in the Shrine, “This behavior seems less odd when one considers how many shops devoted to sexual aids sell a great number of inflatable dolls which men use to extend onanistic activity; nor the number of times men in art museums, thinking themselves alone, are seen by hidden cameras to run their hands over the bodies of statues.”
Even though Jeff pretended to have sex with the mannequin, it ofcourse did not actually involve penetration. That was not his purpose. It helped with the fantasy. He said: “I was walking around Southridge and saw this mannequin that sort of caught my eye. I wanted that mannequin, so I went into the store. There’s nobody in there. Stayed there until closing time. No alarms went off. Nothing. I got the mannequin undressed, got a taxi back home, and stored it in the closet at Grandma’s house. And I used to play around with it after.. dressing it up and undressing it. Pretending it was real.”
After a week or two his grandma stubbled on it. She asked Jeff what it was and how he got is. Jeff told her a story that he got it from a store that had extra mannequins for sale. His grandma called Jeff’s dad so Jeff got rid of it. He took it to the basement and smash it up and put it in the trash. According to Lionel, Catherine Dahmer told Shari about the mannequin in one of their conversations about Jeff drifting downward again. She was wondering how he got. Did he steal it or order it somewhere? Jeff’s grandma couldn’t imagine what Jeff wanted with such a thing. After Shari told Lionel, he called him up. Jeff’s reaction was completely calm and unemotional. He said that he had taken it only to prove that he could. He liked the clothes on the mannequin but taking the mannequin itself was just a prank. Lionel thought Jeff was acting on an impulse which was natural to him. But Shari saw it differently. She thought the mannequin was a sign of something deeply wrong with Jeff. She said, “There’s something wrong with this story, I don’t know what it is, but there’s something wrong.”
Jeff said he wanted to have something real instead of fake like the mannequin but he needed to have complete control. In the end it seems the only way he thought that was possible was killing the men he found beautiful, who had the best physique.
“It would have been better if I’d just stuck to the mannequins. Much, much better.”
this song makes me think of jeff so much. it really does. it must have been what he felt when he desired for a person to become a permanent part of him.
I had to ask. “Jeff, why did you wear this guy’s face?”
Dahmer continued to smoke as he answered. “Pat, I already told you that I wanted to keep these guys with me. I didn’t want them to leave. I loved them. That’s why I killed them. That’s why I saved their body parts. That’s why I ate them—so they could become one with me. I thought if I could preserve this guy’s skin, I could wrap myself in him. His outer shell would surround me. I would actually be in him. We would be one.”
The room fell silent. Patrickus wrote in her notepad, and Murphy and I sat without a word, letting Dahmer’s heartfelt explanation sink in.
— Grilling Dahmer: The Interrogation Of “The Milwaukee Cannibal” by Patrick Kennedy, Robyn Maharaj
if only he’d expressed this in a healthier way, with the consent of the other person, then maybe it would have gone more like this song portrays. 💔 but i wonder if this is what he was longing for — a connection so irreversibly deep and profound, two souls blended together fully, to the point where he was them and they were him.
it’s sad to know he was never able to find this consensual arrangement with a partner, instead feeling like he had to completely dominate them in order to have anything at all that wasn’t just a fuck-and-dump. perhaps in the next life, he will be — or already is — healthier, and he can have this intensely deep and unbreakable bond with someone who feels the same way.
You have bound my heart with subtle chains So much pleasure that it feels like pain So entwined, now that we can’t shake free I am you and you are me
No escaping from the mess we’re in So much pleasure that it must be sin I must live with this reality I am yours eternally
There’s no turning back We’re in this trap No denying the facts, no, no, no No excuses to give I’m the one you’re with We’ve no alternative, no, no, no
Dark obsession in the name of love This addiction that we’re both part of Leads us deeper into mystery Keeps us craving endlessly
Strange compulsions that I can’t control Pure possession of my heart and soul I must live with this reality
I am you and you are me I am you and you are me I am you and you are me I am you and you are me
There’s no turning back We’re in this trap No denying the facts, no, no, no No excuses to give I’m the one you’re with We’ve no alternative, no, no, no
When we hear his name, Jeffrey Dahmer, one of the first things that pop into our heads probably will be “necrophilia“. His attorney, Mr Boyle, based his defense mostly on this “illness”. But necrophilia isn’t or wasn’t seen as a mental disorder. The definition of necrophilia is a bit complex. When people talk of necrophilia they usually mean sex with dead bodies. And yes that’s accurate. But necrophilia also means being sexually attracted to a dead person. The most common motive for necrophilia is possession of an unresisting and unrejecting partner. So in what sense was Jeff a true necrophile? Or is the term somnophilia a better fit for him? Maybe both?
Somnophilia generally refers to a sexual interest in engaging in sexual activity with a sleeping person. Other definitions have since been offered, although they tend to be inconsistent. This appears to be largely due to their emphasis on different elements of the interest (e.g., the specific state, the context, the recipient’s reaction, the lack of consent). For example, while Money’s original definition in 1986, was directed towards sleeping people, subsequent definitions were broadened to encompass ‘unconscious’ people. Somnophilia is also sometimes regarded as being synonymous with sleepysex. However, sleepysex refers to one or both partners being in near-sleep states whilst engaging in sexual behaviors. Here, sexual arousal is thought to stem from the intimacy of the interaction. These two additional concepts increase the scope of the term somnophilia, making it unclear as to whether it refers to an interest in sleeping people, waking people up, having sex in a sleepy state, or all of the above. Based on this, and the dearth of empirical data on somnophilia, it is difficult to form any firm conclusions about its definition.
Somnophilia has been theorised to lie along a continuum with necrophilia due to the passivity of the target individual. Some have even suggested that somnophilic behaviour functions as a substitute for necrophilia as it bypasses the crimes associated with the latter. Deehan and Bartels recently examined this proposed link empirically. They found that, in community-based male participants, fantasising about somnophilic behaviour and necrophilic behaviour were positively correlated. In their study, Deehan and Bartels also found that a subset of people interested in sexual activity during sleep were more interested in being the passive/sleeping person – which the authors termed ‘dormaphilia’. This bears a similarity to other paraphilias that have a seemingly complementary opposite (e.g., sadism and masochism; or exhibitionism and voyeurism). Deehan and Bartels did a study on somnophilia. They recruited 232 participants online to discuss the content, origin, sexual appeal, emotional appraisal, and behavioural enactment of their somnophilic and dormaphilic interests and fantasies. 30.4% participants mentioned the act of taking control, being dominant, and, as Participant 82 stated, having “total power” over the passive partner. Some participants described being able to control their partner’s body, as well as controlling what occurred within the sexual encounter without having to interact with their partner (“Somnophilia puts me in charge, and it allows things to be attempted that can’t be done if the other person is awake” – Participant 48). Some also mentioned the passive partner’s inability to resist the situation or the advances of the active partner. Here, the appeal of somnophilia lay in the guarantee of control.
People who have somnophilia may not wish to cause harm or force violence on someone but they receive sexual arousal and orgasm by intruding on and touching or fondling a sleeping person. If these urges are acted on as part of a consensual fantasy scenario, this can be perfectly safe, fun and legal. Those who can’t control urges around somnophilia may seek treatment.
Brain Masters made in The Shrine also an interesting observation about Jeff’s polaroids and necrophilia:
“Police officers found 74 Polaroid pictures in Dahmer’s drawer, which does not take into the scores he had taken and subsequently destroyed. This was not a hobby, it was imperative – pressing, impatient, ineluctable. There are some of the body whose bowels had fallen out, which implies that the photographer was working in conditions of unspeakable foulness. Why? Because the taking of photographs is an inherent part of the compulsion itself. It was strong enough to banish the smells, render them impotent, and unable to interfere.
The camera completes the objectification of the victim, destroys the last vestige of his individuality, robs him of his independent being. Just as murder creates a compliant corpse, so the photography of that corpse demonstrates total ownership and control – it is a step further in the same direction. The person, once threatenjngly alive, now exists only in so far as the photographer allows him to exist through images of his creating. It is the translation of life into death, of sentience into petrification, of will into object, the dissolution of all into one triumphant thing – the photograph.
Erich Fromm has analysed what he calls the necrophilous character, which may show itself in seemingly innocuous acts. Men who feel more tender towards their cars than their wives are demonstrating the dangers of inanimation (literally, soullessness). They wash it lovingly, even when they could afford to pay someone else to do it, they may give it a nickname, they caress it and gaze at it. The car has become, in such cases, almost a love object, which does not, unlike a love subject, occasionally refuse one’s attentions. The murderer is doing precisely the same in turning his love object into a still image, turning love (aliveness, mutuality) into pornography (passivity, self-gratification). With his camera, he conceptualises and conquers that which was once a free being, and in this way, uses the camera as a kind of weapon or instrument of control. The camera is a thing which records things, framing them, solidifying them.
It is important to recognise that the camera does not enhance. It reduses (in so far as the person photographed is now no more than an image), and it insultingly proclaims ownership, too. It has become a substitute for involvement, and in that regard, Dahmer’s photography of his corpses, his dismemberment, his trophies, is a loud signal of the condition which afflicts him – necrophilia.”
– Based on this, I think Somnophilia also applied to Jeff, maybe even more than necrophila. A lot of sources use necrophilia to indicate a person having sex with corpses. Not only to indicate being sexually attracted to a dead person. Jeff himself said he would prefer to have a complete compliant person (alive) to do whatever he wished sexually, not to consider the other person’s needs. One of the reason why he started drugging the men in the bathhouses and why he tried to make ‘zombies’. So technically he is a necrophiliac because he had sex with the dead bodies of his victims, but he was more aroused by their unconscious state because it made him have complete control.
I used Stable Diffusion and Photoshop. This was a different experience, it is the first time I am using a model that I trained, mixed with my usual prompt. It has resulted in a very dreamy portrait that I’m so excited to share here.
Please visit my Instagram for more portraits of Jeffrey!
Speculation Emerges on Jeffrey Dahmer’s Potential Autism Spectrum Disorder: Insights into a Troubled Mind
Introduction: Jeffrey Dahmer, one of the most notorious serial killers in modern history, continues to captivate public interest due to the depths of his heinous crimes. As time passes, new perspectives and insights emerge regarding his psychological makeup. One such recent speculation revolves around the possibility that Dahmer, who operated during the 1980s and early 1990s, may have suffered from autism spectrum disorder (ASD). While the disorder was not widely diagnosed during his lifetime, the evolving understanding of ASD prompts us to reconsider his predisposition and its potential impact on his actions.
Emerging Speculation on ASD: In recent years, speculation has surfaced regarding the possibility that Dahmer may have had undiagnosed ASD. Autism spectrum disorder is a neurodevelopmental condition characterized by difficulties in social interaction, communication, and repetitive behaviors. The disorder was not as widely understood or diagnosed during the time of Dahmer’s life, which makes retrospective analysis all the more challenging.
Predisposition to ASD in 2002 Study: In 2002, a study conducted by Dr. Helen Morrison, a forensic psychiatrist, suggested that Dahmer exhibited traits consistent with ASD. The study aimed to explore potential links between specific personality disorders and serial killing. Dr. Morrison’s examination of Dahmer’s life, childhood, and psychological profile led her to propose that he may have met the criteria for an autism spectrum disorder diagnosis.
Analyzing Dahmer’s Behavior and Traits: Supporters of the hypothesis point to several characteristics in Dahmer’s life that align with ASD tendencies. These include his social difficulties, recurring rituals, and limited emotional expression. Dahmer’s obsession with collecting and preserving body parts and his rigid adherence to specific routines also draw parallels with common ASD traits, albeit in a highly aberrant and extreme form.
The Complexity of Causation: It is important to note that correlation does not equal causation, and the emerging speculation regarding Dahmer’s potential ASD should be treated with caution. While certain traits may suggest a predisposition, they cannot solely explain his violent and criminal actions. Numerous factors, including psychological, environmental, and sociocultural influences, contribute to the development of an individual’s psyche and behavior.
The Significance of Retrospective Analysis: Speculating on the presence of ASD in a historical figure like Jeffrey Dahmer serves as a reminder of the evolving nature of psychological understanding. With advancements in diagnostic criteria and increased awareness surrounding ASD, experts can now reinterpret past cases through a different lens. Although it may never be definitively confirmed whether Dahmer had ASD, this exploration raises awareness about the complexities of mental health and the need for early intervention and support.
The speculation surrounding Jeffrey Dahmer’s potential autism spectrum disorder provides a fresh perspective on his troubled mind. While retrospective analysis remains an imperfect science, it prompts us to consider the multidimensional factors that contribute to criminal behavior. As our understanding of mental health deepens, this discussion serves as a reminder of the importance of early detection, diagnosis, and intervention for individuals on the autism spectrum. Ultimately, it underscores the need for continued research and compassion to prevent future tragedies and promote a better understanding of the human psyche.
I believe art can help souls; I started to produce portraits of Jeffrey with the intention of helping his soul transform and transcend through beauty and art, where Jeffrey can be put into a context where he can exist peacefully, where he can love and be loved, experience desire without hurt and, ultimately, be happy.
I do not use any AI Model trained to produce Jeffrey’s face, I do use Img2Img in some more classical and obvious forms of portraits but, for the most part, Jeffrey’s image appears through to my outputs in a supernatural fashion, where no photo of him is used, nor any reference to his name. I make use of Photoshop to correct some body features that do not come out well enough through my AI machine, however, his face is, very rarely, corrected or modified.
Untitled with Glasses (2023) – A spontaneous output, unmodified.
I do have a very deep connection with Jeffrey’s soul; I believe my mission is to help him, as he has been, to me, a guiding soul, since my childhood years. I believe his soul is Good and that he has repented in a deep and honest way, choosing to become Light.
It has been very hard for me, and for the community that supports this belief, to experience so much hatred and intolerance, in places that shout words of freedom, in a very selective way that does not give any space to real things in this world, like: forgiveness to those who really need it.
[I am currently without Instagram or any other platform, because our mission is unwelcome and my accounts keep being taken down.]
In the case of Jeffrey Dahmer, Dr. Judith Becker, an expert in forensic psychiatry, has speculated about a potential connection between his childhood hernia surgery and his later behavior. Her statement raises questions about the influence of traumatic medical experiences on individuals, particularly in relation to Dahmer’s disturbing actions of cutting up bodies.
During the 1960s and 70s, it was not uncommon for babies & young children to undergo surgeries without adequate anesthesia. These experiences were often painful and traumatic, leaving a lasting impact on the psychological well-being of the individuals involved. That was compounded also by the fact that studies in the 1940s had incorrectly stated that babies and infants lacked the capability to feel pain, after they seemed to be unresponsive to pinpricks for example. This was later explained by a failure to correctly interpret infant body language.
Jeffrey Dahmer’s Surgery and potential coping mechanisms
Jeffrey Dahmer, as a child, underwent a hernia surgery. It is believed that this surgery, in the early 60s, may have been performed without sufficient anesthesia. Dr. Judith Becker has speculated that this traumatic experience could have influenced Jeffrey’s later behavior, particularly his inclination towards violence and the gruesome act of dismembering and cutting up bodies. After the operation, 4y.o. Jeffrey asked his parents if someone had cut off his penis. This inquiry raises the distressing possibility that he may have felt pain or confusion during the procedure, which could have influenced his subsequent behavior.
Dr. Judith Becker’s Statement
Dr. Becker about Jeff during an interview for a documentary
Dr. Becker ( expert witness during legal proceedings), presented her speculation regarding the potential connection between Jeff’s surgery and his subsequent behavior. Her statement suggests that traumatic medical experiences, such as Jeffrey’s surgery, can have profound psychological effects on individuals, potentially shaping their behavior in unsettling ways. The impact of traumatic experiences on individuals’ psychological development is a multifaceted issue. While traumatic events can contribute to the development of psychological conditions and maladaptive behaviors, it is important to consider other factors, such as genetic predisposition, environmental influences, and individual coping mechanisms, when examining the root causes of disturbing behavior.
Continued Research and Awareness
Dr. Becker’s speculation regarding Dahmer’s surgery and its potential influence on his behavior underscores the need for further research and understanding in the field of trauma. Investigating the relationship between childhood medical trauma and long-term psychological outcomes can provide valuable insights into the complexities of human development, aiding in the identification of interventions to mitigate the potential negative impacts.
The significance of the operation in the trial against Jeffrey Dahmer did NOT receive adequate attention and was not taken as seriously as it should have been. Despite the potential trauma and pain Jeffrey may have experienced during this surgery, the court proceedings focused primarily on his later disturbing actions.The case of this experience and his subsequent disturbing behavior highlights the significance of traumatic medical experiences in shaping an individual’s psychological well-being. While Dr. Becker’s statement offers a speculative perspective, it prompts us to consider the potential connections between traumatic events and aberrant behaviors.
BONUS
Dr Becker telling studends about Jeffrey Dahmers case and how she was involved 🙂
i empathize with jeff as a human being. i don’t empathize with his decisions. this is why it’s so uniquely painful to read about all he’s done. but i don’t think i ever lose my empathy for him, even in his deepest depravity — and that’s a hard pill to swallow, even for me myself.
when i read about him jerking off in front of 12-year-olds in hopes that they would stare at him admiringly, or when i think about how he molested somsack, i feel disgusted and sickened and horrified. and angry with him, too. REALLY pissed off at him, in fact. when he does stuff to underage boys, that’s the closest i get to wanting to just destroy him — even more than the murders for some reason. we don’t know what happens after death, and most of what he did to his victims’ bodies happened postmortem. still awful, but at least there’s a little comfort in knowing they didn’t feel any of it. but the living victims especially have to deal with sustained trauma, and i think about how those developing brains get that trauma irreversibly woven into their psyches.
he selfishly exerted power and control over the powerless in so many ways. and it angers me when i think about it. it doesn’t matter how bad your fucking childhood was; you don’t take it out on innocents. doesn’t matter what age those innocents are, really — it’s wrong regardless — but there’s something especially infuriating about it when they’re so young and they have their whole lives ahead of them, and you choose to inflict scars on them that impact their brain development and therefore go even deeper in a way.
strangely, though, i don’t lose my affection for him as a whole person. it stretches the limits of my empathy to painful extremes, no doubt about that. but my love for him never goes away. and that in itself makes me feel guilty when i think about it in the context of his crimes, like i’m doing something wrong. but at the same time, i remember how much he regretted his actions — and call me naïve, but i truly think he did have remorse, though that’s another tangent — and so my first instinct is to wipe the emotional slate clean [as much as possible] and give him the chance in my mind to do the right thing from now on. that’s the type of person i’ve always been and probably always will be. i’ve always been quick to forgive as long as i think the person really meant it. and if they did, then i think it’s only fair to prioritize moving forward. and jeff seemed to be trending “better” toward the end, so i can probably safely assume that this was a genuine change of heart.
i don’t think i have that Fi “repulsion switch” that’s talked about in MBTI, where a single action or trait of a person — or even multiple traits at once — makes you hate everything about them. i don’t naturally view people as angels or demons, and i’ve really felt more pressure from outside to feel this way than anything else. we’re all just humans, all forced to exist in grey areas. it’s just that jeff’s lows were THE LOWEST you could go without being an outright sadistic POS.
but he lacked that bitter “sting” to his soul that sadists like john wayne gacy had. he had the darkness and the heaviness without the sting of truly enjoying what he was doing. deriving pleasure from an act isn’t the same as enjoying it on a character level, if that makes sense. you can get a physical rush from something and be disgusted at your own body’s reactions to it, asking yourself “ugh, why the fuck do i LIKE this?” that sort of agonizing rug-burn of the soul can really feel like a war inside of you. i’ve been there with alcohol and benzos, just exhausted by my body’s cravings for those things. physically enjoying the rush they gave me, but hating that it brought me pleasure when i knew it was fucking up my life.
i think there was probably at least some of that going on inside of jeff with his sex addiction and alcoholism. the way he leaned into the “evil” nature of the exorcist iii, using the yellow contact lenses to “get into character,” seems like a coping mechanism to me. like he figured he was just going to be evil no matter what, so he may as well go all-out and embrace it. the way he said he felt “so hopelessly evil and perverted” makes me think this. if you can’t beat it, join it, i suppose. he said that he didn’t like feeling evil, though. and i believe he really was trying to be better, considering how perfectionistic he was about christianity toward the end.
this is how i see him after considering his life as a whole. not separating him into child jeff and teen jeff and crime-spree jeff and prison jeff. when i consider the entirety of his life and look at the whole context, i see a person who struggled immensely with tons of horrific urges — WAY more than most of us would ever experience in a full lifespan, to say nothing of his 34 short years. and i do see someone who was ultimately too weak and self-centered to admit to himself that he couldn’t handle it all on his own, though at the same time i do think that most people would have trouble admitting even a fraction of all that shit out loud. still, though, when push comes to shove, ANYTHING is better than murder, and he still chose murder [and all kinds of other awful things]. but i do see why he, as a human being who had really never been fully listened to or taught that it was okay to trust others enough to let them help him, would be reluctant to say anything to anyone. his own actions trapped him at every turn, and there are no do-overs when death is involved.
it’s just a huge mess. JEFF was a huge mess. but i see his struggles, and i can’t help but feel for him overall. no matter what point he was at in his life, he was still the same person by definition. and i love that person. i love him for making years of effort to battle the horrible desires and fantasies that “filled his thoughts all day long.” i love him for sincerely repenting and dedicating whatever time and effort he had left toward being a better person. i love him for the soul he was deep down, that soul that was buried under all the sickness and the domino effect of terrible decisions. that soul that had to fight himself all on his own, more or less. no one gets an instruction manual for how to live as the person they are, and if anyone would’ve needed one, it’d have been jeff. in many ways, he lived life on an extreme difficulty setting, at least internally. and try as we might, no one except jeff dahmer will ever know how hard it really was to be jeff dahmer. and he’s certainly not around anymore to tell us.
i know that his sincerity is contested, but i’m the type of person who gives the benefit of the doubt, i guess. thinking this way gives me something to live for. and even though it’s still important to have boundaries so you don’t self-destruct or get taken advantage of, you can still love and forgive someone from a distance. and that’s how i approach jeff. i would never actually want to be in a relationship with him or anything, if that were possible — he wasn’t capable of a healthy relationship by any means, and that was the root of his whole problem! but i can care about him as much as i want from thousands of miles and several decades away.
and if it turns out i’m wrong and he really was just a total piece of shit who’s duped me into seeing him as human, fuck it. i’ve lost NOTHING by emphasizing the potential for a good outcome in this highly-complicated situation where we’ll never truly know either way. honestly, if i wasn’t optimistic, i’d have killed myself a long time ago because there wouldn’t be any point in battling my depression. i don’t want to be here if i can’t enjoy life, if i can’t see the good in people and situations wherever i find it. so if nothing else, i’ve at least fulfilled MY purpose here by erring on the side of positivity when even the clearest explanation still seems ambiguous.
when i see those polaroids, it’s very strange. it’s absolutely horrifying, yes.. hard to believe a human being could even do that to another. but as i look at them, the main thing i end up thinking about is just how far gone jeff was. how profoundly sick he must have been in order to do these things at all.. and not only that, but NOT be a sadist. NOT be someone who enjoyed causing suffering. it makes it clear just how much of an unfathomable death grip his addictions must’ve had on his mind for him to go to these lengths.
it’s quite understandable why some people think he must have been sadistic in order to do this shit. and yet he wasn’t, and we have plenty of evidence to show this. so as much as i guess i feel an outside pressure to hate him for it, i still can’t. i’ll never hate jeff, ever. i still feel just as terrible for him as i do for his victims. the tragedy just goes that much deeper in my mind.
Jeffrey Dahmer Memorial 