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

[Whitershadeofpale]

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.

The first time I read about Jack the Ripper, I was somewhere between 10-12 yo; I was reading my dad's Readers Digest (as was generally encouraged by my parents, I was a voracious reader and we were only allowed 3 books from the library) and I asked my mum what a "prostitute" was, as the article stated that most/all of his victims were prostitutes.

I recall my mother being horribly flustered, and asking where I'd heard such a word; when I told her, she came back with the definition of "bad women".

A lot older now, I don't agree with that (utterly victim-blaming) defininition, but I'm also not quite sure how I'd explain all of the issues to dgs, who has recently turned 5.

are you sure he spoke English, whenever I've led that kind of tour (Not Jack the Ripper but similar in different cities) there have been half a dozen poor confused tourists who've been flogged the tour as part of a package and obediently trot along and don't appear take any of it in.
When I'm ill I still occasionally have flashbacks to the JorVik centre which I went to aged 4 (although mostly because of the smell)

YANBU

I think it's bad enough we as grown women are never far away from gruesome tales of women being raped and murdered but at least we have a degree of choice in whether we want to hear about it or not.

Kids don't have that choice so YANBU.

Yes that's the one mozzchops.

They were both English.

YANBU OP. I don't even think fetishising JTR is appropriate for adults.

It's not as though the crimes happened 700 years ago and only vague details are known and approximate identities; it's all as graphic as it could possibly be.

JTR really frustrates me MmeG, because there's never likely to be any conclusion to the Who Did It question.

But after all your research of the sadistic fuckwit, do you think looking back at what evidence they collected retrospectively, that it points to anyone in particular?

I read Patricia Cornwell's book about Walter Sickert, disregarding the fact that you're distancing yourself from the WDI Q (cos I can ) is he as likely to have done it as any of the other people who have been put forward do you think? Or was she making it up and talking shite?

C'mon, you must have someone you lean towards more than the others