Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

the victims werent prostitutes

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Ginger View Post
    Jack spent probably only a few hours out of his entire life killing and mutilating women. Would anyone argue that "murderer" would be an inappropriate way to describe him because his life wasn't confined only to murder?
    Good way of putting it.We are only interested in what they were doing when killed.Not the entire lifetime.

    ---
    Clearly the first human laws (way older and already established) spawned organized religion's morality - from which it's writers only copied/stole,ex. you cannot kill,rob,steal (forced, otherwise people run back to the hills,no towns).
    M. Pacana

    Comment


    • Ginger,

      The omly arguement I can give,is that Murderer is likely to remain a description far into the future,while prostitute is a description that is slowly being replaced by sex worker,and the industry,as a whole legitimised.How that reflects back into the past remains to be seen.

      Comment


      • How long before Ďmurdererí gets replaced with Ďpopulation reducer?í
        Regards

        Herlock






        "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Varqm View Post
          Good way of putting it.We are only interested in what they were doing when killed.Not the entire lifetime.

          ---
          Actually, we are interested in the entire lifetime of the victims - or some of us are. For most people 'Jack the Ripper' is the mystery of the murderer's identity and the victims are of interest only for the clues they provide. But 'Jack the Ripper' is also a historical event and everything associated with it is of interest. And 'Jack the Ripper' is also a huge international phenomena that far, far exceeds the mystery of who he was, and the study of that, too, embraces everything that can be known about the events that created it.

          But you are right, of course, that as far as Rubenhold's argument is concerned, it is what they were doing when they went with their murderer to the places where their bodies were found. Nobody can now know that, but the locations suggest prostitution and all but Eddowes are known to have prostituted themselves and may have been actively doing so up to and including when they were murdered.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by PaulB View Post
            Actually, we are interested in the entire lifetime of the victims - or some of us are. For most people 'Jack the Ripper' is the mystery of the murderer's identity and the victims are of interest only for the clues they provide. But 'Jack the Ripper' is also a historical event and everything associated with it is of interest. And 'Jack the Ripper' is also a huge international phenomena that far, far exceeds the mystery of who he was, and the study of that, too, embraces everything that can be known about the events that created it.

            But you are right, of course, that as far as Rubenhold's argument is concerned, it is what they were doing when they went with their murderer to the places where their bodies were found. Nobody can now know that, but the locations suggest prostitution and all but Eddowes are known to have prostituted themselves and may have been actively doing so up to and including when they were murdered.
            Point taken.We all read about the victims or contemporary people,just the inquest alone covered a lot,for ex. Stride.My post was a reply to a post.What I was saying was the labeling of "prostitutes" covered what they were doing when lured into their murders.The label did not pertain to their entire lifetime.When they were with their sisters or friends,or sweeping the floor can you call them prostitutes? Kindof this is a "perceiving" problem,one stroke covers all or in shorter batches/times/incident.Sort of an ex.,generally in court,unless the credibility of the defendant is at stake,previous convictions are not allowed in court cause it could prejudice the jury,forcing them to focus only on the crime/incident.

            --
            Last edited by Varqm; 09-21-2018, 02:44 PM.
            Clearly the first human laws (way older and already established) spawned organized religion's morality - from which it's writers only copied/stole,ex. you cannot kill,rob,steal (forced, otherwise people run back to the hills,no towns).
            M. Pacana

            Comment


            • Sort of people change from minute/hour/day to minute/hour/day .

              ---
              Clearly the first human laws (way older and already established) spawned organized religion's morality - from which it's writers only copied/stole,ex. you cannot kill,rob,steal (forced, otherwise people run back to the hills,no towns).
              M. Pacana

              Comment


              • Originally posted by harry View Post
                Ginger,

                The omly arguement I can give,is that Murderer is likely to remain a description far into the future,while prostitute is a description that is slowly being replaced by sex worker,and the industry,as a whole legitimised.How that reflects back into the past remains to be seen.
                If she's going to spend an entire book advancing the thesis that the Canonical Five should be referred to as "sex workers" rather than "prostitutes", then she will win my perverse admiration, and deservedly so.

                FWIW, for me at least, "prostitute" is something that one might do casually, or at special need, without it defining one's existence. A "sex worker", on the other hand, seems to me to be a professional. Also FWIW, I utterly abhor the modern practice of discarding perfectly good and descriptive words while replacing them with words that are supposed not to carry the connotational baggage of the old word. The new one soon gains the same connotations. They accrue for a reason. "A rose by any other name", as Shakespeare put it.
                - Ginger

                Comment


                • Prostituting was/is more apt because it denotes only the time she was doing it, while prostitute denotes an entire lifetime/personae, no matter what she did.But enough.

                  ---
                  Clearly the first human laws (way older and already established) spawned organized religion's morality - from which it's writers only copied/stole,ex. you cannot kill,rob,steal (forced, otherwise people run back to the hills,no towns).
                  M. Pacana

                  Comment


                  • Considering that Dr. R has a Phd in History, I think it is safe to assume that her thesis will be considerably more nuanced than the 'victims didn't solicit' in a whodunnit sort of way. I liked the book Jane Caputi wrote. I imagine it will be something along those lines and will be an interesting and worthwhile read.

                    Harry - For the sake of argument, if Nichols was soliciting before she entered Buck's Row, where did she plan on finishing the transaction? On the pavement underneath an open window? That's where she was found.

                    It is assumed that Buck's Row was a handy spot for unfortunates working the Whitechapel Road, but it doesn't strike me as a particularly secluded spot compared to some others nearby. As far as I know, Nichols was simply staggering up the street drunk when attacked.

                    If not that, she may have assumed the gate to the stable would have been unlocked, and when she found it wasn't, the killer attacked.

                    Stride was similarly standing near the entrance of Dutfield's yard; it is possible these stables were used as a place to conclude business. And Stride may have been waiting for a member of the club to finish the meeting. She had once 'worked among the Jews.'

                    There was also a suspect seen changing his clothes in a stable. It is highly probable this suspect was Nikaner Benelius, a kind of manic street preacher who falls off the face of the earth after 1888. Supposedly he went to New York but I have never found him.

                    Comment


                    • The legal definition is/was,
                      A person(A) on at least one occasion,and whether or not compelled to do so,offers or provides sexual services to another person in return for payment,or a promise of payment.

                      Only in a court could this interpretation be made,so maybe the author has an answer in that respect.Myself,when in employment,came in contact with many women referred to as prostitutes.I never found them or their behaviour offensive,and what they did or not do as regards sexual conduct,a matter entirely for themselves.As one of them remarked,whether they gave sex free,or received payment,the activity was the same.

                      Comment


                      • The Yorkshire Ripper admitted that he was out to murderer prostitutes but we also know that in his search for them he ended up killing women who were not prostitutes and some who were just school kids. Apparently, if they looked like a prostitute in his eyes then that was good enough.

                        It is almost a certainty that JtR in this respect is no different. Regardless if they were prostitutes or not, JtR pretty much behaved like these types of prostitute killers and probably thought they were prostitutes he was killing.

                        Nichols was out looking to make doss money.

                        Chapman was doing the same.

                        Stride may not have been soliciting as there are apparently witnesses who said she refused such advances, meaning even if she wasn't actively soliciting, she had the appearance of one.

                        Eddowes was a vulnerable drunk in the wrong place at the wrong time and doesn't appear to have been soliciting.

                        Kelly was soliciting.

                        That's 3/5 actively sex working at the time, 1 who looked like they might have been and 1 who was so drunk that they were probably mistaken for one.
                        Bona fide canonical and then some.

                        Comment


                        • Kelly had accomodation.
                          Nichols was offered accomodation.
                          Chapman died at a time when the need for accomodation had passed.
                          Stride had earned enough to pay for accomodation
                          Eddowes had accomodation at the police station had she chosn so.
                          None had a need to earn doss money

                          Comment


                          • I canít see whatís to be gained, in terms of increased knowledge, by falsely claiming that these women werenít prostitutes? Whether full or part-time. They just were. There can be no doubt whatsoever.

                            As to what they were doing at the time of their demise...

                            Kelly had accommodation yes but she was known to be a prostitute and was seen taking at least one man back to her room ( Iím assuming that no one found a Scrabble set in there?)

                            Nichols was offered a room but turned it down saying that sheíd earned and spent her doss money and was going in search of more. I think that we can have little doubt as to how she intended to achieve this.

                            Iím unsure what Harry means on this one, sorry. But she was found in a back yard that was known as a haunt for prostitutes. We can safely assume that she wasnít a landscape gardener working out a quote.

                            From memory I canít recall why we can assume that Stride had earned enough to pay for accommodation. But we know from her records that she was a prostitute in Sweden and she continued to ply her trade in Whitechapel.

                            Eddowes would surely have been chucked out from the police station anyway? Even if she wasnít actively soliciting at the time itís likely that she was seen talking to a man in the wee small hours. If approached itís not unlikely that she would have taken the opportunity to have earned a few pence especially if it might have mollified Kelly and discouraged him from giving her a Ďdamn fine hiding.í

                            Whichever way we try and spin it all of these women were full or part time prostitutes. We donít judge or criticise them for it but facts are facts. Their actions/locations on the nights of their deaths all speak of the fact that they were soliciting.
                            Regards

                            Herlock






                            "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by harry View Post
                              Kelly had accomodation.
                              Nichols was offered accomodation.
                              Chapman died at a time when the need for accomodation had passed.
                              Stride had earned enough to pay for accomodation
                              Eddowes had accomodation at the police station had she chosn so.
                              None had a need to earn doss money
                              Having accommodation is not mutually exclusive with going out looking for money by prostitution. Eddowes own partner originally said she wasn't a sex worker but during the inquest, he admitted they would do it for money occasionally. He had even hawked his shoes the day she died so they could eat Breakfast. He was barefoot.
                              Bona fide canonical and then some.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                                From memory I can’t recall why we can assume that Stride had earned enough to pay for accommodation. But we know from her records that she was a prostitute in Sweden and she continued to ply her trade in Whitechapel.
                                Stride had earned 6p for helping to clean the lodging house Saturday afternoon. (https://www.casebook.org/victims/stride.html) The doorman at the house reported that she had the 6p with her when she left Sunday evening, so either the amount earned was in addition to her Saturday room rental, or else she had enough money for the room in addition to the 6p. She'd been a longterm occupant of the rooming house, and was described as "clean and hardworking" (https://www.casebook.org/witnesses/thomas-bates.html), so seems to have led a more stable existence than the other victims. When her body was found, she had no money upon her. Frustratingly, no-one says (or if they do, I've not seen), whether Stride was paid up for Sunday night as well.
                                - Ginger

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X