Victim Conversation (off-topic moved)

[halomanuk]

Fine,if that is your genuine feelings and you have explained yourself to me then i accept that.

[Brenda]

I took it as Ally was just being sarcastic, no bad intent.

Now if you will excuse me, I have to go stuff my kids with burgers and go cruise aimlessly up and down the highways.

[Ally]

So given the overall irony of this situation, I am guessing it's also true that Brenda is in fact a McDonalds stuffing, gas guzzling, idiot box for a babysitter crap American mother.

Brenda, you should be ashamed.


Editing in again: Dammit Brenda you beat me to it!

[Jeff Leahy]

Well yes it is evidence of social justice of the period. But not a lot more. Everything else is your own twisted interpretation. Your romantic notion of what you believe to be the case from a 21st century perspective.

You see Neal Sheldon is a brilliant historian who clearly understands that a good historian does research into people lives and their social history and try’s to give incite from a learn perspective.

Where as you are just a sad old American half wit with an axe to grind.

To accuse Catherine Eddowes of being a ‘bad mother’ based on what little is actually known is just blatant stupidity. Her life must be viewed as a whole and in context.

Yes she was no Angel. But she was no demon either.

Clearly I said if you condemn her in this way (ie with a sweeping brush) then you must condemn everyone in this way, as almost no one (especially the mothers of America) is without guilt of some kind.

So why you choose your negative fantasy of events. I wonder about a women who clearly looked after her children why they grew up with a man who beat her black and blue, and didn’t leave them until they were almost old enough to fend for themselves. Indeed the grown up daughter clearly wanted her at the birth of her first child.

From a perspective what she did may have taken considerable courage..

However I do not know. Nobody knows because there is not enough surviving record to be certain…In the same way there is not enough record to condemn this woman as a BAD MOTHERS. There is NO record of Catherine Eddowes changing metaphorical nappies.

Stating the JtR victims were Bad Mothers is Ally Ryder opinion NOT historical fact.

Clearly my attack on the Mothers of America was meant as an Ironic mirror of your own poorly thought out historical reasoning and historical romanticism.

Pirate

[babybird67]

that's ok Ally

i saw it in context afterwards and no offence taken, not that i took it (offence)if you HAD meant it personally.

I'm ill...i can't help it. More than anyone can imagine i wish i had my life back and could go to work and do the things healthy people can do. Sadly, one has to play the hand one is dealt, and my hand is made up of a two, a four and a couple of jokers i think! Still, as the Government is spending the grand amount of absolutely nothing on research into my illness, i am sure i can look forward to a cure someday soon...or is that never?

Bloody politicians!

[Ally]

And you know just to clarify, I think disability for people who are genuinely ill is a fine use of the welfare system. It's not these cases I was referring to any way. It was more like these:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/3885661/Britains-generous-welfare-system-triggered-baby-boom.html

[Jeff Leahy]

Stop trying to change the subject. This thread is now about the JtR victims. Stay on topic

[Ally]

There's no reason to stay on topic until someone worthy of debating comes along. Your illogic and constant tangents into la la land, make you a very boring and irrational debate partner. I'll wait til Paul gives you some better ammo and rational points before continuing further.

[babybird67]

no problem Ally

most of my life was a three tier system: working/studying/mothering. Maybe i just burnt out!

washing machine has just arrived, just as the weather has turned bad!

[Jeff Leahy]

There's no reason to stay on topic until someone worthy of debating comes along. Your illogic and constant tangents into la la land, make you a very boring and irrational debate partner. I'll wait til Paul gives you some better ammo and rational points before continuing further.

What, like the social attitude to men beating there wives in 1888.

Is this approved or condemned by 'Mothers of America'?

Did kate bring the beatings on herself? was she asking for it?

And what did the neighbours think? were the boys also free from such brutality?

Clearly I know Paul's opinion. I was wondering if you could enlighten us with some period incite on the matter.

Pirate

[Tom_Wescott]

Pirate,

I'm confused. If you're angry at Ally, then why do you keep complimenting her by calling her an 'American'? It's no secret everyone wants to be an American. But just because you feel Americans are superior, doesn't make it so. We're all equal in God's eyes.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Jeff Leahy]

Tom, I am clearly not critisising any group of people. I wish people to be considered as individuals. I am attempting to demonstrate through ironic humour that Ally’s sweeping condemnation of the JtR‘victims’ as ‘Bad Mothers’ is an idiotic statement and gross generalization much as it would be if you condemned all the mothers in American of being bad mothers because one mother chooses to stuff her child with McDonalds burgers…

I also like the comical notion of comparing Kate Eddowes options with twenty first century thinking….Can we condemn kate for driving a gas guzzling car?

No we cant because Kate must be seen in her time and period context…

As must of course the ‘Mothers of America’

My annoyance with Ally’s position is that she is trying to condemn these women through modern spectacles…And now she’s gone off into some bizarre attack on women who draw benefits?

Well there were no benefits or rights for Kate, just a good hiding (ironic intent)

Pirate

[Ally]

Pirate,

You are making a sweeping generalizion about millions of women. I am talking about five women and of these women, everyone who was a mother was a BAD mother. I notice you are completely overlooking the other two mothers in this group Annie and Polly. Want to know why? Because Polly walked out on her family again and again finally abandoning them for good in 81. And Annie dove into the bottle and abandoned her surviving daughter for others to take care of.

Three mothers:

Kate: daughter moves to have nothing to do with her. Sons taken because of her drinking.
Annie: drunk, abandons her children.
Polly: Drunk, abandons her children several times.

Those aren't generalities. Three mothers. Three bad mothers.

[Jeff Leahy]

Pirate,
You are making a sweeping generalizion about millions of women.

No I was using ironic humour

I am talking about five women

Yes I guessed you would be using the Andrew Cook counting system.

Emma Smith mother of two grown up children.

Martha Tabram mother of two grown up children

Rose Mylett mother of at least one girl.

and of these women, everyone who was a mother was a BAD mother.

No they were NOT. This is an interpretion from a twenty first century perspective. You have no idea what sort of mothers these women made. For a start they had no epidurrels in 1888.

You are judging them by modern standards and condeming them without any historical source about there abilities as mothers. Where are your pictures of these women failing to change nappies? sorry dippers?

I notice you are completely overlooking the other two mothers in this group Annie and Polly. Want to know why? Because Polly walked out on her family again and again finally abandoning them for good in 81. And Annie dove into the bottle and abandoned her surviving daughter for others to take care of.

Three mothers:

Kate: daughter moves to have nothing to do with her. Sons taken because of her drinking.
Annie: drunk, abandons her children.
Polly: Drunk, abandons her children several times.

Those aren't generalities. Three mothers. Three bad mothers.

Annie Chapman was clearly an alcoholic and from what can be gleaned her old man doesn't seem that bad. But to condemn her out right as a bad mother without more detail information seems unfair. Annie actually had a long period of being sobber and may have had periods of being a very good mother...we just do not know.

Now are you going to answer the question about Kates beatings or are you going to wriggle?

Pirate

[Ally]

Yes I am talking about the canonical five since the topic of conversation is how the canonical five are viewed as saints and not as actual people merely because they were the victims of Jack the Ripper. SO the important factor there would be "victims of jack the Ripper" and the others would not be of importance. But if you want to expand on the topic to every woman in the east end who was murdered, sure let's get to those women that you mentioned:

MArtha Tabram: ""The marriage ended in 1875. Henry left due to Martha's heavy drinking. He gave her an allowance of twelve shillings per week for three years but reduced it to 2s 6d due to her pestering him in the streets for money. She had a warrant taken out against him and had him locked up. He had also learned that she was living with another man. At this time he refused to support her any further.""

So at the time of her marriage dissolving she had children aged 3 and 5 and there is absolutely no mention of these children throughout the rest of the accounts of her life. There were no children living with her in any of the places where she resided or mentioned by any of the men she cohabitated with from then on out. Conclusion? Family abandoned due to her incessant drinking. Yet another mother, choosing the bottle of her babies.

Four for Four at this point.


Emma Smith: ""Emma claimed to have both a son and a daughter living somewhere in the area of Finsbury Park, and was often heard to say that they should do something to help her situation. She had been a prostitute for some time now, at least since she last saw her husband (she claimed to have been a widow, but also claimed she left her husband in 1877). Emma was also somewhat of a belligerent woman, often seen with a black eye and other various cuts and bruises as a result of many a drunken brawl.""

So Emma's only comments about her two grown children was that they should be helping her out of her situation. She was apparently such a wonderful mother that her children would rather leave her to drunken prostitution than help her out. A fabulous example of motherhood, you are right.


Rose Mylett: A woman who was so taken with drink that she was called Drunken Lizzie and who had a daughter who did not live with her and who was 8 years old at the time of her mother's death.

Have you noticed a common thread here? Drunk women, who abandon their families and take to prostitution to support their drinking. You know if you are going to try and put up examples of motherhood to support your argument you really ought to make sure the examples are those of GOOD parents if you are arguing that I am making a generalization that isn't supported by fact, because all you just did, was prove my point. Thanks.

As for whether or not Kate was beaten by her husband or not, what actual relevance does it have to her being a crap mother? She was a crap mother. I don't care if her husband beat her, one has nothing to do with the other.