Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Well, for a day. Because it glorifies violence against women.
What do you think they will 'action' next?
"Today we will shut down the Jack the Ripper museum!"
>>> that night: write "semi-skimmed scumbags" on windows of cereal cafe.
"Tonight we will attack police officers in the streets of Shoreditch - fuck the police!"
>>> track down cereal cafe owners and point and laugh at their beards.
"This week we will hack into all banks worldwide and remove everyone's credit rating forever!!"
>>> do a wee through the letterbox of cereal cafe.
"Tomorrow morning we will blow up Buckingham Palace and assassinate George Osborne!!!"
>>> hang around outside cereal cafe until the early hours of Monday morning then loudly call their milkman a "poxy class traitor" when he arrives for his delivery.
not sure why
There is a lot of this view in the other thread, I always thought class war were more old school lefties, crusties and punks rather than trendy Londoners. Could be wrong maybe London ruined them.
if DiS still a thing this'd be huge
the gallant knights of Class War are here to fight for you, now step aside while they deal with this!
My friend is a member of class war and posts pictures from their meets all the time, definitely don't seem like trendy middle class gentrifiers and seem to have many women members, don't get why people are attacking them on these angles when there is plenty to attack in their actions/beliefs
Genuinely a weird and rude post to accuse some one of lying. Nothing in my post is untrue, he's been a friend since college, very working class background (parents caretaker and tesco), really into crust punk, moved to Sheffield, Facebook cover 'burn in hell maggie (anarchy symbol for the a), shares class war stuff all the time and photos from there events. Why is it wrong for me to base my opinion on this rather than trying to fit it into some pre existing anti shoredich thing
Well you are the one making things up in this exchange.
I have a couple of dissers on Facebook if one can look up my friend Neil and confirm he exists that would be great.
But don't attack hipsters, that's bad somehow!!
It matters what we think they are!
white person dreads and tie-dye clothes?
LOL THEY ARE MIDDLE CLASS IPHONES STARBUCKS! THE REAL TRUTH IS SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE! is easier than actually knowing a single thing about anything
but does anyone else find it a bit reductive to retroactively decide that the Whitechapel murders somehow glorify violence against women? If you're seeking to cheaply cash in on it, like the "museum", then you probably run that risk, but the Ripper case is an important historic and cultural event.
I could understand them going after an arbitrary target when I thought it was a spur of the moment angry mob, but with so much foresight going after the museum just seems lazy (at best).
I guess it's about presentation. From the little I know about it I get the impression it's more of a London Dungeons shock them with gory exhibits type place? (Might be wrong).
A few years ago the docklands Museum had a Ripper exhibit (including the photos of the victims etc although they did come with warnings) but it was done more seriously and I don't think that got any protests.
"The full name of the museum is 'The Jack the Ripper and the History of Women in East London'. The frontage is not finished and still in the planning stage."
Oh, of course! What a prick...
in small black ink.
but it's hardly in danger of being neglected or overlooked. If anything, its importance is overstated and the amount of attention it gets is definitely disproportionate. We don't need a Jack the Ripper museum, whatever the angle.
• whether the Whitechapel murders were, as you say, an important cultural/historical event is totally compatible with claims that the murders and our popular understandings of them are steeped in misogyny and glorify VAWG.
• this museum is very clearly drawing on 'Jack the Ripper' mythology which existed then in the nineteenth century and still exists now.
• the crimes were historically important primarily because of how they were used to blame, discipline and instill fear in some. Rather than doing anything to improve the conditions of sex workers and women living in slums, it was used to further moralizing discourses about how women ought to behave and be seen in public.
• this museum is very much within this tradition, not in opposition to it.
• the same applies to anything which is just about sheer 'fascination' with violence against women and not oriented towards challenging it.
museum about the rape and mutilation of a number of women. Wonder if they get a lot of school trips.....
no, they should talk to kids about that. lesson 1:why we're never going to the jack the ripper museum
Has anyone actually been inside it? If something is a horrendous event in history it shouldn't be acknowledged and be a topic in a museum? That'd be like saying Imperial War Museum glorifies war just for existing?
I've not been in the jack the ripper museum but if the tone is all wrong and presents the murders in a positive light and such, then obviously it's wrong/not historically relevant and would need to be evaluated to see if the tone can be corrected and if not, changed into something more suitable.
I get that people take issue with the fact that it was going to be a museum into woman's rights and it seems like a strange change in direction, but then, do people know why the change of direction was made? I can't imagine the owner suddenly went from being a history buff on Emmeline Pankhurst. Then realised he actually hates woman and wanted to show his support for rape and sexual violence towards woman by building the Ripper museum. That seems pretty far-fetched to me.
One last thing that crosses my mind. The London dungeon is perfectly fine as a tourist spot, which does glorify violence and poverty of the Victorian era? But then I suppose it doesn't present itself as a museum as such.
the fact that the guy who started it did an exhibitions on Jack the Ripper in 2008 and was a director of "Jack the Ripper Museum (London) Ltd" in 2012 suggests that he's had a fairly long fascination with the murders and that he never intended it to be a "museum of women's history".
saw that guardian article further up in the thread after I posted that. You'd think the planning permission and such would be void and he'd run the risk of legal action from the council if he was deceitful about the purpose of the building though?
Also I donno if this link was in another thread but this interested me:
it's granted for a class of use, rather than a specific use.
"Planning permission was granted in October 2014 for the change of use of the premises to space for a museum. The council was advised at that time that the premises were intended to be used as a Women’s Museum and supporting information was submitted with the application to suggest that the vision of the museum was to tell the story of women of the East End of London. Ultimately, however, the council has no control in planning terms of the nature of the museum."
is basically a cheapo London Dungeon rip-off, made even worse by the fact it originally gained planning permission by claiming it would be a museum documenting the history of women in the East End. But that doesn't mean that a real museum that actually archived and presented the reality and the impact of the Whitechapel murders would be a bad thing in itself.
is really shit. Hope they didn't they get public funding.
is that until 2012, there *was* a museum of women's history in the East End. I worked there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_Library It closed when London Metropolitan University decided to save budget by cutting it.
At one point, we worked with artists who organised an 'alternative Jack the Ripper tour' - basically they led a tour round Whitechapel to where each of the women were killed, and talked about what was known about each of their lives, and stuck up a little cardboard plaque in memory of them. I found it unexpectedly moving. I'm not opposed to Jack the Ripper tourism generally (I'm guiltily fascinated by true crime) but it was an important reminder that even though people don't know who the Ripper was, it's a real thing that happened not a Victorian novel, and real women died.
I still can't properly figure out the backstory with whether the Ripper Museum people really claimed they were going to open a museum of women's history, and if so how that overlapped with the closure of the Women's Library. But they do seem to be pricks.
Back to the main topic, these Fuck Parade people also seem to be pricks.
“1.1 Vision and goals
The museum will recognise and celebrate the women of the East End – the famous, the infamous and the anonymous – who have shaped history.
As well as telling the story of how women have been instrumental in changing society the museum will also examine the context against which these changes took place. It will analyse the social, political and domestic experience of women from the time of the boom in growth in the East End in the Victorian period through the waves of immigration to the present day.
Despite the immense contribution of the women of the East End to the historical, social, political and economic development of the United Kingdom, no museum exists to showcase their achievements.
The Museum of Women’s History would rectify this. Following the closure in 2013 of the Women’s Library in Old Castle Street, the Museum of Women’s history would be the only dedicated resource in the East End to women’s history . Globally over 100 women’s museums exist. This will be the first women’s museum in the UK .”
that is pretty much a description of what The Women's Library was :(
Also, 'first women's museum in the UK' when they've just referred to one that recently closed!!
not just about the East End.
This would very much depend on whose reality it was presenting. I can definitely imagine a museum about this, even one which aims to just show 'reality' and 'impact', actually reinforcing many of the dodgy representations. I'd be very sceptical if any claim that a museum is the best way to document this, given its extremely problematic history.
of the Whitechapel murders from the salacious industry that's grown up around it. But I do think there's a case to be made that the events of the Whitechapel murders are historically distinct and important in a way that, say, the Moors murders perhaps aren't (one of the protestors in the pieces linked above asks why not make a museum for Myra Hindley?) There's an argument to be made that what happened in Whitechapel in autumn 1888 was the inaugural event in the Long 20th Century and the end of the 19th, (or at least the British versions of them), and the murders impinge on a huge range of cultural areas, including immigration, anti-semitism, poverty and its awareness in public consciousness, policing techniques, and the growth of mass media and its representation of crime and relationship to the consumer. If a museum can represent that, and not lose sight of the reality of its victims, then I think it can have a role, and probably a more positive and productive one than dozens of competing walking tours, or themed bars, or whatever else there currently is.
but you could make just as strong a case for the cultural/historical impact of the Moors Murders. As for being the 'inaugural event' (hmmm, tasteful) of the 20th century, again you could make that claim for dozens of other things, it's arbitrary and a bit pointless.
more than a century after they happened.
(just giving this subthread a weak stir)
Doesn't really justify a museum though.
Opening soon, The Boots Meal Deal Museum!!
also, The Museum of Old Websites curated by Sean Adams
Far too tenous.
💉🔪 💉🔪💉🔪edgy shit edgY sHit 🔪thats 🔫some edgy💉💉 shit right 🔪th🔪 ere💉💉💉 right there 🚬🚬if i do ƽaү so my selｆ 🔫i say so 🔫 thats what im talking about right there right there (chorus: ʳᶦᵍʰᵗ ᵗʰᵉʳᵉ) mMMMMᎷМ🔫 🔪🔪🔪НO0ОଠＯOOＯOОଠଠOoooᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒ🔪🔪🔪 🔫 💉💉 🔪🔪 Edgy shit