Tuesday, March 19, 2019

Tuesday Reads

How the hell do these kinds of idiots get elected in the first place?

I suppose this idiot thinks women should "free bleed" and subject others not only to the sight of blood all over the place but also to subject others to the possibility of bloodborne pathogens.

It's still not known for a fact who Jack the Ripper was despite recent news reports:

Beyond the results, there’s an even bigger obstacle afoot—the provenance of the shawl. For The Conversation, Mick Reed explains the shawl’s origin story is full of problems. Was a shawl even picked up by Metropolitan Police officer Amos Simpson at the crime scene that night? Even if that were true, whether this scarf is the authentic one is up for debate; the cloth was previously dated to the Edwardian period, from 1901 to 1910, as well as to the early 1800s, and could come from anywhere in Europe.

Historian Hallie Rubenhold, author of the new book The Five: The Untold Lives of the Women Killed by Jack the Ripper, has been among the Ripper experts to criticize the conclusions. “[T]here is no historical evidence, no documentation that links this shawl at all to Kate Eddowes. This is history at its worst,” she wrote on Twitter in response to a headline that claimed the newly published research "proved" Jack the Ripper had been identified.

The more unhinged Trump is, the more his fans like it.