“Although the author and host of this podcast has a very different position than typical Ripperologists, they do have one thing in common; they are both equally insufferable.
Much like Ripperologists, her position is ‘I am right and everyone else is wrong’. She says Ripperologists use sources that can’t be trusted, but it’s obvious she uses the same and similar sources, but those can be trusted because they align with her views?
She tries to shame others in wanting to know the identity of Jack the Ripper as if that’s wrong. As if she cannot conceive the possibility that other people have different interests. She makes the claim that knowing Jack the Ripper won’t change anything. Well neither will knowing anything about the victims.
She dramatizes many aspects of the victims’ stories, stating things in a factual manner, that she couldn’t possibly know. She gives no supporting evidence of her claims, perhaps it’s one of those “you gotta buy the book for that” scenarios. But if this podcast is any indication, the book is probably not worth the read.
I thought this would be a genuine look at these women’s lives, who they were, how they lived, and while it is in part, it ends up being drowned out by the chip the host seems to have on her shoulder. She spends a great deal of time talking about other people on how they’re wrong (much like Ripperologists do), like she’s bitter and angry that she’s not being showered with adoration by these people. When you spend any amount of time trying to tear others down to make your point, it’s a bad look. For this reason, she’s as insufferable as the Ripperologists she so despises.
However I do agree with her, I wish the victims of these monsters were out on the forefront of story telling.”
rvdxpress via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
12/16/22