Jump to content

Talk:Mount Rennie rape case

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

POV tag

[edit]

I have added a POV tag to this article on account of the confusing purpose of the "Public reaction" section. It is not clear why the reference to "British oppression" is included . (Yes, I know it is sourced, but why is it included when hundreds of other details from contemporary reports are omitted?). At present it just looks like opportunistic Brit-bashing. Postlebury (talk) 16:38, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

I find it hard to believe that Clunes compared the Rennie incident to the "gang rapes of 2000" as he was writing in 1957! I'm also a bit concerned about the claim tha Hicks was "educated in a convent and only recently moved to Syndey." I've looked at a number of books and articles by reputable historians and I haven't noticed thi detail in any of them. I wonder if te inclusion of this line is intended to cast aside any possible doubts about Hick's character. Don't get me wrong, I don't beleive for a second that a woman would invite a rape, nor that previous "character" has any bearing on a rape case. However, there were contemporary disputes about Hick's character. For instance, a policeman stated in the "Australian Star" on the 30th July 1895 that Hicks was a prostitute (no, not only the Bulletin, the Star cited in Peers, Juliet. "The Tribe of Mary Jane Hicks: Imaging Women through the Mount Rennie Rape Case 1886." Australian Cultural History 12 (1993): 127 - 44.) I think I'll put a citation needed on that line and give it a few weeks before deleting. The fact that Hicks went to a convent school and had recently moved to Sydney is not really relevant, either way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dave Earl (talk • contribs) 09:09, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adding the reference requested

[edit]

A request for a reference about Hick's educational status can be easily filled in from sources of the period and what better than to use a first person statement from the girl herself. I am not using my wikipedia user name - I know the primary sources around the event extremely well - because I do wonder at some of the nit picking and masculinist viewpoints that have appeared on this talk page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.170.90.4 (talk) 07:08, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mount Rennie rape case. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:41, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mount_Rennie_rape_case&oldid=1202962687"