Prostitutes: Money or love first?

[Adam Went]

Personally I wouldn't like to be driving in the vicinity of somebody who was on crack or under the influence of alcohol, though I would presume the former would make "better" drivers only because drugs of that nature tend to sharpen the senses whereas alcohol blurs them. Neither are good (alcohol particularly in large, frequent amounts), both can make people very nasty indeed but at the end of the day there is a reason why alcohol is legal and crack isn't - it's the lesser of two evils.

Most people on here would probably enjoy the occasional drink or three (I know I do) but there is a vast difference between that and being an alcoholic. It's the addiction that is the key to it.

As for young people becoming alcoholics, underage drinking has been an epidemic since probably forever. But the government, IMO, made a huge blunder when they increased the tax on "alcopops" (pre-mix drinks) which were the favourite among young people. They are bad enough, like any alcohol, when drunk to excess, but of course when the price was raised on them the young people just started getting their hands on the heavy, top shelf stuff, which actually ended up being cheaper - and that really did throw a spanner into the works of nastiness.

But one can't blame alcohol for all of society's problems these days, much of it is just screwed up in general and has been spiralling that way on a steady basis for some decades now.

Cheers,
Adam.

[tji]

[QUOTE]

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.

No Maria, to become an alcoholic you have to have more than an 'alcoholic gene.'

The way are phrasing it is that everyone is born an alcoholic and that it is then a lottery if you get it or not?!



Tj

[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.

[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]

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?

[tji]

And I was joking about you sneering.

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

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]

[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

[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.

[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

[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.

[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

[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

[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.

[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.