I think you are missing the boat entirely.
To call somebody murdered is to force them into a category that is thought to be far less than the ‘living’ or ‘non-murdered.’ The associations with dead people overlooks the fact that they were…
And, I think, tho I could be wrong, that you blamed well know that no one believes that being a hooker, etc… deserves to be murdered in such a hideous way.
Best wishes,
hh
This seems to me to be a silly distinction like the one where “person of color” is perfectly acceptable, almost forward thinking, but saying “colored person” is horribly outdated and almost considered racist. It’s purely a semantic control on speech which really means nothing.
Saying that someone is an accountant isn’t implying that they aren’t a person first and an accountant second. The fact that they are a person is implied in the news story. Was the news story ambiguous enough that you thought they might have found dogs or cattle that had been slain?
I think it would be more accurate to say because they were prostitutes they were more easy to target (i.e., their working conditions made them easy victims of opportunity). We do not know if the serial killer’s fixation is on their profession or their appearance. I think their profession is revelant in news articles if for no other reason than it would help get the word out to other woman that could be targeted, especially since many Craiglist’s prostitutes are part-timers who don’t exactly stay keyed to the street like the women in the business full time.
Actually, what bugs me more is that they say it was on “Long Island.”
Long Island is 120 miles long. I had to search Google Earth to figure out where they were talking about; my relatives all live on Long Island and I wondered whether it was happening near them.
“Woman” acknowledges that a person is a human being with valid rights. Some people think prostitutes give up some of those rights. “Well, what do you expect. She chose to fo what she did. It was her own fault.”
I’be heard people say that Nichole Brown Simpson “got what she deserved” for stepping out on her ex-husband.":eek:
Ann Rule’s book “Green River, Running Red” gives a marvelous account of the Green River serial killer and his victims, who were also prostitutes. One thing I love about Rule is that she never dehumanizes the victims. But sadly, amny people do.
Anyone who thinks a woman deserves to be murdered for being a prostitute is not going to be dissuaded from that attitude by a qualifier on the word “prostitute.”
Prostitute is such an ugly word, I prefer the term professional orgasm provider.
Ah, if only middle management types were just as available to be victims as prostitutes are. What a better world this would be.
I prefer Sexual Relations Engineer (Commercial)
Isn’t the point that they were murdered because they were prostitutes? That would be why it’s a valid distinction.
The serial killer could just as well have ordered pizza and killed the drivers.
The fact that they’re prostitutes is an important distinction because they tend to go to seedy places, and they’re not as likely to be reported missing by their employer if they don’t come back.
It also provides a sense of security to other women on Long Island (which I agree is a very vague location…they might as well have said “Earth”) who are not prostitutes…perhaps a false sense of security if the serial killer is just killing prostitutes out of convenience and starts working on nurses or pizza delivery drivers.
A friend of mine used to give tours at historic buildings in downtown Memphis. She once referred to the inmates at a certain brothel as purveyors of commercial affection.
Of course they should be called prostitutes. They were prostitutes, and it’s important - relevant, at least - to point that out.
Everyone is someone’s cousin or niece or whatever. Totally meaningless term.
P.S. If they didn’t want to be remembered as a prostitute, they made the wrong choice of career 
I’m with you till the last remark & smiley. Though not every woman is someone’s niece.
I’m surprised they aren’t calling them hookers. But then, I guess, people would be wondering whether a crime had even been committed.
Do the police suspect the two serial killers are aware of each other and are working together or are they working indepently and the nearby locations of the remains are coincidental?
Our point is that such people will not be enlightened by adding more words to the description. In fact, they will not be enightened at all.
It’s unfortunate is anyone feels that way, but changing the wording does not address the problem.
So should she have been called “a woman whose marriage was to OJ” or something? Some people are dicks, and it’s usually hard to convince them they’re dicks. There’s nothing wrong with “women who worked as prostitutes” other than the fact that it would be bad in a headline, but I don’t think it solves any problems. Prostitutes are on the margins of society and they’re particularly vulnerable to this kind of thing. It sucks, but polite language won’t fix it.
There’s no evidence for that as far as I know. It’s not a sure thing that there are/were two serial killers. The women who have been identified - the prostitutes - were killed over a period of more than three years, found in a similar location, and they were all “wrapped in burlap” according to Wikipedia. So it seems obvious they were all killed by one person. It sounds to me like the other remains were found in several different locations along one parkway but I’m not sure how close they were to each other, and I don’t know how much of a connection there is between any of those people because we don’t know who they were or when or how they died.
Is there any possibility these deaths are related to the working girls that were being killed in southern New England in the mid '90’s?
From what I know of serial killers, the women were probably killed because they were women; as said above, prostitutes are just the most convenient victims. (Much easier than pizza deliverers who are sent to specific addresses.)
And, yeah, it could be a false sense of security, which is why it is so dangerous to emphasize the profession of the victims.
yeah …
“Well, what do you expect? She was a prostitute.”
“Well, what do you expect? She was a woman who worked as a prostitute.”
Not seeing a huge improvement, there.
