Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"Strong Evidence Of Prostitution"?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • "Strong Evidence Of Prostitution"?

    Regarding the Pinchin case, Bagster Philips noted "No evidence of child bearing but strong evidence of prostitution."

    What would that strong evidence be?

    The condition of the vagina he noted as "rather dilated", one suspects this is his evidence?

    Hebbert noted "the vagina is wide but still rugose", rugose I believe here means "ridged", i.e. wide but not distended to the extent of having no ridges. In his An Exercise in Forensic Medicine part II he writes: "The vagina had been distended, though not so patent as after child-bearing."

    Hebbert also noted her soft-skinned hands (signifying no manual occupation, though she did had a hardening on the right little finger as one gets from writing) and no mark of a wedding ring.

    I suspect it would be these factors combined with her apparently distended vagina that lead Philips to write "strong evidence of prostitution", on the theory that a prostitute engaging in intercourse frequently would have a "dilated" vagina, therefore an unwed woman with a dilated vagina would most likely be a prostitute.


    How likely is that theory - or, does Philips' "strong evidence" hold up?

  • #2
    Kattrup:

    Hebbert noted "the vagina is wide but still rugose", rugose I believe here means "ridged".


    Rugose means wrinkled, corrugated or ridged.
    Thanks for starting the thread.
    To Join JTR Forums :
    Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

    Comment


    • #3
      I daresay that a woman involved in a regular, basically monagamous, relationship would also have a distended vagina.
      Kind regards, Sam Flynn

      "Suche Nullen"
      (F. Nietzsche)

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Howard Brown View Post


        Rugose means wrinkled, corrugated or ridged
        Yes, but “wrinkled” and “corrugated” would perhaps not be the best adjectives to describe a vagina, least of all one considered “still rugose”, i.e. not yet changed. I therefore interpreted it as “ridged” since a normal vagina with all its nooks and crannies would have some ridges.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Kattrup View Post

          I suspect it would be these factors combined with her apparently distended vagina that lead Philips to write "strong evidence of prostitution", on the theory that a prostitute engaging in intercourse frequently would have a "dilated" vagina, therefore an unwed woman with a dilated vagina would most likely be a prostitute.

          I think this is exactly what Phillips based his comment on.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Kattrup View Post
            a normal vagina with all its nooks and crannies would have some ridges.
            Indeed, and the specific term for them is "vaginal rugae".

            From the Wikipedia entry: "Six weeks after birth, the rugae have returned to approximately the same size as they were before the birth [but the] number of rugae after childbirth decreases. [In women] who have not given birth, the rugae are more prominent than in those who have given birth multiple times."
            Kind regards, Sam Flynn

            "Suche Nullen"
            (F. Nietzsche)

            Comment


            • #7
              Medical Jurisprudence books of the 1880's* recognised that the rugose state of the vagina was not altered by sexual activity alone, except where violence may have been used.
              Isn't Hebbert using the rugose state of the vagina to determine whether there had been a recent birth? He doesn't make any comment about it as indicator of sexual activity as Phillips appears to be doing. I can't think of anything else that Phillips would be basing his comments on but it seems out of line with the thinking of the time as evidence of the level of sexual activity, if he was.

              *
              Legal Medicine
              Tidy, Charles Meymott, 1843-1892
              Vol. 2. London : Smith, Elder, 1882-1883.

              A manual of medical jurisprudence for the use of students at law and of medicine
              Ewell, Marshall Davis, 1844-1928
              Boston : Little, Brown, 1887..

              Comment


              • #8
                How certain were the doctors of the victim's age? Another medical reason for the findings in this case could be menopause or lack of estrogen for other reasons.
                The wickedness of the world is the dream of the plague.~~Voynich Manuscript

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                  I daresay that a woman involved in a regular, basically monagamous, relationship would also have a distended vagina.
                  I wonder then if some automatically classed women who didn't have a wedding ring, even if they might have been in a monogamous relationships, as prostitutes?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Debra Arif View Post
                    Medical Jurisprudence books of the 1880's* recognised that the rugose state of the vagina was not altered by sexual activity alone, except where violence may have been used.
                    Isn't Hebbert using the rugose state of the vagina to determine whether there had been a recent birth? He doesn't make any comment about it as indicator of sexual activity as Phillips appears to be doing. I can't think of anything else that Phillips would be basing his comments on but it seems out of line with the thinking of the time as evidence of the level of sexual activity, if he was.


                    I agree that Hebbert is noting "still rugose" as an indicator of child-bearing. I don't think it would necessarily be just recent birth, though.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Kattrup View Post
                      I agree that Hebbert is noting "still rugose" as an indicator of child-bearing. I don't think it would necessarily be just recent birth, though.
                      In medical texts it is noted that the first birth may not alter the appearance that much so there seems little point in using it determine the number of pregnancies or past pregnancies, especially as disease could alter the appearance too? I think Hebbert would have been looking to establish whether or not there was a recent birth, primarily to ascertain whether or not the death may have been abortion related. And/or for signs of instrument use or evidence of rape?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Debra Arif View Post
                        I wonder then if some automatically classed women who didn't have a wedding ring, even if they might have been in a monogamous relationships, as prostitutes?

                        I believe this would be the case as far as Phillips was concerned.
                        Best Wishes,
                        Cris Malone
                        ______________________________________________
                        "Objectivity comes from how the evidence is treated, not the nature of the evidence itself. Historians can be just as objective as any scientist."

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Cris Malone View Post
                          I believe this would be the case as far as Phillips was concerned.
                          Thanks for the feedback, Cris.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Bump Up
                            To Join JTR Forums :
                            Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X