A Petticoat Parley: Women in Ripperology

[PaulB]

I am in no way encouraging you to leave the field especially as a result of the machinations of HR but I would love to read one of your westerns, should you write one! Make it all gritty and dark and you will have a fan for life in me. I think you would be great at it I reckon.

Ah, there are a couple of problems with that. I can't write fiction and I don't know a lot about the real Wild West. The latter hasn't been a problem for some western writers, but the former is a bit of an obstacle.

[Losmandris]

I know where it will end for me, packing in Ripper studies altogether, which looks an increasingly attractive possibility. I'm afraid I see 'Jack the Ripper' as a legitimate subject for study, and it would be horrible to see it said in serious history books that the police routinely branded homeless and destitute women prostitutes, just on the say-so of Hallie Rubenhold. But you're probably right and the good story will prevail, and I'll write westerns... I used to read a lot of Louis L'Amour once upon a time.

I am in no way encouraging you to leave the field especially as a result of the machinations of HR but I would love to read one of your westerns, should you write one! Make it all gritty and dark and you will have a fan for life in me. I think you would be great at it I reckon.

[PaulB]

Thank you, Andrew. I appreciate that. I actually have no immediate plans to leave Ripper studies. This thread is about what I thought was a particularly professional panel discussion in which time was given to The Five, or rather the impression the book, the author, and the author's considerable number of followers give of Ripperology as largely misogynists glorifying the Ripper and violence against women. We bitch among ourselves, but nobody hears our voices because we are discounted. The book's praises are loudly sung over on Twitter, especially by a large number of teachers and academics, even a serious suggestion made to alter a school text book to fit with Rubenhold's narrative, To the best of my knowledge, not one of those people has checked out the concerns of Ripperologists. Not one. It seems they don't attach importance to what we say. That's what concerns me. I don't think 'Jack the Ripper' is all about the identity of the murderer, I think it is a subject for legitimate historical study: the time, the place, the people, and the whys and wherefores. There seems to be very little point in investing time, effort and money into researching the subject, if all that's going to happen is that we're ignored, or have some author scour the websites and take and publish the fruits of all that effort without acknowledgement. Or in the case of Rubenhold, take the information Ripperologists found and imply that it's her research and that she's giving the voice back to the victims, who we have otherwise treated as little more than cardboard cutouts. If that is what happens, then that's when I shall quit Ripper studies. That's what I meant, I think. I suppose I kind of see historical Ripperology drifting aimlessly down the Swanny and nobody is doing anything about it. Or maybe they are and I'm not seeing it. Or maybe I'm just depressed, having realised that I have reach the age when those quick cremation ads on daytime telly are targeted at me. That's very sobering that is.

[AndrewL]

At the risk of sounding obsequious, Paul, please don’t leave Ripper studies! You are needed as much as ever.

[PaulB]

People who are interested in the case and actually read the inquests and newspaper reports will know otherwise. There will always be the ill-informed.With a big caveat that this was in 1888, with scant info, this case will be "solved". So there is more to the "story".

The question is whether the ill-informed will outnumber the informed. We're talking about Rubenhold's stuff being uncritically accepted, finding its way into mainstream history books, and being taught in schools. We shouldn't be complacent about the already muddied waters of Ripper history being muddied further.

[Varqm]

I know where it will end for me, packing in Ripper studies altogether, which looks an increasingly attractive possibility. I'm afraid I see 'Jack the Ripper' as a legitimate subject for study, and it would be horrible to see it said in serious history books that the police routinely branded homeless and destitute women prostitutes, just on the say-so of Hallie Rubenhold. But you're probably right and the good story will prevail, and I'll write westerns... I used to read a lot of Louis L'Amour once upon a time.

People who are interested in the case and actually read the inquests and newspaper reports will know otherwise. There will always be the ill-informed.With a big caveat that this was in 1888, with scant info, this case will be "solved". So there is more to the "story".

[Varqm]

As I have mentioned before. in the eyes of many a good story outweighs the facts. It is really a sad state of affairs. Makes you wonder where it will actually end?

The influence of TV, movies ,media is too much, not anytime soon. Like I cannot believe Qanon worked.

[PaulB]

As I have mentioned before. in the eyes of many a good story outweighs the facts. It is really a sad state of affairs. Makes you wonder where it will actually end?

I know where it will end for me, packing in Ripper studies altogether, which looks an increasingly attractive possibility. I'm afraid I see 'Jack the Ripper' as a legitimate subject for study, and it would be horrible to see it said in serious history books that the police routinely branded homeless and destitute women prostitutes, just on the say-so of Hallie Rubenhold. But you're probably right and the good story will prevail, and I'll write westerns... I used to read a lot of Louis L'Amour once upon a time.

[Losmandris]

As I have mentioned before. in the eyes of many a good story outweighs the facts. It is really a sad state of affairs. Makes you wonder where it will actually end?

[PaulB]

Don't be ridiculous. He's with the media. He doesn't have to actually verify the facts on anything before jumping to a conclusion and putting it before the public. We've left that world behind.

Some people in the media still care about the facts. Dr Matthew Sweet evidently isn't one of them, but there are some poor souls out there who can still recall more enlightened times when the truth sort of mattered. Or at least I hope so.

[Ally]

Like Dr. Matthew Sweet in front of an audience of 41,000 Twitter followers telling me I should delete what I wrote without first determining if it was true or not.
Fun times.

JM

Don't be ridiculous. He's with the media. He doesn't have to actually verify the facts on anything before jumping to a conclusion and putting it before the public. We've left that world behind.

[jmenges]

Like Dr. Matthew Sweet in front of an audience of 41,000 Twitter followers telling me I should delete what I wrote without first determining if it was true or not.
Fun times.

JM

[PaulB]

You were expecting a normal, reasonable, reasoned reaction Paul but what we got was reaction from people who were immediately on board with the agenda. They had no desire to scratch beneath the surface and do a bit of digging. They had a ‘cause’ they had a a ‘heroine’ and they had ‘the enemy.’ They didn’t want anyone disturbing the narrative so silence the enemy, endlessly praise the heroine and demonise the enemy.

They couldn’t silence the panel though.

Maybe I did expect a reasoned and reasonable reaction, although I think I have been around Ripperology long enough not be so naive, and the initial behaviour of Hallie Rubenhold strongly suggested that I shouldn't be surprised by anything to which she resorted. But it's not her camp followers that concern me, but the people who don't share the 'cause' and still don't question what they read.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I know. It's just me. I honestly expected these people to have respect for the truth, that they'd at the very least listen to what Ripperologists had to say and correct our wayward thinking, if it was wayward. I suppose I'm just disappointed in their closed-mindedness.

You were expecting a normal, reasonable, reasoned reaction Paul but what we got was reaction from people who were immediately on board with the agenda. They had no desire to scratch beneath the surface and do a bit of digging. They had a ‘cause’ they had a a ‘heroine’ and they had ‘the enemy.’ They didn’t want anyone disturbing the narrative so silence the enemy, endlessly praise the heroine and demonise the enemy.

They couldn’t silence the panel though.

[Varqm]

I know. It's just me. I honestly expected these people to have respect for the truth, that they'd at the very least listen to what Ripperologists had to say and correct our wayward thinking, if it was wayward. I suppose I'm just disappointed in their closed-mindedness.

Got you. It would have been a good, if sensible, discussion. It helped participating in ripper blogs where things are discussed right down to the bones.