Prostitutes: Money or love first?

[Hunter]

However, it would seem even from her very actions that night that she was intent on something different. She had taken particular care of her appearance, had worked earlier that day and earnt some money, and as we've said, was in a better condition than might be expected that night. Without trying to sound like a romanticist, it might well be that Stride was making a genuine attempt to get part of her life back on track when she headed out that evening. At least it's what I would like to believe.

Although I'd be the first to admit that what I am about to relate is speculation, there are some keys to her past that may bear some clues. Starting with her move to Gothenburg, she alternately worked as a domestic servant and as a prostitute. It is not unlikely that she may have been expected to perform duties other than just 'domestic' while working as a servant. We know that she gave birth to a stillborn girl whose antecedents are unknown. Many young women drifted into prostitution as a result of such experiences which resulted in a drifter's lifestyle because of the stigma attached, disease and a developing taste for alcohol.

I believe Elizabeth learned to use both professions in tandem when the need would arise. If she could, she would seek a client who would take her home or at least, to a motel or other lodging. She was very capable of putting on 'airs' if need be and as a servant learned that tidiness and some respectable appearance was a must to attract a customer who was capable of just a 'knee jerker' in an alley.

Certainly, she accepted the hope for stability in a relationship, but these never seemed to work out; either because of financial trouble, abuse or alcohol... or what I perceive as Elizabeth's own urge- started when she left home at 17- to ramble on occasion; especially when she saw her situation as untenable.

She had the benefit of a well rounded Church education and was intelligent. Each time she seemed at the precipice, she managed to pull herself out by her wit, which included- if need be- to play upon the sympathy of others.

He lowest point in life had to be when she entered the workhouse. For a woman of her character it had to be a very desperate act to become an 'inmate' at such a facility. This episode probably led her to try a steady relationship once more; this time with Michael Kidney, who- unlike Thomas Stride- was much younger than her. But, the revolving door was already in place. With abuse, alcohol and a fierce independence she spent the remaining years living two separate lives with Kidney, at No. 32 'Flowery Dean' and, I think on occasion, with other temporary suitors. Kidney even hinted at that in his deposition at the inquest.

Whether Elizabeth Stride would have, once again, gone back to Kidney or she had finally determined to start a new life... we'll never know. By September 30, 1888 she was getting long in the tooth- at least what teeth she had left. She had been 'rode hard and put up wet' and despite her endeavor to still show some semblance of dignity, her options had probably diminished. Even the fantasy world that I believe she lived in sometimes to escape reality could no longer hide that fact.

I do think that Elizabeth tried to be as resourceful as she could all the way to the end... no matter what her purpose was in Berner Street that night. Her features, her very drab dress and her placement on a dimly lit street at that hour exposed the reality. Perhaps, in her mind, the freshness and color of that rose backed by a maidenhair fern represented hope of some kind.

[Tom_Wescott]

You're trying to make assumptions about Stride on the night of her death based on events which had happened in years past. This isn't fair, nor is it historically accurate. Anybody who looks at the known evidence from that night, both pre and post mortem, can get a pretty good idea of the activities that Liz was undertaking, or lack thereof - whether they know what they are talking about or not. (Says the one who likened alcohol consumption to crack smoking.)

Years past? Years? Like 1888, 1887, 1886, those kinds of years past? As usual, you're not being clear in what you're saying. Yes, anyone who looks at her movements that night will conclude she was drinking and soliciting. That's what she did. Are you now agreeing with me or still disagreeing? And yes, I'd say alcohol and crack are similar. One is legal and more socially acceptable, that's all.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

Hunter is not merely spot on, as usual, but has even managed to reconstruct Stride's past very accurately in a few paragraphs and to analyze her situation based on facts.

There's no doubt at all that Stride had alcohol issues in the past and, like most women of her class, had been a habitual drinker.

What past, Adam? She was an advanced state alcoholic (which is much more than “alcohol issues“) continuously in the last years of her life, maybe with small remisses, during which she incidentally stayed with Michael Kidney at his house. Until she went for another binge.

However, it would seem even from her very actions that night that she was intent on something different. She had taken particular care of her appearance, had worked earlier that day and earnt some money, and as we've said, was in a better condition than might be expected that night. Without trying to sound like a romanticist, it might well be that Stride was making a genuine attempt to get part of her life back on track when she headed out that evening. At least it's what I would like to believe.

Adam, on what do you base you assumption that Stride had taken care of her appearance differently than other times on the night of September 29? You're romanticizing it big time. All that the evidence tells us is that she was resourceful and tried to do the best with what she had (clean clothes, the cachous) as a means of going to work that night, and she spent the night with a lot of different men outside/inside of pubs, trying to make as much money as possible. Unless this is what you mean when you're saying that “Stride was making a genuine attempt to get part of her life back on track that evening“, as in financially. In that case we might be agreeing.

Whatever the case, as we seem to agree on, it's a fair bet from what we know of Stride that evening that she was close to sober - the struggle she put up against her attacker as witnessed by Schwartz would also indicate that she had her faculties about her, unlike other victims.

I think I was the first in this thread to mention that Stride was not as wasted as Nichols and MJK on the night of her death, still, let's not exaggerate the “struggle she alleggedly put up with BS“. Stride had a bad leg and she would not have been able to put up much of a struggle anyway. All she did was fall and scream, “not very loud“.


Alcohol and crack are similar?! I hope you're joking, Tom. Alcoholism is a disease, not a moral issue, one is born an alcoholic, and I happen to know of people (colleagues) who have deeply and decisively contributed to my field while being functional alcoholics and struggling against it for decades. There are TONS of wonderful artists and writers who were alcoholics. Crackheads? Don't think so.

[Adam Went]

Hey all,

Hunter:

While I agree with the general gist of what you're saying once again, I always think it's risky to try and understand the actions of somebody on a particular night based, as before, on events that happened in the past.

We've all done and said things in our lives that we're not proud of - that doesn't mean that we should be, or are judged in the present for those actions. We wouldn't deem that to be fair and so it shouldn't be fair enough for Liz either. For her, much of what she had to do would have been simply to survive from day to day.

Like the other victims, she had a chance earlier in her life to make something better of herself. Like the other victims, she fell down the wrong path and became stuck there - she didn't have the help and resources that people do in 2011 to drag themselves back out of the mire.

Now I don't want this to be taken as me portraying Liz to be some kind of misunderstood angel, because she's definitely not that. She was a habitual drinker, she had domestic issues, and she was also capable of spinning a good yarn - one of the best being the tale about her husband and children on the Princess Alice when it sank in 1878, which was false and used to gain money from the Swedish church.

You allude to the point that she was not getting any younger - and you're right. Liz was nearing the end of the time when she would be able to make any living out of prostitution. Annie Chapman was only a few years older but was already succumbing to age and illness when she died.

The recent split from Michael Kidney, the domestic work, the attention paid to her appearance, her general character that night as described by the witnesses.....everything about it tells me that there was something different in Liz's mind this time, and I think there's nothing wrong with the belief that she was out to put one final effort into raising her position in life. Call me a foolish romanticist if you will, but that's how I read it.

Tom:

Years past? Years? Like 1888, 1887, 1886, those kinds of years past? As usual, you're not being clear in what you're saying. Yes, anyone who looks at her movements that night will conclude she was drinking and soliciting. That's what she did. Are you now agreeing with me or still disagreeing? And yes, I'd say alcohol and crack are similar. One is legal and more socially acceptable, that's all.

I'm talking about Liz's history in its entirety. I never said there wasn't events closer to her death as well, but that doesn't make it any less unreasonable to judge her from September 29/30 based on that. See my response to Hunter.

I agree that she was soliciting, I disagree that she was drinking - at least not any amount of alcohol worth creating a fuss over.

Your statement about the likeness of alcohol and crack show just how much you know about the subject. Says all that needs to be said of the value of your opinion on the matter really.

Maria:

Adam, on what do you base you assumption that Stride had taken care of her appearance differently than other times on the night of September 29? You're romanticizing it big time. All that the evidence tells us is that she was resourceful and tried to do the best with what she had (clean clothes, the cachous) as a means of going to work that night, and she spent the night with a lot of different men outside/inside of pubs, trying to make as much money as possible. Unless this is what you mean when you're saying that “Stride was making a genuine attempt to get part of her life back on track that evening“, as in financially. In that case we might be agreeing.

Her fellow lodgers made special mention of this from the night of her death, therefore that in itself would suggest that it was not something Liz did as a matter of course on any other night she went out. It's evident from their statements alone that she was trying a little harder that night.

And as for getting her life back on track, yes, I am referring to attracting customers so as to help her position financially initially, and, combined with the domestic work here and there, might help her regain some sort of better position for herself.

I've even heard the suggestion that Stride was waiting for a rendezvous with a new partner that evening, having split again from Michael Kidney - can't say I give a lot of credence to this view but it's another one worth adding to the mix.

I think I was the first in this thread to mention that Stride was not as wasted as Nichols and MJK on the night of her death, still, let's not exaggerate the “struggle she alleggedly put up with BS“. Stride had a bad leg and she would not have been able to put up much of a struggle anyway. All she did was fall and scream, “not very loud“.

She did more than some of her fellow victims under the influence managed - and this is a moot point anyway really because I don't feel that BS Man was as likely to be her killer as Pipeman was. She certainly wasn't the only victim to have medical issues at the time either.

I'll just add here that the irony hasn't escaped me that I am arguing for Stride to have been sober, while others are arguing for her to have been drinking/drunk.....whereas in recent times i've argued for Catherine Eddowes to still have been somewhat drunk, while others have scolded me and claimed that she was sober!!!

Can't win....

Cheers,
Adam.

[tji]

Alcohol and crack are similar?! I hope you're joking, Tom. Alcoholism is a disease, not a moral issue, one is born an alcoholic, and I happen to know of people (colleagues) who have deeply and decisively contributed to my field while being functional alcoholics and struggling against it for decades. There are TONS of wonderful artists and writers who were alcoholics. Crackheads? Don't think so.

[/QUOTE]

Erm no Maria, people have a pre-disposition of becoming alcoholics if there parents are alcoholics, males more so than females. around 40-50% chance. This does not mean every person who has alcoholics for parents become alcoholics. Adversely you can become an alcoholic if no-one in your family is. So alcoholism isn't just genetic it is also environmental.

The studies show the same for drugs, so yes, they are the same. Being a drug addict is just as hard as being an alcoholic you cannot sympathise with one and sneer at another.

Tracy

[tji]

Hi Adam

I'll just add here that the irony hasn't escaped me that I am arguing for Stride to have been sober, while others are arguing for her to have been drinking/drunk.....whereas in recent times i've argued for Catherine Eddowes to still have been somewhat drunk, while others have scolded me and claimed that she was sober!!!

I think the famous Kenneth Williams 'Infamy' quote works well here

I don't see it an impossibility for her to stay sober for a few hours - if she felt it was better for her to do so, as with a lot of if people who drink on a regular basis, they can abstain for a time if needed. (In this case we are only looking at hours) We know she would have had to stay sober (at least enough to fool employers) while she worked, so she can't have been too far gone not to have some control over her drinking.

Tj

[Adam Went]

Hey Tracy,

Definitely agree with you about Liz. It's quite possible she'd had one or two drinks earlier in the night but from all the information we can gather about her from that night, and even from the post-mortem, she had not been drinking herself to excess as some of her fellow victims had. It certainly wasn't going to be another bender.

Alcoholism in families is a bit of a taboo subject, it's not the sort of thing most people would discuss at the family Christmas dinner table....

Cheers,
Adam.

[Tom_Wescott]

The studies show the same for drugs, so yes, they are the same. Being a drug addict is just as hard as being an alcoholic you cannot sympathise with one and sneer at another.

While I think Teej's idea of sneering at both drug addicts and alcoholics has merit, let me point out the rarely mentioned fact that crack heads are better drivers.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

Talking about drug addicts, we were watching Gus van Sant's Drugstore Cowboy on DVD earlier tonight, and what hit me was when one of the characters (Max Perlich) used the expression “What's up, pard?“. Get it? As in The Ripper's pard. I've watched this movie dozens of times and never yet noticed this expression. Actually it's the first time I've ever heard this expression spoken in American English.

[tji]

[QUOTE]

While I think Teej's idea of sneering at both drug addicts and alcoholicshas merit.........,

Woah Tom gotta stop you there sorry, I am not the one sneering, I am pointing out Maria's mistakes and disagreeing with the fact that she seems to think it is ok to be an alcoholic but looks down her nose at drug addicts - stating they are nothing alike.

(I am not even touching on how you know crack heads are better drivers as I don't play golf )

tj

[Tom_Wescott]

I personally don't think it's okay to be either, unless you're responsible and functioning (i.e. hold a job, don't drive intoxicated, etc.). And as you pointed out, no one is born an alcoholic, etc. Adults need to stop excusing their bad behavior and start taking responsibility for it. I fully understand why children no longer respect adults or take them seriously.

And I was joking about you sneering.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[tji]

And I was joking about you sneering.

Well that's ok then - you are back on my Christmas card list......

Tj

[mariab]

And as you pointed out, no one is born an alcoholic, etc.

OF COURSE one is born an alcoholic, as in, unable to stop at just one glass of alcohol due to genetics, and forced to a lifelong abstinence pertaining to alcohol. As Adam correctly pointed out, alcoholism runs in families, and it's well-known that it's a lottery, as in some people get it, some not. The same as in mental diseases, which also run in families. I hope Tom does not insinuate that it depends on “strength of character“ if someone has it or not. The real test of strength of character is what one does when they realize they have it, which generally takes years.

And did you see what I quoted about “pard“ in my post #54?

[Tom_Wescott]

Yes, I saw that. I think Drugstore Cowboy was partially filmed in Tulsa, albeit before I lived here.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

I think Drugstore Cowboy was partially filmed in Tulsa, albeit before I lived here.

Really? Cuz it very much looks like Portland, Oregon (where I've been, and pretty often), the opening scene shows the Willamette river and even Mount Hood in the backyard, though these are helicopter takes which might have been added later. And the forrest where they dump the body looks very much like the American Northwest. The DVD says something about an LA unit. It was filmed in 1988/89.
It's a really neat movie, my favorite by Gus van Sant. And nice music, particularly the early ska song The Israelites.