In order to understand serial killers, the study has been focused on their biography and how they behave. Jeffrey Dahmer (Harold Shipman), John Wayne Gacy, and other well-known figures emphasize the sociopathic tendencies and behavior of the serial killer. Accounts that highlight their various personality traits, risk factors, and other factors are often used to explain their bizarre behaviour. Although this personal biography can be used to provide psychological analysis, it is possible for serial killings to appear both historical and cultural. It’s as if these predispositions could manifest in the same way regardless of context.
Serial killing is actually closely linked to its wider social and historical context. This is especially evident when serial killings are compared to the series of historical changes that occurred in the last 400-500 years. These historical changes are often associated with modernity’s rise. Although serial killings have been common throughout history, it was uncommon for someone to commit serial predation in earlier times. Serial killing is a new phenomenon. This is due to recent socio-cultural conditions. Criminalologists can help provide new insights by emphasizing the wide range of institutional frameworks, motivations, opportunity structures and environments within which serial killers occur (Haggerty 2009.
Serial killing refers to the rarest form homicide. An individual who has killed more than three people, but was not aware of them, may be called serial killing. This definition is acceptable by both academic and police experts. It therefore serves as a reference point. It does not include many of the common (but not invariable) characteristics of serial murder. Unfortunately, this definition also limits the scope of these crimes. These include the multiple influences of the media on serial killers as they choose victims from certain backgrounds. This (and other factors) can help you understand the social and historical contexts which are structurally predisposed to serial killers.
We will briefly discuss three aspects of serial killers that are often assumed to be obvious, but are directly linked to serial murder’s current incarnation. These include the emergence of a society composed of strangers, celebrity culture, and cultural contexts that marginalize and denigrate.
Group of unknown people
The modern era is marked by mass urbanization. This has had a profound impact on the nature and relationships of people. Pre-modern societies were characterized by close personal relationships between people. They knew each other well, and often had intimate knowledge about their neighbor’s family, routines, and personal preferences. Strangers weren’t often encountered and, when they did, were frowned upon and suspect. According to Braudy (1986), the average medieval citizen may have met only 100 strangers in their lifetime (a low number by modern standards). This is a significant difference from today’s reality where you could encounter hundreds of strangers on your daily commute to work.
Individuals found themselves in a sea populated by strangers after the rise and fall of capitalism. This was a key factor in serial murder’s emergence. They prey on strangers as a distinguishing feature from many homicides. The dense urban environment of modern cities is ideal for serial killers to have routinised, impersonal encounters.
Mass media, celebrity culture
Although serial killings are rare statistically, they are a widespread cultural phenomenon. Serial killers are now a ubiquitous reference point in movies, television fictions, novels, true-crime books, and videogames. The global mass media system – another characteristic feature of modernity- has made it easy for many people to be intimately acquainted with the dynamics and lives of serial killers.
It isn’t easy to see the connection between serial killing and media. The mass media promotes serial killers as a cultural dominant category by widely sharing details about them.
The conclusion is that serial killing is possible today, even though sequentially killing was a common practice in antiquity. Although serial killing can be imitated by the media, it is possible to make the exact behavior of serial killers more widely known.
Celebrities have also been encouraged by the media. In today’s secular world, the possibility of becoming famous has become attractive. This is because it will allow individuals to escape from an insecure anonymity and make them visible beyond the confines of their family relationships and class. While celebrity may be appealing to some, it can also be a passion that drives others. Celebrity attracts serial killers. Egger (2002) demonstrates that many serial killers enjoy celebrity status and the attention they get. It is clear that a serial killer complained to local police, “How many deaths do I need before I get national attention?” (Braudy, 1986).
Marginalisation
Serial murders can be frightening because they appear random. However, this is misleading. While serial killers may target strangers, they do not randomly choose their victims (Wilson 2007). Serial killers are more likely to target victims who mimic cultural denigrations common in contemporary society. Every society has its own unique structures of symbolic denigration that position certain groups of people as “lesser” or outcasts. Modern institutions often target these individuals for censure, reprobation and marginalization. They prey on homeless people, prostitutes as well as migrant workers, children, elderly, and children. Gerald Stano compared his victims’ deaths to “nothing different than stepping upon a cockroach” (Holmes/DeBurger 1998) This statement demonstrates how serial killers are able to embrace and reproduce wider cultural codes that marginalize, devalue and stigmatise specific groups. Serial killers see the world through a distorted lens and reflect on modernity’s unique values.
It is especially important to understand the dynamics involved in victim marginalization when studying serial killers. For the denigration or suppression of certain groups of people is tied to specific opportunity structures to murder. Criminologists often emphasize the importance opportunity structurings as a method of determining whether criminal behaviour is likely in particular contexts. For example, crime is more likely to happen when victims are easily predated upon, motivated offenders and lack of competent guardians. It is possible that serial killers target victims who are easily accessible and have less chance of generating timely legal consequences or investigation.
Modern phenomena
Serial killing is frequently portrayed in terms of the inexplicable actions of the decontextualised, sociopathic lone killer. However, this article will focus on the more familiar and disturbing modern face. Anonymity, a culture based on celebrity and cultural frameworks that denigrate, are just a few of the distinctively contemporary phenomena. Each of these provide key institutional structures, motivations and opportunity structure for analysing such acts. This is why focusing on only aetiology, offender biography, leaves out the wider social context. It also makes it difficult to understand the whys and hows of serial murder.
