Undergarments

[Phil Carter]

Hello Mike,

Many thanks!

best wishes

Phil

[Phil Carter]

Corey,

Have a look at what Eddowes carried around. Hardly items that "makes things easier"..she was carrying half a shop!

Also, these women were NOT full time Prostitutes all... Eddowes, Stride for example.

It is NOT normal for a woman to NOT posess undergarments, especially in one's own home (Kelly), in cold November (Kelly) when one is def of the age to have menstruation periods (Kelly and others)

Look at the items in Kelly's room. Nothing, Corey, nothing that shows an alternative change of garments at all! Two items of CHILDREN'S clothing, one male, one female... ummm.. guess what it tells me about Kelly's home? You mean to say that this woman walked around day after day, week after week, month after month, with NO CLOTHES to change into? She would have stank to high heaven!

best wishes

Phil

Nothing for her week of menstruation. No extra squares of material, nothing.

[Mike Covell]

From the victim's section of this site,

Nichols
Flannel drawers
Chapman
No mention
Stride
No mention
Eddowes
Specifically mentions no undergarments
Kelly
No mention

[corey123]

Phil,

I dunno how much undergarments cost in 1888, so I bet the reason to them having NO undergarments would be of these two.

1)Poor.
2)didn't use them because it would be easier to work as a prostitute without them.

I would think the reason would be No.2.

Yours truly

[Phil Carter]

Exactly Corey...EXACTLY!

best wishes

Phil

[corey123]

Phil,

Am I mistaken or did some of the C5 have no undergarments whatsoever?

Yours truly

[Phil Carter]

All,

I raise a point I would CERTAINLY like to see discussed.

I would find it AMAZING that any woman would only have ONE pair of undergarments. However poor they were. Because of menstruation.

How many pairs of undergarments did MJK own? How many were found amongst her belongings? In her "home"?


best wishes

Phil