![\"Wanted](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/badreputation.org.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/08\/465px-Wanted_poster.jpg\")
<\/a>So I get it, I do. The Whitechapel murders<\/a> of 1888 are grimly fascinating,
and the question mark over the killer’s identity is a magnet for myths
and stories. The study of the murders and their legacy illuminate the
historical and the contemporary context in valuable ways. One example is
Judith Walkowitz’s superb book, City of Dreadful Delight<\/b><\/a>. And Madame Guillotine<\/a> has a great post exploring her
interest in Jack the Ripper as a feminist.<\/p>\n
But there are other tales we could tell. There are plenty of morbid
stories to choose from (our other major historical export is the Krays<\/a>) and it might even be nice to talk
about some East London history that doesn’t involve murder.
Although we know nothing about him, Jack the Ripper overshadows a cast
of amazing East End characters, and the Whitechapel murders draw far
more attention than any number of incredible events. Just one example:
this year is also the 125th<\/sup> anniversary of the Matchwomen’s strike<\/a> which launched the
modern trade union movement. Thanks to the efforts of Louise Raw<\/a>, there was a commemorative event at
the Bishopsgate Institute<\/a> and a bit of media
coverage. But will we be tripping over Matchwomen walking tours in
Bow?<\/p>\n
It’s not just the extent of it but the tone. Jack the Ripper
is everybody’s favourite mystery serial killer. There is
endless speculation about his identity, his knowledge of anatomy
and even admiration for his ability to evade capture. In contrast,
the women he murdered are reduced to objects for study or criminal
evidence for analysis.<\/p>\n
For example: my local paper recently contained a special 12 page
Jack the Ripper supplement including a page entitled \u201cThe
victims: How women met their gory deaths\u201d, featuring detailed
descriptions of the last movements and mutilated bodies of five
women who were murdered – Mary Ann Nichols, Annie Chapman,
Lizzie Stride, Catherine Eddowes, Mary Jane Kelly – complete
with pictures of their faces taken after death.<\/p>\n
Where is the respect for these women? Poring over details like how
drunk they were and how deep the gash in their throat was or how
their intestines were arranged may be one thing in a history book,
but why is it being printed in the Newham Recorder<\/strong><\/a>, along with photographs of their
corpses? I don’t want these intimate and gruesome details
exhumed for my entertainment.<\/p>\n
Like almost all media coverage of the subject the article
fails to connect the Whitechapel murders to any kind of
context about violence against women then or now. Another
article highlights the fact that six other women were
murdered in the same area in the same year, three also
working in prostitution and killed by punters (Emma Smith,
Martha Tabram, Rose Mylett), three killed by their
husbands.<\/p>\n
Sadly this article reads like a masterclass in how to subtly
blame victims and excuse perpetrators when it describes the
three cases of women killed by their husbands – Hannah
Potzdamer, Susan Barrell and Elizabeth Bartlett:<\/p>\n
\u201cordinary people driven to the ultimate crime by
circumstance, a fit of anger or a desire for revenge\u201d
(this is a quote from author Peter Stubley, included in
the article)<\/p>\n
\u201cher throat is slashed… in a jealous
rage\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cHannah had left him and moved in with a
bootmaker\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cRobert, suffering from delirium tremens, also shoots
himself\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cshe refused to give him money for
drink\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Over a century on it’s felt necessary to include
details like this which serve to exonerate the killers. I
wish I could afford to send every journalist a copy of
this guide to responsible media reporting of
violence against women<\/a> (PDF).<\/p>\n
Whether blas\u00e9 or breathlessly excited, the tone
used to talk about Jack the Ripper almost everywhere
makes me feel queasy. Have a look at this New York Times article<\/a> about how
All Saints clothing store makes use of \u201cthe romance
of Jack the Ripper\u201d and its location in \u201cthe
Ripper’s hallowed stomping grounds\u201d. Big
stomper was he?<\/p>\n
And did you know the Ten Bells<\/a> pub in Spitalfields
(where one of the victims had been drinking before she
was killed) was at one point called ‘Jack The
Ripper’? They used to sell T-shirts, and a
blood-coloured cocktail called Ripper’s Tipple.
Tasteful.
Obviously<\/em> there’s a difference between
the crimes of one serial killer and the carnage of the
First World War, but that has an anniversary coming up
too – can you imagine a WWI-themed bar serving
ham and mustard gas sandwiches? Although I guess
we’re getting close with ‘Blitz
parties’, but that’s a rant for another
day.<\/p>\n
Many people do seriously study the Whitechapel
murders without celebrating ‘Jack’,
but as this brave article<\/a> explains,
unintentional sexism abounds in Ripperologist
circles. The focus is firmly on the suspects and
not the victims, whose suffering is silent or
sensationalised. The LIFT<\/a> campaign in Tower
Hamlets have subverted this with an alternative
Ripper tour which talks about the lives and the
communities of the women who were killed. There
are some interesting tweets from the walk in this Storify<\/a>.<\/p>\n
Here’s a classic response<\/a> to
criticism of Ripperology:<\/p>\n
We do not celebrate, we commemorate. We do not
idealise, but we condemn him. We examine the
harsh realities of that world to allow us to
understand where we came from, how society has
changed and why we should be thankful for these
changes, and recognise where it has not and
strive to put this right.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
While this may be the aim, and I fully admit I
haven’t had time to research this post
very thoroughly, I haven’t seen many
examples of Ripperologists striving to end violence against
women<\/a>.<\/p>\n
That is the issue at the heart of this, and
the reason I can’t join in the fun:
violence against women is epidemic, often
lethal but frequently trivialised. The most
uncomfortable parallel I found between Ripper
fandom and damaging contemporary attitudes to
violence against women was this, on the London
Dungeons<\/a>\u00a0profile page for Jack the
Ripper:<\/p>\n
DOs and DON’Ts<\/p>\n DO look over your shoulder.<\/p>\n DO dress conservatively.<\/p>\n DO go unnoticed.<\/p>\n DO NOT flirt.<\/p>\n DO NOT walk alone.<\/p>\n
DO NOT accept his offer to buy you a
drink.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
This is advice that is seriously but
unhelpfully issued to women today in the
guise of rape prevention. It is also a
classic example of the victim blaming which
prevents many women reporting violence let
alone seeing their attacker convicted.
Repeated in this context it’s
ghoulish, and not in a good way.<\/p>\n
Now, as then, women working in prostitution
are particularly vulnerable to violence
– especially trans* women and migrant
women. A woman working in prostitution
is\u00a018 times<\/a>\u00a0more
likely to be murdered than the general
population.\u00a0While I don’t want to
be a party pooper, I can’t get that
figure out of my head. I’ll sign off
with this quote on ‘Jack’, from
feminist academic Deborah Cameron:<\/p>\n
The question for society is not which
individual man killed, but why so many men
have done and still
do.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Jack and his victims<\/h3>\n
Missing the big picture<\/h3>\n
Ripper chic<\/h3>\n
Ripperology<\/h3>\n
Violence against women<\/h3>\n
Some links<\/h3>\n