Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think a Jack the Ripper tour isn't suitable for a young child.

32 replies

Whitershadeofpale · 29/08/2014 23:41

I have been on a Jack the Ripper tour this evening (I'm writing my dissertation about the media's portrayal of the crimes) and there was a mum there with a young child (maybe 6-7).

The tour guide a few times looked quite pointedly at the mum and said that she was about to give quite graphic details of the crime, but the mum made no acknowledgment of this. The descriptions involved mutilations, including genitals.

AIBU to think that this was a really bizarre and unsuitable choice of tour? I suppose that as the murders involved were so long ago people forget that real women were murdered in horrific ways.

OP posts:
Bulbasaur · 29/08/2014 23:45

Kids see worse things on TV, video games, and movies. It's easy to detach if you have no personal ties to something.

Not something I'd bring my 6 year old to, but chances are, it's going to go over a 6 year old's head.

Notacs · 29/08/2014 23:47

I don't think kids do see worse things to be honest - certainly not if you don't allow them access to it!

No way would I let my 7 year old on something like that! How horrible.

PenisesAreNotPink · 29/08/2014 23:49

I think that's what's parentings for Hmm

Oh look that shits not for my kid, best not be useless and expose them to it ...

AgentZigzag · 29/08/2014 23:56

It'd be totally inappropriate for children of 6/7 to learn about the specifics of jack the ripper.

What kind of worse things are you thinking about them seeing in everyday life Bulbasaur?

I suppose it would have been a worse situation if the women were alive when he was mutilating their bodies, but I can't think of a time when a 6/7 YO would come in contact with that level of torture on TV/games/films. That would be on par with a SAW film or something, and that definitely wouldn't be right for a 6/7 YO.

It comes down to whether the mum can make the decision on the childs behalf that it's alright for him to know what happened, and I'm not sure she can.

Original poster
Whitershadeofpale · 29/08/2014 23:57

Maybe that's true for some children bulbasaur but I had pretty lax parents and I know that things I saw on Telly had a much smaller impact than things I heard or read. The mind fills in the gaps ime.

An example of what was heard:

Descriptions of prostitution in allies, women being cut 'through to the backbone', women being cut 'from vagina to throat' and women having their uteruses removed. Also there was discussions about whether the murders were sexually motivated and references to witness reports of how many men the women had had sex with for money on the nights they were killed.

OP posts:
Summerisle1 · 30/08/2014 00:04

Kids see worse things on TV, video games, and movies.

No. They don't - and certainly not at the age of 6 or 7. Unless the children have truly irresponsible parents, of course. Which pretty much sums up the calibre of anyone prepared to expose a child that young to a Jack The Ripper Tour.

hoboken · 30/08/2014 00:19

DD's father took her to the Edinburgh Dungeon for her 8th birthday. She was terrified and, at 20, has never forgotten the experience...

Dontbugmemalone · 30/08/2014 00:21

Ermm my 6 year old still watches cbeebies and Thomas the Tank Engine so I don't agree that kids see worse things unless they have very lax parents.

OP, YANBU.
Didn't they have a minimum age or anything?

Poor parenting choice, definitely.

Notso · 30/08/2014 00:21

We went on a Jack the Ripper tour when DD was 8 and DS1 was 4.
DH is really interested in the whole thing. He asked the tour guide who said it was fine and was more than happy to take payment for the children.
I stayed near the back with them, they were a frankly bored by it not listening and more interested in a group of hungover 'hens' that were on the tour who kept going off to be sick all the time.

fluffyduffydoo · 30/08/2014 00:22

I got taken on a burke and hare tour aged 8 in the brownes

think if the tour was 18 plus rated they would not have let the child participate

Is the fact you are writing your dissertion about it clouding your judgement?

Notso · 30/08/2014 00:27

I found the dungeons far far more unsuitable for young children. We took DD 14 into the one at Warwick Castle. There were very young children in there crying.

MyLegIsHaunted · 30/08/2014 00:35

I wouldn't take my kids on a tour like that.

My husband and brother and I went to one of those special Halloween nights at a theme park last year, where they set up horror themed mazes.
We were lined up for The Walking Dead maze and ahead of us was a family with 2 little girls aged roughly 4 and 6. They were CRYING before they even entered the maze, because they were so scared, the staff kept strongly advising the parents that it was not appropriate for them but the dad kept laughing and saying "Nah, they'll be right!" Sad
The mazes were bloody scary too, actors in full 'walker' costume/make up and scenes from the show recreated, and the actors jumped out at you from behind doors, bushes etc.
I'm in my 30's and at one point I was in a ball on the floor screaming and laughing as someone had dropped down from the roof above me!
It was a great fun night for us but I couldn't stop thinking of those two little girls and how terrified they must have been in that dark maze full of zombies Sad

Original poster
Whitershadeofpale · 30/08/2014 00:40

No, no minimum age that I can see on the website but I would have thought that the fact it's a tour or murder sites would have been enough for people to realise, it's certainly not marketed as child friendly. It also begins at 7.30 and ended around quarter to 10 so I'd think it would be quite an adult crowd.

Perhaps my dissertation means I'm more familiar with the specifics of the murders fluffy but in general I'd still think it was not really appropriate.

OP posts:
Lally112 · 30/08/2014 00:43

depends on the kid I think, that would have fascinated me when I was about that age but would I take DD1? no - she would throw up, DS1 - too sensitive, DS2 - maybe, he seems to be growing up to be a creepy little fecker like I was.

Original poster
Whitershadeofpale · 30/08/2014 00:43

I do think a lot would have gone over his head but he was pushed to the front for the whole thing to make sure he could see the guide and hear everything.

I'm sure a fair amount would have gone over his head (the discussions about the ethnic makeup of the east end and legal position of Jews in the 19th century for example) but the descriptions of the murders and mutilations would I'm sure have stood out.

OP posts:
AgentZigzag · 30/08/2014 00:44

The point is though that nobody can predict what a child will focus in on and that'll come back to haunt them at bedtime. Even if they're the parents.

A lot of the time they can be perfectly normal mundane things that get twisted at the prospect of going to sleep in the dark, but just taking the one thing of a man ripping a woman's stomach open with a knife can be replayed again and again, what did it feel like for the woman, what was the man thinking when he was doing it, was she actually dead when it happened, what if it happens to me/my mum etc etc etc.

Tbh I would be concerned if a 6/7 YO wasn't bothered about graphic tales of such horrific murders, some adults have trouble dealing with it don't they?

Stratter5 · 30/08/2014 00:44

Err, no way would a child of mine be exposed to that. Not on television, not in print, and certainly not in RL. Not at that age, and probably not unles you add anothe 10 years on. DD2 is 17 soon, and I'd be uncomfortable even now, although I know she's undoubtedly been exposed to that sort of thing.

AgentZigzag · 30/08/2014 00:47

Could you drop the company a line through their website Whiter?

Maybe they didn't think they had to tell parents that it's unsuitable for children, thinking who would take their 6 YO along??

Maybe they need a nudge to do it?

NoodleOodle · 30/08/2014 01:06

Sounds unsuitable to me.

Original poster
Whitershadeofpale · 30/08/2014 01:06

I suppose I could agent. I think the guide was a bit uncomfortable as well. The boy was very well behaved and his mum seemed lovely but the guide did seem to glance at them every time something graphic was mentioned as did lots of other members of the group.

Maybe just a disclaimer on the website is in order but even though I think it's inappropriate, I saw no ill effects on him, no crying, no chatting when the guide is talking etc so is it my place to say that I just don't approve with someone's parenting choice? (I'm aware of the irony of saying that and posting here Smile)

OP posts:
GimmeMySquash · 30/08/2014 01:13

My friend and I took children under 13 on a ghost tour, it was full of people jumping out dressed as ghosts or in period costume, the children loved it. Maybe this Woman thought it would be something like this?

AgentZigzag · 30/08/2014 01:33

13 YO is a bit different from being 6/7 though Gimme, and there's a big difference between ghosts compared to a man hideously mutilating women after he's slit their throats.

This would only become a judgement on their parenting choice IMO Whiter, if it was alongside them being exposed to other inappropriate 'material', like 15/18 rated films/games etc. The lad might not have made a fuss about it while he was there listening, but that could be a totally different matter when he's alone.

I've also had a life long interest in violent crime, but I know that when I was first interested in it (about 7/8 odd) I wasn't able to rationalise the details and it did fuck my head up to a certain extent. I'm still obsessed interested in the subject, but I've been very careful not to let my interest influence at what age I think my 13 YO is ready to deal with the ins and outs of how cruel and sadistic some people are.

In that case it doesn't 'depend on the kid', because you can't know whether it'll influence them long term until it's too late. Why would anyone risk that? To what ends?

MmeGuillotine · 30/08/2014 01:40

I'm what is commonly referred to as a Ripperologist (I hate the term tbh as I come at it from a feminist angle and research the victims rather than do the whole whodunit stuff) and personally prefer to keep my children (8 and 5) mostly in the dark about the whole thing.

They're tough cookies, but I think that is WAY too grim for them. However, they get dragged around Whitechapel all the time while I'm researching and know the name as I give talks and write and contribute to books about the case so it occasionally gets talked about in a pretty oblique way, although I won't discuss it in any detail in front of them and keep my books about it out of their reach.

However, I think I know most of the Ripper walk guides and am fairly sure plenty of them wouldn't bat and eyelid at someone bringing a child along, whereas others would probably be less than impressed.

MmeGuillotine · 30/08/2014 02:04

Erm, to clarify before accusations of shit parenting start, l'll mention the name Jack the Ripper in front of them but nothing else. It generally only comes up when someone else mentions it tbh, mainly because my last book was set during the murders so people might stop me to ask how my 'Ripper Book' is selling or to ask me who he was, which generally gets greeted with an elaborate shrug and a shifty pas devant les enfants look.

Also, cunningly, they have NO IDEA why we keep ending up in the East End, apart from that it's where my family come from and has nice curry and awesome street art. One of my ancestors was a sergeant involved in the actual case - I may tell them that when they're much older as it's kind of cool.

Anyway, my current project is a book about Marie de Guise so I can talk all I like about it and litter the kitchen with my research books if I so choose. After a year of keeping more or less schtum at home about my last book, it's pretty amazing. :)

MozzchopsThirty · 30/08/2014 02:35

Me and dd went on the tour, but she was 16 at the time

Is it the one that goes from tower bridge tube (amazing IMHO)

I don't think it's suitable for youngsters, my little ones would be bored stiff.
Me and dd found it brilliant though and I'd love to go again

Swipe left for the next trending thread