The Unfortunates

[protohistorian]

Plenty of women called "A. Tart", though...

[ATTACH]4488[/ATTACH]

(From 1881 Census)

That's funny, i don't care who you are!

[Robert]

Gareth, at one of the schools near Valentine's, in either 81 or 91, some of the boys had got the enumerator to write down their nicknames - so you get things like "X the Terrible" or "Y the Awful".

[Stephen Thomas]

Plenty of women called "A. Tart", though...

Sam (and Robert)

If you don't have this book, may I recommend it.

A tenner cannot be better spent.

[m_w_r]

Hi Stephen -

I've seen this book in the shops and glanced through it, and, to be fair, it's one joke performed hundreds of times, but, on the other hand, I remember seeing on one page, a daughter born to the Teater family.

Ann Teater.

Which is worth a tenner on its own.

Regards,

Mark

[perrymason]

Hi again,

Just a quick note for Caz.....I dont think you get me, but thats ok. It does bother me a bit when an altruistic gesture is seen as somehow asserting some perceived superiority...all I can say is that is not the case at all. It does bug me when I see the "all whores whore all the time" based arguments...particularly in Kelly's case. When at the bottom of the ladder, you do whats needed to stay on it at all, once you have a foothold on a rung, the perspective on life changes. When some of these women were desperate to have a place to sleep, or some booze to stave off the shakes, or some lukewarn soup somewhere, they did what the must do. Of all the women plying their trade in that manner during those years, how many would have resorted to the work had they a working husband or a job themselves.

Desperate times call for desperate measures, no doubt.... but when fed, and drunk if that be their thing, and with a dry warm place to lay down, they become regular, content people for a time. Thats my position on Mary Kelly that night.

And I find it difficult to suggest that without having someone "remind" me that she is after all, a "street whore".

On you and I....I have no inferiority or superiority issues...you can be a pain in the a** to me at times, and I to you. I still like you though, and enjoy your posts...for the most part.

Cheers Caz.

[Robert]

HUGH ARSE Pedigree
Male


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Event(s):
Birth:
Christening: 11 NOV 1701 Saint Mary Steps, Exeter, Devon, England

Death:
Burial:

But no middle initial G.

[Sam Flynn]

Sam (and Robert)

If you don't have this book, may I recommend it.

A tenner cannot be better spent.

[ATTACH]4489[/ATTACH]

I can well believe it, Stephen. Off to Amazon I go...

PS: Funniest names I've found in the Census were "Ebenezer Minge" and "Wallace Twatt". I kid you not.

Meanwhile, back at the thread...

[caz]

Hi again,

Just a quick note for Caz.....I dont think you get me, but thats ok. It does bother me a bit when an altruistic gesture is seen as somehow asserting some perceived superiority...all I can say is that is not the case at all. It does bug me when I see the "all whores whore all the time" based arguments...particularly in Kelly's case. When at the bottom of the ladder, you do whats needed to stay on it at all, once you have a foothold on a rung, the perspective on life changes. When some of these women were desperate to have a place to sleep, or some booze to stave off the shakes, or some lukewarn soup somewhere, they did what the must do. Of all the women plying their trade in that manner during those years, how many would have resorted to the work had they a working husband or a job themselves.

Desperate times call for desperate measures, no doubt.... but when fed, and drunk if that be their thing, and with a dry warm place to lay down, they become regular, content people for a time. Thats my position on Mary Kelly that night.

And I find it difficult to suggest that without having someone "remind" me that she is after all, a "street whore".

On you and I....I have no inferiority or superiority issues...you can be a pain in the a** to me at times, and I to you. I still like you though, and enjoy your posts...for the most part.

Cheers Caz.

Hi Perry,

Well you obviously keep missing one of my points, which is to ask again where your 'altruistic gesture' leaves any victim who was soliciting when she met her killer?

Why not start another thread, and another, to show how wonderful you are for wanting us all to see the victims as angels who would sooner use a broken kettle to wash clothes all day in a tiny room, even if a man was offering her the same or more cash for a few minutes of her company? How do you think society much further up the ladder worked in those days? Most wives were 'bought' by men who didn't expect them - or want them - to do anything for their keep except lie down, think of England and produce a football team. What altruistic gestures can you make for them?

It won't help find Mary's killer, whether he was the same man who had recently been attacking unfortunates in the street, or a lover who was fed up with his underpants coming out of her laundry grey and with the skiddies still there.

Incidentally, do you think Mary earned any money at all during her last 24 hours? If so, how and what did she spend it all on, assuming she had nothing left by the time her killer struck? What was she going to do for breakfast? Go without?

Love,

Skid Marx & Chris Peacock
XXX

[perrymason]

Hello Caz,


Well apparently Ive been misreading you, because thats a post full of petty little snips, isnt it? Its only to you that I need to continually defend my support of treating these women as women first, not whores, ....why is that?

Hi Perry,

Well you obviously keep missing one of my points, which is to ask again where your 'altruistic gesture' leaves any victim who was soliciting when she met her killer?

By pointing out that not all women were forced to solicit to have a bed and apparently get drunk and eat a meal, so the ones that did were likely compelled to do so. I dont see prostitution as the choice of occupation for the roughly 30,000 that were involved in some capacity.

Why not start another thread, and another, to show how wonderful you are for wanting us all to see the victims as angels who would sooner use a broken kettle to wash clothes all day in a tiny room, even if a man was offering her the same or more cash for a few minutes of her company?

Revealing comments....so its about the easiest way to make money then? Or how to make it faster? Never desperation...just a business decision is it...I see. First setting all their possible personal moralities aside Id imagine.

How do you think society much further up the ladder worked in those days? Most wives were 'bought' by men who didn't expect them - or want them - to do anything for their keep except lie down, think of England and produce a football team. What altruistic gestures can you make for them?

You might open a whole new train of thought here....because "whoring" oneself is open to interpretation isnt it?

It won't help find Mary's killer, whether he was the same man who had recently been attacking unfortunates in the street, or a lover who was fed up with his underpants coming out of her laundry grey and with the skiddies still there.

I of course disagree,... because its you and the vanguard that just loves the irony of Mary going out again unseen or heard when she was safe indoors, just so she can deliver herself to his clutches. Cause we agree he picks them up while they are supposedly out soliciting, right? If Mary never left her room there are a myriad of possibilities that do not include any Ripper, and some that include a Ripper that was known by Mary. The murder happens before the mutilations...so using the end results as your measure for whether Jack did this relegates the attack and the murder itself to erroneous information. If you think thats unimportant in terms of the murder investigation thats up to you.

Incidentally, do you think Mary earned any money at all during her last 24 hours? If so, how and what did she spend it all on, assuming she had nothing left by the time her killer struck? What was she going to do for breakfast? Go without?

Not sure why I am answering this, but in any event, I believe based on the following evidence....Mary and Maria spent all Thursday afternoon in her room, Maria has client laundry with her, Maria said she gave Mary a few coins, the kettle has been heated for long periods possibly at high heat recently, Mary has a water pump outside in the alcove, Mary has a tin bath visible in crime scene photos, Maria is still there as late as 7 that night, small courtyards like Millers Court could often be seen strung with clotheslines.......I believe its quite possible the girls did Maria's clients laundry that day, drying the clothing faster indoors with the heat, and folding the items that were dry enough. I think the reason Maria left them there may be because it was dark and maybe lightly raining when she left and she didnt want to get the clothes soiled taking them home. Since she was given a mere pittance by Maria, she could not have gotten drunk and fed with that money. The fact she comes home drunk and possibly fed already should indicate she found a cash source, nothing more.

I happen to feel its disrepectful and unwarranted to suggest that these women or most single/divorced/widowed women of the period took prostitution as their preferred occupation to any other means of making even lesser money. I would think selling ones body was a difficult act for many of the women then....but when its that or die,.. that to me is an Unfortunate.

Regards Caz.

[Shelley]

Hello Caz,


Well apparently Ive been misreading you, because thats a post full of petty little snips, isnt it? Its only to you that I need to continually defend my support of treating these women as women first, not whores, ....why is that?



I happen to feel its disrepectful and unwarranted to suggest that these women or most single/divorced/widowed women of the period took prostitution as their preferred occupation to any other means of making even lesser money. I would think selling ones body was a difficult act for many of the women then....but when its that or die,.. that to me is an Unfortunate.

Regards Caz.

Hi Perrymason,
I have to agree with Michael here, it was a difficult decision for all women concerned and only a last resort of surviving for many an unfortunate. However, let's not just estimate that these women took a decision by a last choice in order to survive, many and especially of the younger women included in this category of ' unfortunate ' were more than likely forced/coierced into prostitution either by a singular criminally minded man, or a member of a gang. It has also been noted that prostitutes that had children themselves, often thier daughters would follow into this category of ' unfortunate ' as well, and who can escape the bonds of what you are born into? It has been an age old classification within Britain, and to some extent when you see British astocracy and how they function, it still is.

[BLUE WIZZARD]

caz,

I for one happen to agree with Michael, his sensitivity for the Unfortunates of Whitechapel, These woman had a difficult time trying to survive on the streets, and prostitution was a way to survive, the problem with those whom do not have to struggle with day to day survival as they did will never know what it was like, I agree with Michael they were human beings and should be respected as such, derogatory labeling such as whores is not being respectful.
And a site such as this one with members trying to solve the unsolvable case,
Should not victimize the Unfortunates more than they have already been victimized, the women of whitechapel saw themselves as Unfortunates because they did not want to be labeled as prostitutes or Whores, because it was disrespectful, why do we feel we should sit in judgment of them? Is prostitution a crime that should have been dealt with by the likes of Jack? And the woman judged by the likes of us? Victimology is a study of why these women were victims of Jack, not so we could be smug and judgmental of their lives.

BW


BW

[caz]

I give up.

Just got back to this thread and what do I see? Three posters totally missing my original point instead of just the one.

Perry was the one casting aspersions on women who turned to prostitution by trying to imply that certain Whitechapel murder victims were 'better' than that. I found this distasteful because it implied that any victim who was soliciting when she encountered her killer must have been somehow 'worse' than any who wasn't.

I was making no judgements at all, no moral comparisons between a Mary selling herself three times over and still not using her earnings to pay for a bed, and another Mary doing a hard day's laundry before inviting a friend back and not having a penny towards the back rent. I was trying - and failing - to make Perry see that all the women would deserve equal sympathy regardless of how they were surviving right up until their final moments. It seemed like he was operating on a sliding scale of sympathy, whereby the most should be reserved for a genuine laundress, with the least needed for a "laundress". Why is it more laudable to see Mary as the former, as if being a "laundress" would make her any less deserving of our sympathy?

I am at a loss to explain this any more clearly.

I'm just clinging on to the hope that more people who were reading this thread understood where I was coming from than the three who responded, who clearly had no idea and thought I was 'down on' unfortunates, when nothing could be further from the truth.

Love,

Caz
X

[halomanuk]

To go back to the original point in this thread the 'unfortunates' was just a name given to women who were on the streets being prostitutes,it was never given a set graphic definition from what i have always seen,and was just a general term.
You were a prostitute,you were an 'unfortunate'..

[caz]

Indeed. And a rose by any other name smells as sweet. But some people are uncomfortable with labels that they think give a dog a bad name.

Jack was the only one who had a bad name and deserved to be hanged.

Love,

Caz
X

[halomanuk]

Hiya to you Caz,and thanks for my Birthday wish earlier by the way,i did see it but couldn't respond at the time .

The way i look at it,all the victims linked with JtR and indeed many others are just 'VERY unfortunates'.
Everyone knew the name,just society didn't do much to help them - the way of life circa 1888.