Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Witnesses: Kennedy and Lewis - by Wickerman 5 hours ago.
Witnesses: 36 Berner Street............... - by Robert 7 hours ago.
Witnesses: 36 Berner Street............... - by MrBarnett 7 hours ago.
Witnesses: 36 Berner Street............... - by Debra A 7 hours ago.
Witnesses: 36 Berner Street............... - by MrBarnett 10 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Did Mary Kelly meet the Bethnal Green Botherer? - by Abby Normal 11 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Witnesses: 36 Berner Street............... - (16 posts)
Witnesses: Kennedy and Lewis - (4 posts)
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - (1 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Did Mary Kelly meet the Bethnal Green Botherer? - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Media > Books > Non-Fiction

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #81  
Old 09-18-2018, 03:07 PM
Observer Observer is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,654
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bridewell View Post
Albert Cadosch's mother died around 1867 so any reference to cat owner is almost certainly to his stepmother.
Yes I was referring to his stepmother.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 09-18-2018, 06:54 PM
harry harry is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,915
Default

Varqm,
I cannot be as sure as you are,but I would be interested in your,or anyone else's,description of a prostitute.I understand the simple definition of sex for money,but is it that simple?Can we be certain that when Nichols stated she had earned money the previous day,it was through prostitution,or her quest that night was in search of money for sex.?Were there alternate means of acquiring fourpence? Stride it has been stated earned sixpence for cleaning.

Nonsense,is not a very dismissive answer.I expect better from you.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 09-19-2018, 01:36 AM
miss marple miss marple is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 764
Default

it is not a matter of whether they were or were not prostitutes, they were 'unfortunates'. that is women who through poverty, drink, breakup of marriage or other circumstances were destitute. Among the options for survival was occasional prostitution. There were more occasional prostitutes in London than full time ones. Unless you were a high class prostitute, working the streets led to early death, often from tb, and sexual diseases. A full time sex worker in the 1860s had a survival rate of seven years.

So with the exception of Mary Kelly who claimed she had been involved in the sex industry since she was 16, and had been living off Joe Barnett till he lost his job and Liz Stride who had been a convicted prostitute in Sweden.It seems that only extreme poverty led the women,to walk the streets as they all with the exception of Kelly, had had better lives, families and work. They did various things to keep body and soul alive, cleaning, hopping, selling cloth flowers , shacking up with a partner to pool costs, but sometimes it was'nt enough. Chapman lost her allowance from her husband when he died and had a drink problem, the streets were the only option, Eddowes had spend the boot money on drink and was desperate to get it back.
l prefer the term 'unfortunate' to prostitute. They were not described as prostitutes in the press.

miss marple
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 09-19-2018, 01:56 AM
GUT GUT is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: I come from a land Down Under
Posts: 7,370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miss marple View Post
it is not a matter of whether they were or were not prostitutes, they were 'unfortunates'. that is women who through poverty, drink, breakup of marriage or other circumstances were destitute. Among the options for survival was occasional prostitution. There were more occasional prostitutes in London than full time ones. Unless you were a high class prostitute, working the streets led to early death, often from tb, and sexual diseases. A full time sex worker in the 1860s had a survival rate of seven years.

So with the exception of Mary Kelly who claimed she had been involved in the sex industry since she was 16, and had been living off Joe Barnett till he lost his job and Liz Stride who had been a convicted prostitute in Sweden.It seems that only extreme poverty led the women,to walk the streets as they all with the exception of Kelly, had had better lives, families and work. They did various things to keep body and soul alive, cleaning, hopping, selling cloth flowers , shacking up with a partner to pool costs, but sometimes it was'nt enough. Chapman lost her allowance from her husband when he died and had a drink problem, the streets were the only option, Eddowes had spend the boot money on drink and was desperate to get it back.
l prefer the term 'unfortunate' to prostitute. They were not described as prostitutes in the press.

miss marple

Well said, save that even MJK was, in my opinion, an unfortunate. If we accept the story she told it was widowhood that in effect lead her to prostitution.

As far as I know none of my ancestors resorted to prostitution on bec9ming a widow, but a few did agree to what can only be considered unfortunate marriages because other options were, to say the least, limited.
__________________
G U T

There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 09-19-2018, 02:48 AM
Michael W Richards Michael W Richards is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,419
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by c.d. View Post
Hello Michael,

You assume that if the victims were not actively soliciting then they were not soliciting at all. But think about this for a minute. Were they carrying signs that said "open for business" or "closed for business?" How can we possibly know what they would or would not be willing to do at any given time? And even if they were not actively soliciting (whatever that means) they were all poor and had drinking problems. It seems that Jack had no intention of letting them keep his money even in death. So how easy would it be for him to offer twice the going rate along with some story that he just got paid and really wanted some fun? If she accepts his offer it does not mean that she is committed to soliciting the rest of the evening. It only means that a poor woman saw an opportunity for some easy money so she took it.

The issue is not so black and white as you make it out to be.

c.d.
I think if youll re-read what Ive been saying cd youll find that I'm pointing out that in only 2 cases do we have evidence that they were soliciting at the time.That gives us a foundation to assess the evidence in those cases and maybe get some information about their killer and perhapswhy they died.

In those 2 cases, I can see the signs of an opportunity killer, someone who didn't know his victims, and someone who had an interest in female internal organs.

Unless we know the remaining 3 were soliciting as well we cant assume the same situational characteristics. Particularly when the subsequent murders have unique aspects to them. Polly then Annie by one man is completely acceptable to me personally, I don't see any strong counter arguments,...but I don't see the same kind of evidence going forward. I see similarities that may have been intentionally done, rather than instinctively or compulsively.
__________________
Michael Richards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 09-19-2018, 03:37 AM
Ginger Ginger is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 536
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miss marple View Post
They were not described as prostitutes in the press.
I don't think that any of them (with the possible exception of Kelly, and even with her I doubt it) practiced prostitution because they thought it an agreeable way to earn a living. Their status as prostitutes, or not, seems to me a rather important point, though. It's in the nature of that line of work to accompany men whom one has just met into secluded locations. That's why to this day so many of them end up murdered - they're an easy target for serial killers. If they *weren't* "on the job" when murdered, then the case becomes much stranger and more intriguing, and we have to wonder if the victims knew Jack, and went willingly with him for some other purpose than sex. That's been the basis of speculation as long as there have been Ripperologists.

FWIW, I think that Stride, despite her prior conviction, was outside the club hoping to be paid to help clean up after the meeting. She'd obviously be inclined to chat and be agreeable to anyone she thought connected with the club under those circumstances. It was her misfortune to chat up the murderer (who may well have picked her because he thought that she was "on the game", standing around a stable yard entrance at one in the morning).

So far as the papers not using the word "prostitute", Google Ngrams https://books.google.com/ngrams/grap...titute%3B%2Cc0 shows 1884 as the lowest year since 1800 for the use of that word. 1888 wasn't much higher. It was simply an unfashionable (or perhaps embarassing) word in the LVP. The word "unfortunate", which has been in constant decline since 1800, sees its use stabilize, and even slightly rise, between 1880 and 1900 (https://books.google.com/ngrams/grap...ate%3B%2Cc 0). Sadly, there's no way to find what appearances of "unfortunate" were as a noun, rather than an adjective, or if there is, I don't know how to make Ngrams show that. I tend to suspect, though, that between 1865 and 1905, "unfortunate" as a noun was quite often a euphemism for "prostitute".
__________________
- Ginger
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 09-19-2018, 04:04 AM
Robert Robert is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,902
Default

A few of the more northern newspapers used the word, and the Daily Telegraph 10th Sept did too.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 09-19-2018, 06:49 AM
MrBarnett MrBarnett is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Romford
Posts: 2,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert View Post
A few of the more northern newspapers used the word, and the Daily Telegraph 10th Sept did too.
You mean the 'p' word, Robert? Some of them certainly used that.
And, as I said over at How's, the word 'unfortunate' was not solely reserved for erstwhile 'respectable' women who had suffered misfortune and subsequently drifted into prostitution.

In the early 19th century the term 'unfortunate prostitute' was often used. The two terms were interchangeable.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 09-19-2018, 07:04 AM
Bridewell Bridewell is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Bottesford, Leicestershire
Posts: 3,760
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Observer View Post
Yes I was referring to his stepmother.
Thanks for clarifying.
__________________
Regards, Bridewell.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 09-19-2018, 07:19 AM
Robert Robert is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,902
Default

Hi Gary

It was probably just me being lazy. I know how to spell it but typing it with one finger is always a bit tricky.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.