CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online
log in · register
Home › Society › Psychology › Serial Killers: Q&A...

Serial Killers: Q&A...

Started by wearyowl29 · · 👁 13 views · 106 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants wearyowl29rustyfalcon52Nicole Jamesbriskgull27rustymaker5briskbison27Sean Hernandez5shadowowl9Zachary Torres5copperharbor47William Cook56Sarah Wood8Benjamin Gray91James Allen6ATaylor Parker10brightcobra91Donna Wood52Karen Booth3Aaron Anderson72casualharbor9silentpilot6Larry GrayAdam Miller46 …
shadowowl9 shadowowl9 Member
38 messages
joined Sep 2008
#21 ·
I’m not offended. It’s just that I have no idea what we’re actually discussing here. Are we talking about concentration camps? The percentage of abused children who end up on a dark path? Or maybe something else entirely—the third, fifth, or sixth thing? Or perhaps we're circling back to your opening thesis and that question about why serial killers are almost exclusively men rather than women. Actually, you know what? Forget it. I’m done with this thread.
rustymaker5 rustymaker5 Regular
352 messages
joined Mar 2008
#22 ·
Nemrut Dag;7210074 said:
I've been sitting here thinking about all this back and forth we've been having on the boards lately, just staring at the screen and wondering where the hell we actually stand on these issues... It feels like everyone is just shouting into a void without actually listening to the substance of what’s being said, though I suppose that's just how things work these days in America... You see people jumping to conclusions before the facts are even fully laid out on the table, and then you have people like rustymaker5 getting caught up in the weeds of minor details while the bigger picture remains completely ignored by the mainstream media and the folks running the show in D.C.... It’s exhausting, really, to watch the constant cycle of outrage and reactionary nonsense that seems to define our current political landscape... I find myself drifting away from the discussions because it starts to feel less like a debate and more like a choreographed performance where nobody actually wins anything, they just perform for their own side... Maybe I'm just getting cynical in my old age, or maybe it's just that the level of discourse has dropped so low that there's nothing left to grab onto... anyway, I guess that's just my two cents, if anyone actually cares to hear it... kaže:


I honestly have no clue what part of my post could possibly be taken as an insult to you...😕

Look, it’s not even about being insulting... that isn't the point at all... 🙂

You’re just twisting and turning your words like a snake hiding its tail, making it impossible to tell what you actually mean... one can never really pin down what you're trying to say when you wrap everything up in those layers of ambiguity... 😉 Maybe I completely missed the mark on this one... maybe I just didn't quite grasp the point you were trying to make... 🙄
Sean Hernandez5 Sean Hernandez5 Active Member
57 messages
joined Apr 2011
#23 ·
rustyfalcon52 said:A serial killer is generally defined as someone who kills three or more people over a certain timeframe, with distinct "cooling-off" periods in between. Their victims often share common traits, such as age or race.
We could certainly go even deeper into the technical definitions.

I think you might have mixed those two points up... the connection to sex workers is just one possible reason why women are more frequently targeted.

I think we probably should move toward a deeper definition, because you can find some kind of similarity between almost any group of victims if you look hard enough.🙂
If you have a guy using a sniper rifle to kill random people who share absolutely nothing in common, he’s still technically a serial killer.
rustyfalcon52 said:A serial killer is generally defined as someone who kills three or more people over a certain timeframe, with distinct "cooling-off" periods in between. Their victims often share common traits, such as age or race.
We could certainly go even deeper into the technical definitions.

I think you might have mixed those two points up... the connection to sex workers is just one possible reason why women are more frequently targeted.

I didn't mix anything up; I think you just missed my point.😁
How many serial killers targeting sex workers are actually documented?
And how many pedophile killers or "Angels of Death" are there? (In those cases, gender isn't really the primary factor here).
I am not disputing the fact that men are the primary perpetrators of violent crime in America, nor that women are more frequent victims than other men. The reasons for that are already established—you can draw plenty of general conclusions from FBI data on that.
However, serial killers represent an extremely tiny fraction of all violent offenders and murderers.
The issue is that these cases get massive media coverage precisely because they are so rare, which creates this illusion that they are happening constantly. But they aren't. They really aren't.
wearyowl29 wearyowl29 RegularOP
715 messages
joined Feb 2014
#24 ·
shadowowl9 said:I’m not offended. It’s just that I have no idea what we’re actually discussing here. Are we talking about concentration camps? The percentage of abused children who end up on a dark path? Or maybe something else entirely—the third, fifth, or sixth thing? Or perhaps we're circling back to your opening thesis and that question about why serial killers are almost exclusively men rather than women. Actually, you know what? Forget it. I’m done with this thread.

Fair enough, it's your call.
wearyowl29 wearyowl29 RegularOP
715 messages
joined Feb 2014
#25 ·
rustymaker5 said:But you’re wrapping your actual meaning in layers like a snake hiding in the grass! It makes it impossible to tell what you really meant. 😉 Maybe I just missed the mark entirely? 🙄


I guess I might have missed the point when I jumped into that other thread.
Oh well, it doesn't matter now.

Seriously though, I'm dying to know—how on earth does my post have "hidden meanings"? 😕
rustymaker5 rustymaker5 Regular
352 messages
joined Mar 2008
#26 ·
wearyowl29 said:I guess I might have missed the point when I jumped into that other thread.
Oh well, it doesn't matter now.

Seriously though, I'm dying to know—how on earth does my post have "hidden meanings"? 😕


I didn't quite put my foot in the right place there... My bad. Sorry about that. 😘

I suppose I should probably say something about this whole situation, though it feels like we’ve been circling the drain on this topic for hours now... It’s just one thing after another lately, isn't it? You look at the news, you look at what people are saying online, and it feels like everything is just drifting further away from common sense... I mean, honestly, where does it end? We spend all this time debating these tiny, insignificant details while the actual foundation of things is just crumbling right under our feet... it’s exhausting, really. I’m sitting here thinking about how much energy we waste on these endless cycles, and yet, here I am, still typing... it’s almost funny if you think about it too long... anyway, let's see where this goes... At first glance... Your opening post could definitely be taken a different way than how you directed it at Salvador... I honestly thought there was just a massive mess of confusion going on here, though maybe I'm just overthinking things or jumping the gun without any real reason, so I guess I'll apologize if I misread the room... 🙂
Zachary Torres5 Zachary Torres5 Member
14 messages
joined Dec 2006
#27 ·
That’s the freak from the farm up in Canada, if I remember right. Maybe he was so damn ugly even the local girls wouldn't give him the time of day. Clearly, living among pigs wasn't cutting it for him. Hence the killing spree.
rustyfalcon52 rustyfalcon52 Member
39 messages
joined Jul 2006
#28 ·
Sean Hernandez5 I agree we need to dive deeper into this, but... (it feels a bit like a wild goose chase😉)

For instance, how would you define someone who constantly evades the long arm of the law while manipulating anyone they encounter along the way? Does that automatically make them a serial killer?
In my view, no—even if they have committed several murders where the victims simply happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I have to admit, I might be missing something here, but I’m struggling to follow your logic. On one hand, you mention that serial killers are such rare outliers that they get so much attention, but then you suggest we don't actually know their true numbers—which implies there could be many more out there. (And if that's the case, they aren't exactly rare anymore, are they?🙄 )
wearyowl29 wearyowl29 RegularOP
715 messages
joined Feb 2014
#29 ·
rustymaker5;7211403 said:
I didn't express myself very clearly there. My bad! 😘

It’s finally the weekend, so we all let our guards down a little bit....

But at first glance your opening post could be interpreted quite differently than how you addressed Salvador. I thought I saw some confusion or a mix-up, but maybe I just jumped the gun without thinking it through—so, sorry about that! 🙂

I was really just building on his point and expanding the conversation, not trying to argue or shut him down at all. But hey, let's get back to the main topic...
wearyowl29 wearyowl29 RegularOP
715 messages
joined Feb 2014
#30 ·
rustyfalcon52 said:Sean Hernandez5 I agree we need to dive deeper into this, but... (it feels a bit like a wild goose chase😉)

For instance, how would you define someone who constantly evades the long arm of the law while manipulating anyone they encounter along the way? Does that automatically make them a serial killer?
In my view, no—even if they have committed several murders where the victims simply happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I have to admit, I might be missing something here, but I’m struggling to follow your logic. On one hand, you mention that serial killers are such rare outliers that they get so much attention, but then you suggest we don't actually know their true numbers—which implies there could be many more out there. (And if that's the case, they aren't exactly rare anymore, are they?🙄 )

Wait a second! Isn't a serial killer defined by someone who deliberately—meaning with specific intent—plans murders based on their own twisted criteria? You know, that whole "these specific types of people deserve to die" mindset, all without any immediate material gain involved...

So, a serial killer isn't just some guy walking out of a Chase Bank with a massive bag of cash and taking out three pedestrians on his way out... but is a guy picking up hitchhikers on a lonely stretch of highway just to kill them considered one? Because I think we need to be more precise here!
rustyfalcon52 rustyfalcon52 Member
39 messages
joined Jul 2006
#31 ·
wearyowl29 said:Wait a second! Isn't a serial killer defined by someone who deliberately—meaning with specific intent—plans murders based on their own twisted criteria? You know, that whole "these specific types of people deserve to die" mindset, all without any immediate material gain involved...

So, a serial killer isn't just some guy walking out of a Chase Bank with a massive bag of cash and taking out three pedestrians on his way out... but is a guy picking up hitchhikers on a lonely stretch of highway just to kill them considered one? Because I think we need to be more precise here!


Exactly... it seems we're on the same page here.👍

I'll check back in later; I have to head out to a job site.
Sean Hernandez5 Sean Hernandez5 Active Member
57 messages
joined Apr 2011
#32 ·
rustyfalcon52 said:Sean Hernandez5 I agree we need to dive deeper into this, but... (it feels a bit like a wild goose chase😉)

For instance, how would you define someone who constantly evades the long arm of the law while manipulating anyone they encounter along the way? Does that automatically make them a serial killer?
In my view, no—even if they have committed several murders where the victims simply happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I have to admit, I might be missing something here, but I’m struggling to follow your logic. On one hand, you mention that serial killers are such rare outliers that they get so much attention, but then you suggest we don't actually know their true numbers—which implies there could be many more out there. (And if that's the case, they aren't exactly rare anymore, are they?🙄 )

Well, how is it not serial if there is a series?🤣
The term "serial killer" isn't actually a legal definition. That’s the whole point. I am not sure where you would even categorize such a thing, but since there is no precise definition, it makes discussing statistics difficult—because, frankly, I don't know exactly what we are talking about.
Take Ted Bundy, for instance; he targeted young women (which fits the initial premise here). Then you have Son of Sam—if I recall correctly, and feel free to correct me if I am wrong—who killed both men and women somewhat randomly, sometimes using a gun when the voices told him to. He is still titled one of the most famous serial killers ever. So, how does that fit your logic?🙂
rustyfalcon52 said:Sean Hernandez5 I agree we need to dive deeper into this, but... (it feels a bit like a wild goose chase😉)

For instance, how would you define someone who constantly evades the long arm of the law while manipulating anyone they encounter along the way? Does that automatically make them a serial killer?
In my view, no—even if they have committed several murders where the victims simply happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I have to admit, I might be missing something here, but I’m struggling to follow your logic. On one hand, you mention that serial killers are such rare outliers that they get so much attention, but then you suggest we don't actually know their true numbers—which implies there could be many more out there. (And if that's the case, they aren't exactly rare anymore, are they?🙄 )

I am not buying it.
😍
The entire issue is that nobody has actually defined what a serial killer is here. Instead, everyone is busy offering theories about their psyche or why they pick certain victims.
You all are just focusing on a few famous butchers, but that barely scratches the surface of the topic, because serial killing isn't limited to just people who use knives.

By the way, everything you wrote (as a critique of me) is accurate; I don't see what part is unclear.😕
copperharbor47 copperharbor47 Member
18 messages
joined Jan 2008
#33 ·
I was watching this documentary about serial killers the other day. There were two guys being compared—one who was a total sadist and loved torturing people, and then there was this one guy (I think his name was Dahmer or something similar).
That guy was basically like a kid who used to dissect live frogs and cats... he’d keep their bones and was just completely obsessed with death. When he hit his teens, he realized he was gay (which maybe isn't even relevant here). He ended up killing 17 men, but unlike the sadist, he didn't really get off on the torture part—he’d usually just drug them or knock them out first, then go to work by shooting them, using acid, eating parts of them, or keeping organs in the fridge...

Once he got caught, he claimed he’d been lonely his entire life with nobody to talk to, and that everyone he cared about always left him. He actually thought—which is obviously totally psychotic thinking—that if he ate their organs, a piece of those people would stay with him forever. And the crazy thing? The guy was perfectly average intelligence.

He even wrote a confession that was about 150 pages long... in which he admitted he knew what he was doing was wrong but just couldn't stop himself...
Btw, at the trial, they actually found him to be legally sane!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is hands down the wildest part of the whole story.

The last thing he ever wrote was: "If I had stayed with Bogo, none of this would have happened."

And now I'm sitting here wondering:

1. How did absolutely nobody around him notice he was a freak? Like, why didn't anyone react to him gutting animals in the neighborhood? I can't buy the excuse that his teacher didn't notice he was different—especially since neighbors later said he was super weird and withdrawn and all that...

2. Could any of this have been stopped if he'd just gone to a psychiatrist, a priest, or literally anyone else and said, "Look... I'm fantasizing about death, I'm obsessed with dead animals, I'm dissecting them, I'm keeping their bones... HELP ME!!!!!"

But honestly, when you live in some tiny rural town, I guess that's almost impossible. It makes you wonder how people would even react. I feel like we all have that aggressive side to our personalities—it's just suppressed in most people, while for others, it's way more intense.
William Cook56 William Cook56 Newcomer
2 messages
joined Jun 2007
#34 ·
wearyowl29 said:Wait a second! Isn't a serial killer defined by someone who deliberately—meaning with specific intent—plans murders based on their own twisted criteria? You know, that whole "these specific types of people deserve to die" mindset, all without any immediate material gain involved...

So, a serial killer isn't just some guy walking out of a Chase Bank with a massive bag of cash and taking out three pedestrians on his way out... but is a guy picking up hitchhikers on a lonely stretch of highway just to kill them considered one? Because I think we need to be more precise here!

According to the official definition provided by the FBI—who, if I recall correctly, were actually the ones to first coin the term "serial killer" in the first place—we are talking about an individual who has committed three or more murders, specifically with those distinct "cooling-off" periods between them. It’s all about that interval, you see!

There are certain types of killers who simply don't have that "cooling off" period—you know, that window of time where things settle down—and those are what we call spree killers.

It’s quite a fascinating—if somewhat chilling—psychological progression, isn't it? One often observes that serial killers, once they’ve reached a certain threshold of successful murders, begin to develop this heightened sense of invincibility—a sort of misplaced confidence, if you will—and as that compulsion to kill intensifies, they frequently undergo a terrifying metamorphosis into spree killers!

Listen, let me be perfectly clear here—having a body count of at least three isn't the only metric we use to categorize a serial killer! It’s much more nuanced than that—way more complex! And for heaven's sake, the killings can't be motivated by simple greed or financial gain! If you're doing it for the money, that's just plain old robbery or murder for profit—it doesn't fit the profile!

There are really two distinct breeds of serial killers out there—it’s quite fascinating when you break it down!—and I truly believe we can categorize them into two very different groups.
They’re incredibly organized—really quite methodical about it—and in most cases, we're looking at individuals with high intelligence levels who typically gravitate toward highly precise, technical professions. They exercise such meticulous control over the crime scene itself; they’ll often commit the murder in one location only to transport the victim to another entirely different spot later on. It's all part of the process—they go to great lengths to scrub any evidence or traces left behind, and then—this is the truly chilling part—they actually follow their own case through the media coverage!

They say people are either disorganized or organized—it’s always one or the other, right?—but honestly, if you look at how things actually play out in the real world, most folks are just a chaotic blend of both! It’s rarely a clean split—more like a messy, unpredictable mix—and that's exactly how it works in practice!
Sarah Wood8 Sarah Wood8 Active Member
95 messages
joined Aug 2007
#35 ·
Men are obviously more violent, probably due to hormones, testosterone, and all that other crap, but that doesn’t mean women can't be way more malicious and calculating.
Why do women specifically target men? Maybe it's just a lifetime of built-up frustration that finally snapped and turned into something incredibly twisted. From what I've gathered looking into these cases, the women who kill serial killers often resemble a woman who once dumped them or walked out on them.
Benjamin Gray91 Benjamin Gray91 Newcomer
2 messages
joined Jun 2007
#36 ·
Basically, when we talk about a "serial killer," we're looking at someone who commits murders over an extended period without one specific, singular motive.

Erick W. Hickley actually did a study on serial killers and laid out some specific traits:
- Out of the group studied, 24 were women and 114 were men.
- About 28% of them worked with accomplices.
- On average, you're looking at 8 to 12 victims per killer.
- Most of the time, the victims didn't even know the killers.
- In 85% of cases, the main drivers were sex or money.
- There are three main types: transient killers, localized killers, and area killers.
- Only about 5% of these killers had obvious social struggles.

I'm not totally sure exactly when this study was published—it's been a while—but I think we can still draw some pretty solid conclusions from it. Generally speaking, when it comes to motives, most male serial killers were driven by sexual impulses and proving their physical dominance. Also, FBI stats from back in the early '80s showed that these guys were often highly intelligent, though they struggled in school. They usually grew up in homes where the mother was the dominant figure and relationships with their fathers were emotionally cold. A lot of them dealt with sexual fantasies involving parents, had specific fetishes—like lingerie, for example—and most suffered through sexual, emotional, or physical abuse during childhood. As for women, the motive is usually money, and unlike the men, the female killers often actually knew their victims. Though, honestly, there just isn't much data on women...
Also, based on her own research, Hellen Morrison concluded that biological factors combined with environmental influences starting as early as 12 months old shape these killers. Regarding the victims, she found they’re often chosen based on certain physical characteristics, and that most serial killers manage to kill freely for about 15 years before they finally get caught.

Nowhere in the definition of a killer does it say exactly how many murders have to happen to earn that label—mostly because they tend to operate for such a long time before getting caught. Using that 15-year mark as a guide, it's clearly a huge number of victims. Plus, the math shows an average of 8-12 victims per killer.
Unfortunately, there's just way less statistical data on female serial killers, mostly because women tend to lean toward different types of crimes—you know, things like shoplifting, fraud, or murders motivated by money, revenge, or passion...
William Cook56 William Cook56 Newcomer
2 messages
joined Jun 2007
#37 ·
It isn't just about targeting sex workers—the motivation really depends on what specific psychological profile they fall under.
There are essentially four motivational archetypes:

1. The Visionary; despite the common cliché, serial killers aren't actually all driven by hallucinations or losing touch with reality—most people who claim they hear voices are often just trying to dodge a prison sentence!
That being said, there are definitely a few cases where the delusions are very real.

Take Herbert Mullin, for example—he murdered 13 people because he genuinely believed voices were telling him his actions would prevent an earthquake in California.

Then you have Ed Gein (the man behind the inspiration for classics like Psycho, Texas chainsaw massacre, and When the Lambs are Silent)—he was convinced that if he consumed the remains of women who resembled his mother, he could actually preserve her soul within his own body!
He even went so far as to sew suits out of his victims' skin just to "become" his mother!

2. Mission-oriented; these types believe they are performing a service for society by eliminating certain groups of people—which is why sex workers are so frequently targeted. They think they’re doing the world a favor.
A prime example is Robert Pickton, who was convicted of killing 27 sex workers, though many believe the actual number is closer to 60!

3. Hedonistic; this type kills purely for the thrill of it.
Some get a rush from the "hunt," others find pleasure in torture, and some move straight to the kill to indulge in necrophilia or cannibalism.
It’s almost always tied to sexual gratification—like David Berkowitz (better known as the Son of Sam), who found sexual arousal in stalking couples in their cars and killing them, even though he wouldn't touch the victims after the fact!

4. Power/control; this is hands down the most common type.
They kill because they crave total dominance over their victims—usually, these individuals suffered abuse during childhood and felt powerless and neglected, so by killing others, they finally feel like they are the ones in charge!

And, of course, you'll see these categories overlap, much like how we see the distinction between organized and disorganized killers!
James Allen6 James Allen6 Active Member
85 messages
joined Apr 2007
#38 ·
I suppose the issue is that men are inherently more fragile than women. They don't seem to know how to defend themselves through other means, so they resort to aggression instead.
Maybe it also stems from how they are raised—you know, the whole "don't cry, man up" mentality. So, rather than breaking down or seeking professional help, he just ends up hitting his wife.

Then I’ll read some headline in the New York Times saying, "Man accidentally kills wife after domestic dispute"... hello??!!! 😢
A Anonymous Veteran
3.6K messages
joined May 2005
#39 ·
wearyowl29 said:I was just scrolling through the news this morning and read about this absolute monster—some guy who slaughtered around 60 sex workers, and some people are even saying he might have ground them up into sausages. It’s gruesome stuff. It really got me thinking about why, by almost universal rule, serial killers are men and their victims are women, most often those working in the nightlife industry.

Where does all that deep-seated, pathological hatred toward women come from? Why do they feel driven to go on these relentless killing sprees...?

And honestly, why don't we see more female serial killers out there? Why does it always seem like they're the ones being targeted instead of the ones doing the targeting...?

How do you all make sense of this???😕


I’ve heard about that guy...
It’s sick...
Men are physically stronger... maybe that's part of it...
And street workers often deal with heavy drug use... they struggle financially even though they're selling themselves for high prices... I hope you know what I mean, but yeah.🙏
wearyowl29 wearyowl29 RegularOP
715 messages
joined Feb 2014
#40 ·
I honestly don't know where to start with this one! It’s just such a wild topic, isn't it? I was sitting here sipping my coffee—the good stuff from that little roastery down in Seattle, you know the one—and I started thinking about how much things have shifted lately. It feels like we're constantly navigating these strange, new waters. Sometimes you think you've got a handle on things, and then—BAM!—everything changes. It reminds me of that time I tried to fix my own sink back in Chicago; I thought I was a regular plumber until the kitchen turned into a swimming pool. Total disaster! But hey, we learn, right? We adapt! Anyway, I just wanted to throw this out there because it’s been rattling around in my brain all morning. What do you all think? Is it just me, or is the vibe totally different lately? Let's chat! kaže:
So, I’ve been hearing things about that guy lately...
Absolutely insane...
Men are physically stronger... maybe that’s why? I mean, you look at the sheer power difference and it just makes sense! It reminds me of watching my old neighbor, a retired linebacker from the Dallas Cowboys, move around his yard—just pure, raw strength compared to the rest of us. There's definitely something to be said about that biological edge!
It’s just a sad reality that some people end up caught in a cycle of heavy drug use. They're struggling to make ends meet, even when they're selling themselves just to stay afloat. It's a tough break, honestly. Anyway, I really hope you get where I'm coming from on this.🙏

Raw power isn't even the main driver here. It’s not that they care about being strong, per se. It's more about that mindset—that deep-seated belief in their own heads that they’ve been hand-picked for the job. They truly believe they're on some grand mission to scrub the world clean of "trash and filth." It gives them this perfect, built-in excuse, doesn't it? They can justify just about anything by claiming they're doing us all a massive favor!
It’s one thing to play the part of a janitor on the side, just cleaning up the mess, but it's a whole different story when they actually start enjoying it. They begin playing games with their victims, acting like some kind of self-righteous vigilante angel!
It’s the same old pattern: deep-seated resentment toward women, an inability to actually connect with them, and that overblown obsession with their mothers. It turns them into these bitter people just looking for payback. Honestly, they have the exact same profile as Trebeth.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads