Looks like we missed our chance to solve this mystery.
Not necessarily. The one at Crystal Lake Cemetery is unusual enough that someone who works there may know something about it. Perhaps lynndavis can ask.
I’m thinking that “censored” may have some other meaning in this context. Crystal Lake Cemetery does have a few Lukanens.
Maybe the marker referencing the grave at Mound Cemetery was placed there because she couldn’t be buried in Crystal Lake with her family for some reason (she was “censored”).
Perhaps she is labelling infant genital “correction” as erroneous as “genital mutilation” and thus uses the most severe label.
A local newspaper might know the story.
This really defies belief.
Actually, I think it is more like unbelievable.
Inconceivable, even.
A female ham radio operator?
Get out.
Ok, perhaps a minor exaggeration.
Maybe she had a leg or something amputated and bought a plot and marker at that time to have it buried. Dunno about the Ritually or the Still, though.
Perhaps contact the funeral home from the public death notices? I would ask to speak with the person who handled the services for Roberta. Don’t give the reason for the call until you get that person since they probably won’t follow up with you otherwise.
If that doesn’t work, call the local headstone engraving (heh) outfit(s).
They’ll probably remember this one.
If she was Romano, perhaps it had something to do with that and someone’s awful reaction to such?
What is Romano?
I’m assuming that’s Roma, or Romany, formerly known as “gypsy.”
If it’s a Jewish cemetery, it could be a limb, or even an organ, as you are supposed to bury those-- when my aunt had a leg amputated, she had it buried in the Jewish cemetery. That still makes the inscription a little odd, unless she thinks she lost the organ or limb due to malpractice, and is choosing to describe it that way.
Damn. Yes, Roma. Stupid auto-correct.
The Mound Cemetery has a website and a contact for the cemetery manager. I’m tempted to email him and ask him about it.
Jeez, I just burst out laughing! 
But, ya know, she may have been “ritually mutilated”…
My only other idea is a that the women was married and both names were originally added to the original stone. The stone was then “censored” by carving the words “ritually mutilated” over the husband’s name. The other plaque was at the former husband’s place of burial, directing anyone interesting in the family’s lineage to the wife’s stone.
Perhaps it’s something about “even when I’m dead, I’ll tell the world that you abused me”?
I would guess that she was mutilated for whatever religious reason (probably genital, every religion has its converts from other cultures) and that she purchased a plot for her parts, with the intention of being reunited with them at her death.
The trauma being what it was, she wanted to make the point that she could be reunited, but not restored.
It sounds as though she was subsequently buried elsewhere, and that cemetery refused to allow her previous stone (to the relief of her family, one might suppose) so, the initial plot being bought and paid for, the referral stone was placed.
While it’s an unusual combination of name and religion, Occam’s razor suggests this answer.
Nobody seems to have commented much upon the, in my view, truly remarkable fact that this woman had her gravestone erected at least six months before her death. I have never heard of such a practice, but maybe it’s not really uncommon in the US?
Here’s another thought: those words - still - ritually mutilated - could they be referring to, like, Jesus, rather than the deceased?
Do it. You’re probably not the first one to ask. He’ll probably welcome the inquiry, as most people do inquiries about their work.
It is not uncommon, particularly if one spouse predeceases the other, and they intended to be buried next to each other (my theory is the couple divorced, and the stone was censored).
Plus, if she had known she was on her way out (she was only 64 at the start of this thread, but could have been ill enough to know), she may have simply made her own arrangements.
It doesn’t really fit the facts, as a plaque in another cemetery described it as a “censored” tombstone.
Right. She was buried there, instead of in the original plot as she expected. The second cemetery would not approve the stone with the reference to ritual mutilation, (censored it) so she (or her executor) had the reference stone erected instead.
This would all tend to indicate that she was not buried with her parts. Or maybe they were moved? It’s all so weird, butt hat’s the only answer which makes sense to me.
Obligatory George Carlin link: Censored Gravestone
runningdude
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignotus View Post
Nobody seems to have commented much upon the, in my view, truly remarkable fact that this woman had her gravestone erected at least six months before her death. I have never heard of such a practice, but maybe it’s not really uncommon in the US? …
It is not uncommon, particularly if one spouse predeceases the other, and they intended to be buried next to each other (my theory is the couple divorced, and the stone was censored).
Plus, if she had known she was on her way out (she was only 64 at the start of this thread, but could have been ill enough to know), she may have simply made her own arrangements.
Today 02:27 PM
I am aware of the existence of family graves, where names, dates of birth and dates of death get subsequently added for each passing of a family member, but have you actually, ever, seen an erected gravestone with the name (and possibly date of birth) of a still living person?
If the woman had the stone erected herself while still alive, it looks to me like this would have been a most extraordinary measure. If some other party had it erected for her in her lifetime, this would seem (at least in my culture) as a gross insult, if not a downright threat (much like saying “You’ll need this soon!”).
And I think graveyard management staff, at least in most parts of Europe , would approve of neither.