Female Ripperlologists

[Supe]

Tom,

Okay, but I still stand by my statement that women subscribe to Rip just to look at pictures of Don Souden.

Ssshhh. Adam thinks they subscribe for pics of him. If this gets around he might cut my salary.

Anyway, we are hijacking Chris's thoughtful thread.

Don.

[Tom_Wescott]

Good call, but then these threads usually end with me being called a misogynist, anyway.

One female Ripperologist who stands heads above most of us men in the research department is Debra Arif. Sharp eye and mind on her. She just doesn't flaunt it as much as some of us guys do.

Caz, when she pulls her head out of Maybrick's arse, is also a force to be reckoned with. I always considered it a sharp loss to Ripperology that she became so consumed with the diary.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[halomanuk]

I would say this .........................................no comment.

[Robert]

One thing this thread seems to indicate, is that men are more likely to respond to threads about female Ripperologists than the female Ripperologists themselves. Ally is the only one so far. My guess is they're giving us enough rope to hang ourselves.

[halomanuk]

maybe they should have tried this technique in 'the star' in 1888 eh ?
The Ripper definately needed hanging .

[Howard Brown]

Chris:

1) What percentage of serious students of the case (an unfortunate phrase, but I cannot think of a better) are female?

It might depend on what area of Ripperology they are serious about,Chris,just as it would with a man. If they are suspect-oriented, then they are probably equal because suspect-oriented speculation usually has the same result(s). Men,namely male authors,who might be considered part of the so called "serious" cadre that outnumber women 2 to 1 have contributed more to the mythology surrounding the Case than women have....and by more than a mere 2 to 1 ratio at that.

2) Are female students of the case better placed in some ways to study certain aspects of crimes that centrally involve brutal violence against women?

I don't know why they should be in a better position,hence I don't know how... other than this physiological possibility: A man can probably assume the perpetrator's position in the Case perhaps a little more naturally than a woman could... as a female might assume the victim's role slightly easier. That there might be or is a difference on any other aspect of which gender may be seem to potentially play a part in "roles" or aspects is negligible, at least from what I've seen.

3) What insights into the case could a female researcher bring to bear that may differ from those of a male colleague?

I personally think there is no issue of gender Chris. In fact, thats a question best left to a female Ripperologist in my view since its geared towards a female having to answer.

4) Do male researchers of the case ever feel uncomfortable talking about certain aspects of the crimes to women?

Personally,no. Civilian women whom I work with were not squeamish, nor was I,when I asked them to assist in "experiments" like a re-enactment of the 39 Blows to Tabram. None of them are interested in the Case to the extent the women who are involved in the field are either.

[KatBradshaw]

Well I am a girl and I have been looking in to this case for 21 years. I even did my dissertation on it. One thing I have noticed is that when you tell people you are inteserest in the case they seem much more sympathetic to us than men. Most people assume i am not interested in the gory details but in the psychology or the feminist leaning. That may be true. Certianly the men I have known in the past who were interested in the case were given a lot more stick than I was.

[BillieHoliday]

I wouldn't consider myself a true Ripperologist - I've tended to dip in and out of the case over the last 30 years - I'm 45 years old now and first got interested when I was around 17 years old and discovered Knights' The Final Solution (I know, I know). I swallowed it hook, line and sinker.

My level of study is low probably because I've never been hugely concerned about the all important question - Who Was Jack The Ripper? I really am not that interested in knowing who he was - althought any new suspect will obviously catch my attention.

I am more interested in the history of the case - the women's lives, how they felt. The victims fascinate me far more than Jack himself. The lifestyle in the East End, how people lived, the victorian era is something that I have wondered about since I was a child. My sister who is 48 has a huge interest in JT and sometimes we'll sit and talk about JTR and members of the family wander into the room, roll their eyes and ask: "don't you ever get bored of talking about Jack The Ripper?"

No we don't actually!

Anyway, here I will attempt to answer these questions:

1) What percentage of serious students of the case (an unfortunate phrase, but I cannot think of a better) are female?
I don't consider myself a serious student. Compared to some of the people on this site, who tend to be male, I know very little. To a layman I probably would sound very knowledgeable but I'm a bit of a dilletant where JTR is concered.
2) Are female students of the case better placed in some ways to study certain aspects of crimes that centrally involve brutal violence against women?
I don't feel, due to my personal experiences I am better placed at all. I've long been interested in serial killers. I see huge similarities between Jack and the Yorkshire Ripper, and I'm old enough to remember the atmosphere when Sutcliffe was doing his rounds. Maybe what stands out most for me is the feminist angle of that case - ie, police warning women off the streets, giving them a curfew and feminists marching in protest with the tagline 'Women reclaim the night''.

3) What insights into the case could a female researcher bring to bear that may differ from those of a male colleague?
Maybe an obvious answer, but I am surely better placed to understand some of the choices the victims made before their deaths and on the nights of their deaths. I also have personally known Ladies Of The Night as friends, who have given me some insight into how working girls operate and think. As a woman who likes a drink I probably understand better how alcohol will impact on a woman's brain and affect the choices she makes.
4) Do male researchers of the case ever feel uncomfortable talking about certain aspects of the crimes to women?
Oh I do hope not!

[BLUE WIZZARD]

Tom Wescott,

I'm going to get a lot of flak for this, but women are a lot more observant than men, also they can multitask better than men.

Like it or not but men were the hunters with tracking skills, following tracks for miles focused on one thing the prey.

Women had more responsibilities so multitasking is her skill, again believe it or not but women are quicker than men in most situations, sorry about that but the truth is never easy to accept. It took me a while to accept it myself, but the truth is the truth.

Think about it, when was the last time you won an argument with a woman?

I'm not saying this to be funny but men tend to become ridicules and sublime when arguing with woman.

I may have made a lot of enemies on this site, but I stand strong on what I have said.

Hey but we do bring home the game from the hunt.

BW

[Ally]

So I have thought long about answering this topic. Both as to whether I should and if I did, how would I respond. With all the claims of misogyny that this field is prone to, it could be said that even asking if women were "different" in any regards to the study might bring about a charge of sexism, but whatever. Here are my responses.

2) Are female students of the case better placed in some ways to study certain aspects of crimes that centrally involve brutal violence against women?

No. We are no better placed to understand violence against women, than you would be to understand violence against men. Violence is a force of its own, the object of it is inconsequential to a large degree. Yes, the root might be important, if we knew why he did what he did, then the object of the violence might prove to have some interest, but without knowing the cause, the effect cannot be better understood by women than by men.

3) What insights into the case could a female researcher bring to bear that may differ from those of a male colleague?

Nothing actually comes to mind. Now there are some ludicrous theories out there involving torn aprons and menstrual rags that as a woman, I feel completely capable of saying "bollocks" too, but even a man with a bit of logic would be able to say its bollocks, even though he has never personally been in the situation where he has need of a menstrual device.

4) Do male researchers of the case ever feel uncomfortable talking about certain aspects of the crimes to women?

Yes. Just say menstrual and watch them go all schoolboy. Violent mutilations, no problem, a women's period and it's tee hee hee.

[aspallek]

Nothing actually comes to mind. Now there are some ludicrous theories out there involving torn aprons and menstrual rags that as a woman, I feel completely capable of saying "bollocks" too, but even a man with a bit of logic would be able to say its bollocks, even though he has never personally been in the situation where he has need of a menstrual device.

Try having a thrombosed hemorrhoid evacuated.

[Tom_Wescott]

Men win arguments with women all the time...just read any given exchange between Ally and a man.

There's nothing sexist in the questions Chris posed. Sophomoric, one might say, but not sexist. And the answer is OF COURSE there are differences. Men are more logical, women more romantic. That's why all suspect books written by women are about the more 'romantic' suspects. Also, too many women infuse their work with a feminist propaganda which only serves to annoy the reader.

It's funny how no one is ever curious why Ripperologists are damn near without exception WHITE. Yes, I know....Eduardo Zinna...but a rare exception. Name a black Ripperologist. You can't. I don't count the Hughes brothers for obvious reasons.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Nicola]

Men win arguments with women all the time...just read any given exchange between Ally and a man.

There's nothing sexist in the questions Chris posed. Sophomoric, one might say, but not sexist. And the answer is OF COURSE there are differences. Men are more logical, women more romantic. That's why all suspect books written by women are about the more 'romantic' suspects. Also, too many women infuse their work with a feminist propaganda which only serves to annoy the reader.

It's funny how no one is ever curious why Ripperologists are damn near without exception WHITE. Yes, I know....Eduardo Zinna...but a rare exception. Name a black Ripperologist. You can't. I don't count the Hughes brothers for obvious reasons.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hello,Tom

I'm not what you would call a Ripperologist but I have always had an interest in the case. Men and women see things differently for sure,but I don't think either side has an advantage when it comes to viewing the case.


As for the Ripperologist being mostly white,that's true. I'm black and everytime I talk about the case with my friends,I get WTF looks. Now I do get the same from my white friends. But with blacks,the attitude is JTR is European history and has nothing to do with us. Also in my culture,murking about with autopsy pics,discussing wounds with great intestest and such is sometimes seen as looney tunes behavior. The attitude is,unless you work in areas that require this,why do it? Unless,you are,ahem,unwell.


My friend once told me:
A crazy ass white man killed some hookers a hundred years ago. Obviously,his crazy ass is dead. So who cares who he was?


My teacher introduced me to the case in school and I've always found it interesting.I find it fascinating and one of the greatest whodunits of all time.

[BLUE WIZZARD]

Tom,

You said "Men win arguments with women all the time...just read any given exchange between Ally and a man."

Sorry Tom I forgot about Ally, I was talking about SOME women not all women.

What the hay, you almost blew my theory.

Thanks for the enlightment.

BW

[Tom_Wescott]

Nicola,

Your friend is very wise. I wonder sometimes why we do care. That's cool you have an interest in the case. The Ripper mystery transcends continents and language barriers, but doesn't seem to cross the race line. I find that interesting and your input was much appreciated.

Blue Wiz,

I'm glad you caught the joke.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott