Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What about the pimps?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BLUE WIZZARD
    replied
    Originally posted by c.d. View Post
    Hi Wizzard,

    No, I can't prove that there were no pimps in Whitechapel at that time but it would seem that as Miss Marple indicated if they had to split what money was made both the prostitute and the pimp would starve to death. Now it might be possible that a group of prostitutes had somebody who protected them and steered customers their way, but I just can't see it on an individual basis especially for women as poor and destitute as the victims.

    c.d.

    c.d.
    c.d.

    The Unfortunates of Whitechapel were on there own, with no pimps to work with them, now if they happened to be working the johns on the corners that the pimps were in control of, or the pimps lay claim to, then the pimps were upset to see them on their turf, taking the money away from them.

    Like selling newspapers on a corner and having another paperboy tell you to get off his corner or he will harm you.

    BW

    Leave a comment:


  • Stephen Thomas
    replied
    I searched 'pimp' on OLD BAILEY ONLINE and there's not much there.

    This is well worth a read, though

    http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/brows...pimp#highlight

    Leave a comment:


  • c.d.
    replied
    Hi Wizzard,

    No, I can't prove that there were no pimps in Whitechapel at that time but it would seem that as Miss Marple indicated if they had to split what money was made both the prostitute and the pimp would starve to death. Now it might be possible that a group of prostitutes had somebody who protected them and steered customers their way, but I just can't see it on an individual basis especially for women as poor and destitute as the victims.

    c.d.

    c.d.

    Leave a comment:


  • BLUE WIZZARD
    replied
    SUPE,

    History

    Although the actual origin of the word is unknown, the term "pimp" was introduced to the English language early in the 17th century. At the time, it meant "a person who arranges opportunities for sexual intercourse with a prostitute." This is still the common meaning of the word when you hear someone talking about a pimp. In some instances, the word could also be used to refer to someone who does well with the ladies.

    Seems to me that pimps were in operation at the time of the whitechapel murders, perhaps by some other name as quoted by kensei.

    And if you read my post as carefully as you read Miss Marple's post then you would understand what I was talking about.

    Can you prove that there were no pimps or "bully boys," at that time in whitechapel?

    Not just because Miss Marple said so.

    BW

    Leave a comment:


  • Supe
    replied
    Blue Wizzard and the rest,

    At the risk of insulting some people, steep yourselves in some period social history rather than applying your 21st C conceptions. If nothing else, read Mayhew (he is actually fun to read). At the least carefully read what Miss Marple wrote above. There were no pimps for these people, certainly not in the modern sense, and (just in case someone asks) there were no fly guys riding around in pink hansoms with fur trim.

    Don.
    Last edited by Supe; 02-10-2009, 10:19 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • BLUE WIZZARD
    replied
    Originally posted by Frank View Post
    So the pimps were not concerned as long as non of their "own" girls was attacked?
    I suppose that the murders were "bad for the business" and would think that they tried some actions to normalise the "business climate", i.e. keep eyes and ears open and catch the killer.
    Frank,

    What if the pimps were trying to take control of their turf and the part time prostitutes were interfering with business, I guess you could beat them up or kill them as a warning to stay away from their turf.

    Fear is a strong message.

    BW

    Leave a comment:


  • Christine
    replied
    One thing that I have found lacking in much of the Ripper Literature is a description of what the average man on the street was doing. Based on the press reports, a lot of people were upset, upset enough to follow drunken homeless women around just in case something might happen. The only clear example of know of this happening is George Hutchinson, and he apparently made such a botch of it that he's a top ripper suspect himself. It's all somewhat odd to me.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by miss marple View Post
    The canonical five were not professional prostitutes, that is they were were not full time, did no operate from brothels... These women were alcoholics, or drank to relieve the dreariness of their lives, Occasional prostitution paid for their drink or bed for the night.These women were at at the bottom of the pile
    Good post, Miss M.

    Leave a comment:


  • Frank
    replied
    So the pimps were not concerned as long as non of their "own" girls was attacked?
    I suppose that the murders were "bad for the business" and would think that they tried some actions to normalise the "business climate", i.e. keep eyes and ears open and catch the killer.

    Leave a comment:


  • miss marple
    replied
    The canonical five were not professional prostitutes, that is they were were not full time, did no operate from brothels, and in steady relationships.Mary who had been a full time prostitute,stopped when in a relationship and went back when Joe left.
    These women were alcoholics, or drank to relieve the dreariness of their lives, Occasional prostitution paid for their drink or bed for the night.These women were at at the bottom of the pile and had perversely had more freedom to drink, whore or sleep when they liked, unlike their worn out but virtuous sisters slaving in sweatshops or factories.Also they were not servicing twenty or thirty men a day in a brothel. The fourpenny pittence they earned from a shag covered their drink or bed but would not keep a pimp. No pimp would tolerate such lazy habits.
    West End girls charged between 5 and 10 shillings.Upmarket brothels could get much more.
    Many of the younger and prettier Ipswich victims prostituted themselves because of a drug habit, they needed a fixed amount each day,
    they did not have pimps.
    Miss Marple

    Leave a comment:


  • kensei
    replied
    I'm no expert, this is just my understanding from what I've studied. Of course there were pimps, also known as "bully boys," and that was inevitable. But there were also a lot of freelancing prostitutes, which most if not all of the Ripper's victims seem to have been. A pimp named Billy portrayed in the 1988 "Jack the Ripper" miniseries starring Michael Caine was a completely fictional character. There has been speculation as to whether John McCarthy- Mary Kelly's landlord- was actually her pimp as well. I personally don't think so. There would have been many women operating on their own, as well as numerous pimps and gangs pressuring them to conform under threat of violence. Such was life in Whitechapel.

    Leave a comment:


  • Frank
    started a topic What about the pimps?

    What about the pimps?

    Hello!

    Did the Whitechapel prostitutes have pimps in 1888 especially the victims? What was their reaction to the murders? Did they start any actions tu hunt down the killer? Was any of the pimps ever suspected by the police?

    Best regards,
    Frank
Working...
X