Almost every time Netflix releases a serial killer documentary or series, it gains so much recognition that it becomes a trending topic for weeks. The Ted Bundy Tapes were such a big hit. The latest serial killer series that has taken center stage is Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story. unlike The Bundy Tapes, this series features actors, with Evan Peters taking over the role of the serial killer. Peters has done such a phenomenal job with this role that viewers are binge-watching the series. In fact, this particular series is not something to be taken lightly as it is too hard to handle.
Why this series trend is certainly a difficult question to answer. Perhaps it is the people’s attempt to understand the strange human spirits that have the ability to turn someone into a real monster. While this is a central theme in this particular series, it is important to note how Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story has much more to say about society than just Dahmer himself. If you were to analyze the series, they would be able to recognize how the show emphasizes various harsh realities of society then and even today.
The show’s villain, Dahmer, may play the central role in the series, but there is one character who is seen as Dahmer’s foil and the show’s heroine. Glenda Cleveland, played by Niecy Nash, has almost won every viewer’s heart, and for good reason. Glenda is not only Dahmer’s neighbor, but she is also the only character that Dahmer distrusted and constantly tried to do something about. However, Glenda’s many phone calls to the police, voicing her suspicions, and fervent efforts to rescue Konerak Sinthasomphone (Kieran Tamondong), one of Dahmer’s youngest victims, go unheard of and ignored. The show seems to emphasize the fact that the neighborhood is a black-majority area and Glenda is a black woman, seems to be some underlying reasons why these white men wearing the uniforms seem to like Dahmer, the weird-yet-white man. believe about this concerned woman .
This is then confirmed when Glenda’s daughter is arrested for breaking the camera of two white boys who were clearly trespassing and tone-deaf. This arrest is in stark contrast to Dahmer’s lack of arrests in the beginning. It further shows how society tends not to listen to the black voices, something Glenda points out. In addition, it’s also important to pay attention to the questions Shirley Hughes (Karen Malina White) gets when she comes to report that her son Tony Hughes (Rodney Burford) is missing. It clearly shows the stereotyping of the black community.
There are many incidents in the series that clearly indicate that discrimination against the black community is one of the reasons that could have caused the delay in Dahmer’s arrest.
In addition, the way the Sinthasomphone family is discriminated against because of the father’s lack of English speaking skills and the way they are traumatized by inhumane and disgusting phone calls from the police officers (revealed later in the series) is yet another example of how society minority communities.
Police bias
The police play a vital role in any crime series, and it’s no different in Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story. However, what makes their portrayal in this series interesting is that it reveals the bias within the forces. Obviously a majority of officers in the armed forces are white and so there seems to be a clear bias within the armed forces. The way the two white officers who brought Konerak Sinthasomphone back to Dahmer against Glenda’s concerns were not only reassigned after a few days of paid leave, but were also celebrated as “heroes” by the union. Interestingly, during this particular scene, the show cuts off here and there to show how Glenda received an award for being a good citizen of Milwaukee. The contrast in these two events lies in how humble Glenda’s award is and how luxurious and luxurious these two officers’ awards are. There are so many messages that this one scene sends out.
Problematic Sensuality of Serial Killers
There is an ongoing debate about how the series itself portrays Dahmer. On the one hand, the show explores some key themes. However, the show also seems to sensualize Dahmer to some extent. The way he was neglected and bullied and put aside as a child makes the viewer sympathize with him. This is quite problematic. Chaney points to this argument in her review by declaring:
When the stories of serial killers are sold to a murder-obsessed audience and how hurtful it is when the victims get smaller, but the show never finds a way to stop them committing the same crime. You don’t get credit for complaining about the existence of a circus if you happen to be the ringmaster.
Interestingly, the show also elaborates on how serial killers are sensed by showing how Dahmer’s “fans” wrote to him and even sent him money. So there are two ways in which this topic is approached; one is on the show by portraying the “fans” and the other is on the show itself because it might be why Dahmer became a monster. Anyway, it is absolutely important to note that murderers like Dahmer should not be sympathized as there is no excuse for such brutal crimes.
The families of the real victims
Although the creators have stated that the show is a “attempt to shed light on the stories of Dahmer’s victims… the repercussions, it’s how society and our system failed to stop him multiple times because of racism, homophobia “there seems to be a lack of taking this route. In fact, many of the victims’ families have argued against the series as “they become traumatized again by looking at the same thing again, with some children having emotional breakdowns.“
That said, the show attempts to illustrate the pain and suffering of the victims’ families. However, it is limited to a few episodes as most of the story focuses on Dahmer and his family. So the arguments of the real families of the victims are valid, and it goes on to show how such inhumane acts have a lasting effect even after so many years. It can even cause trauma for generations. Moreover, such emotions and feelings can never be captured through a TV show, because pain is subjective.