Scary stuff...
Also, is anyone else disturbed by the labelling of "missing prostitute" rather than "missing woman"? I assume it's done for good reason, but it just seems dehumanizing somehow to me.
I guess the reasoning is the fact that it's relevant. All the women that have been murdered are prostitutes, therefore the warning is to them in particular to be vigilant. A rather large clue, to help in finding the killer, I would imagine.Originally Posted by DavidJames
Is the use of the word "Ripper" in the title of the thread not just a little bit inflamatory there David - "Moderator without care"?
Not wishing to be seen to be making light of a very serious happening and I hope the culprit is found and dealt with urgently but just how does comparing this with Sutcliff Help actually?
Sure, but there's an article in the Times today from the parents of one of the victims, where the parents specifically say "their daughter Gemma led a life that was not adequately described by the term “prostitute”."
It then goes on to say:
Like it or not, "prostitute" is seen as a negative label, and I'd imagine the parents of all the young women concerned are going through enough hell as it is.Mr and Mrs Adams, who raised their daughter in a comfortable home in the village of Kesgrave, near Ipswich, did not know she was a prostitute until she was reported missing on November 15.
“I don’t want people to think of her only as a prostitute,” Mr Adams said. “The Gemma we want to remember was a loving, beautiful and wonderful girl. It was the nightmare of drug addiction which drove her to work on the streets. We are going through hell trying to come to terms with it. It has been shock after shock.
I didn't make up the title; it's been used before, I think I saw it in a tabloid a few days ago - and I'm sure it'll be used again.
Actually, I was thinking of Jack the Ripper as comparison. Serial killer, targetting (apparently) prostitutes in a single location; seems fairly plausible analogy.
And what's my moderator hat got to do with anything?
But, OK, if you prefer I can change it - any suggestions?
I know I won't be very popular for saying this, but I haven't really given this story much sympathy.
I get upset when innocent children are raped and murdered. These women know they take extreme risks by walking the streets to have sex to pay for their drug habit.
Having said that, I still think the person who is doing this should be strug up. No one has the right to take away another life, regardless of who the victim is.
No, it makes perfect sense to me. It doesn't detail how the girls died, it just says they were found dead?But, OK, if you prefer I can change it - any suggestions?
I agree though, that the use of the word 'prostitute' was probably necessary. The article was aimed at them, so highlighting the fact that the women involved were prostitutes is more likely to get other prostitutes' attention. After all, if oil rig workers are in danger from terrorists, they will say "missing oil-rig worker" not "missing man". The term prostitute is only demeaning if it's used accusingly or incorrectly.
I'm sure most 'prostitutes' parents would feel this way about their child. They are not born being prostitutes, they were all someones little girl at some time in their lives. It still stands, that at the time of their murders they were earning through prostitution. This is relevant to the documenting of the murders.
No one, no matter what their reason for being on the street late at night, is 'asking for it' where rape or murder is concerned. They are taking certain risks, yes, but they should not be in risk of their life. Even if they are prostitutes, or drug-addicts, or boy-racers...
People have different moral views where prostitutes are concerned. Some people believe sex is not a service you should sell, which is fine. I have no problem with this. But when one of them is murdered I feel as much sympathy as I would for any other human being. Regardless of their moral standing. As long as they are not harming anyone (like the man/woman responsible for their deaths) then they are still 'human' and should not 'have' to sign a waver to go out on the street at night.
It's all very sad
You missed out the bottom bit of my quote, which agrees with what you just said.No one, no matter what their reason for being on the street late at night, is 'asking for it' where rape or murder is concerned. They are taking certain risks, yes, but they should not be in risk of their life. Even if they are prostitutes, or drug-addicts, or boy-racers...
People have different moral views where prostitutes are concerned. Some people believe sex is not a service you should sell, which is fine. I have no problem with this. But when one of them is murdered I feel as much sympathy as I would for any other human being. Regardless of their moral standing. As long as they are not harming anyone (like the man/woman responsible for their deaths) then they are still 'human' and should not 'have' to sign a waver to go out on the street at night.
It's all very sad
... I still think the person who is doing this should be strug up. No one has the right to take away another life, regardless of who the victim is.
What?
By the way. A forth woman has now gone missing in the area. Guess what she does for a living?
I imagine he was referring to the contradiction between "string 'em up" and "no-one should take another's life"
Which was why I posted the link in the first place. I dunno, you spend all this time posting nice links, and no-one ever uses them
Ok, being a woman, I've changed my mind. What I meant was, all victim's lives are precious. In my opinion, the murderer isn't a victim, so he should be strung up.I imagine he was referring to the contradiction between "string 'em up" and "no-one should take another's life"
Which was why I posted the link in the first place. I dunno, you spend all this time posting nice links, and no-one ever uses them
It's just my opinion, please don't string me up.
No, I didn't. I was directing my response to the first part of your post, which was your point about not being able to feel much sympathy for them because they are prostitutes and therefore know they are taking a risk. Not to whether or not the murderer should be hung, drawn and quatered anyway.
I guess the point I was trying to make was that "prostitute" is a label, not a description. And not a good label either. These women are now labelled - and, as we've seen in this thread, belittled - as "prostitutes", not as "women", or indeed "people".
I think it's being used by the media as a convenient label. I'd like to think it's not being used for salacious purposes, but I'm not even sure about that.
As for warning any women working as prostitutes, I imagine they're all pretty well warned by now - but I doubt that'll stop the media using it.
Whether we like it or not the media will always use the most eye catching titles they can, regardless of the feelings of families or indeed members of the public. This is part of the reason that I don't watch the news or read newspapers.
Although put a little bluntly, I agree with DT in that I'll feel less sympathy for someone who takes risks and suffers as opposed to an innocent or child.
However, I don't think any of us would be so callous as to say that any of these women/girls were asking for it.
Personally, I'd save my favourite punishment for the murderer. String him up by the knackers with cheese wire, then whip him with stinging nettles and barbed wire until dead.
How do you know that they all have a drug habit? And even if they do, why does that mean that they don't deserve much sympathy? I bet none of the girls concerned always dreamed of it as a lifetime ambition. The very fact that they have chosen this line of 'work' would suggest that they had fallen on very hard circumstances - surely deserving of some sympathy?
I think I know where you are coming from. After all, if we all got upset by every bad news story then we would probably all be in a permanent sense of depression. However, i just think that the idea that 'someone does a dangerous job so why we should really care about them' is a little harsh
Having said that, I still think the person who is doing this should be strug up. No one has the right to take away another life, regardless of who the victim is.
God forbid anyone should have an opinion.
If I dropped down dead tomorrow of a heart attack, I would only have myself to blame for eating too much cake and sitting on my bottom all day not being active enough. Same with smokers, if you're a smoker and you get lung cancer...tough luck.
I read in the papers that these girls were drug addicts & that's why they were doing this, to feed their habit.
Gav articulated it better than me, but I agree with what he said.
Last edited by Kev F; 11th-December-2006 at 06:11 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
![$vboptions[bbtitle]](images/master_col.bmp)
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks