Talk:Magdalene laundry

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I copied this from another wiki. Magdalene laundry on Wikinfo. I wrote most of the article but some was imported from Wikipedia.Barbara Shack 11:09, 10 December 2007 (EST)

Barbara, I note that there has been considerable criticism of your original Wiki verion on wp:Talk:Magdalene_Asylum. Any comments on that? --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 11:23, 10 December 2007 (EST)
While I am no fan of religions of any type I rather do feel that this could do with a "bit" of copy editing and perhaps a few more references. Possibly the primary author would care to put in a few more? I see that, notwithstanding some active red removal, some rather doubtful red links remain. Anyway, if we get some more references , I'd be happy to edit the text a bit.--Bobbing up 11:31, 6 January 2008 (EST)
While this is an interesting article, it's not very RWified, and as I suspected, was pretty much copied wholesale from wikipedia. While that is not necessarily a bad thing, it lacks any "talk" that occurred there, and so I find it rather lacking. How about we write our own, original article, with a link to the WP version at the end? humanUser talk:Human 17:47, 2 February 2008 (EST)

I think I am going to take a fairly sharp hatchet to this article, reducing it to a few paragraphs and a link to the wp article. The whole section about "Lily" can also just be an EL. While it is clearly a greivous issue, the article is largely unsourced and assertive. It also flows poorly - for instance, "The laundries were named for Mary Magdalene, the prostitute who apparently repented her sins and became one of Jesus' closest followers. They were started in the middle of the 19th century as rehabilitation centers for prostitutes. Victims of Magdalene laundries could not expect to be forgiven as Mary Magdalene was." comes at the end of a section titled "The Types of Victims" when it should be in the lead, describing what they were. In fact, the lead should answer, briefly, "who how what when where why", I think. Oh, and I now see that it is/was a direct copy from wikinfo, not wp. I wonder how many other wikis the author has copied it to? humanUser talk:Human 16:26, 10 February 2008 (EST)

OK, I butchered my way through most of this. Some is still a bit clumsy, but I think it is a bit clearer, more readable, better organized and less rantlike now. humanUser talk:Human 17:55, 12 February 2008 (EST)

Well, excuuuuse me for not knowing the archaic meaning of the word[edit]

I saw "Magdalene laundries" and thought "What, did Mary Magdalene run a laundromat? I thought she was a prostitute?" Well, imagine my surprise when, instead of something funny, I find yet another thing that makes me lose my faith in mankind. *Sigh* I'm all depressed now. I need to go eat a bowl of frosted flakes to make myself cheery again. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 17:37, 10 February 2008 (EST)

I'm surprised it took someone this long to move this to the more appropriate title... humanUser talk:Human 14:30, 7 March 2008 (EST)
So was I! : ) --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 14:57, 7 March 2008 (EST)
I was so burned out on it after rewriting most of it I did not have the energy to do that last step - hopefully the inlinks have been corrected and the redirects deleted... humanUser talk:Human 15:16, 7 March 2008 (EST)


No-one calls it an asylum, its well known as a laundry. Don't ask why, but its an Irish thing. MarcusCicero 12:41, 23 March 2008 (EDT)

Maybe it's an "official" versus "colloquial" name? IE, the Church calls them asylums (asyla?) but because of the work done there, the folk call them laundries? There might be some insight at the WP article talk page, since they went to the same naming convention we currently have. humanUser talk:Human 13:12, 23 March 2008 (EDT)
In my opinion, the churches stance on its name, or anything at all whatsoever to do with this shouldn't be entertained. They were the bastards who ruined generations of women for happening to have sex before marriage. They still haven't adequately apologised for this, or for the generations of young boys raped in industrial schools by priests in Ireland. MarcusCicero 14:06, 23 March 2008 (EDT)
Ooh, should we have an article on that, too? By the way, my comment above is only a guess. It could be that they had a "legal" name, too. But I don't know. humanUser talk:Human 14:18, 23 March 2008 (EDT)
Basically the Church called them laundries. I'm not sure where Wiki got the term Asylum from, if anything it would be a 'Magdalene Convent', since the places were run by nuns. MarcusCicero 19:11, 23 March 2008 (EDT)
they're called laundries in Ireland because the work that the women who worked there were forced to do was mostly washing sheets and clothes. — Unsigned, by: HeadlessDenise / talk / contribs 21:50, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Naming Decision?[edit]

Why is this still called an asylum? Its clearly known as a Laundry. There was an old Magdalene Laundry beside where I lived last year - a cold, dark, evil place. We used to throw our empty bottles from our balcony into its backyard when we were drunk.

The people who have suffered here, and are familiar with this place all too well, did not refer to it as an asylum. It was a Laundry. Please change it. MarcusCicero 19:16, 24 November 2008 (EST)

Thanks. MarcusCicero 19:18, 24 November 2008 (EST)

Hephzibah house[edit]

Found that around NLQ, it seemed notable. But is this article the right place, or do you know somewhere it might fit better? (also added a line about France, just to show the generalized sexism of the 20th century, might be misplaced too, tell me) dx (talk) 22:51, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Something new is due out[edit]

Magdalene laundries report to be published Proxima Centauri (talk) 16:03, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Irish PM apologises for conditions in #Magdalene laundries, workhouses where thousands of women were locked up from 1922 to 1996 Scream!! (talk) 16:12, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Proxima Centauri (talk) 17:57, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Mountain of dead babies in Tuam, Co.Galway[edit]

This is obviously connected. Does it need its own section or just links? — Unsigned, by: Ultan / talk / contribs

This sections needs to be removed. No human remains have been found in Tuam. {{|Rob}} — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

Pardon? Scream!! (talk) 09:31, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

No, the lack of evidence comment appears to be correct, the media seem to have exaggerated the case based on the report of a local historian who found that there were many births and deaths but the numbers didn't match the grave numbers. An important reminder to be skeptical of everything, especially things you are inclined to believe! — Unsigned, by: Ultan / talk / contribs

Seems so. Just shows dunnit? Scream!! (talk) 22:17, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
It would appear that while early claims (i.e. the 800 dead babies stuff) were clearly exaggerated, the issue is still under debate, and possibly scrutiny, on the Emerald Isle: Cabinet to discuss mother-and-baby homes early next year (RTÉ News, Monday December 15, 2014). So, I guess this issue might be revisited if/when the planned official inquiry publishes a report or something. ScepticWombat (talk) 14:12, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
significant amounts of remains have since been found, something like 300 corpses on site and it's certain that more children died or were given away across Ireland. — Unsigned, by: HeadlessDenise / talk / contribs 21:50, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Not a single reference.[edit]

There are no references here at all. This is just hearsay and certainly makes a mockery of rationality. - mjwalker — Unsigned, by: Mjwalker / talk / contribs 05:45, 29 June 2015‎

Pardon? Scream!! (talk) 05:55, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I'd prefer exact citations, yes, but Mjwalker's comment is simply ludicrous as Scream!! already pointed out by highlighting the source/external link section. I've thus removed the [citation needed] templates that Mjwalker inserted into the article since they seemed to be more about whitewashing (by introducing the U and D from FUD) than genuine requests for sources to improve the article. Any attempt at whitewashing such a phenomenon as the Magdalene laundries is seriously uncool. ScepticWombat (talk) 07:14, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Apart from anything else: who wants to stir up Prox without good reason? :-) Scream!! (talk) 10:53, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Further interest in writing about this and cases like this?[edit]

i'm new to the site and i'm not sure whether this is the right place to ask about this, but would other users be interested in an overall article about the treatment of pregnant women in ireland and its relationship to catholicism? it's relevant at the moment due to an upcoming abortion debate and the recent apology over the Kerry Babies case and it's such a culturally sensitive and covered-up part of ireland's history that there aren't aren't many comprehensive overviews of how exactly ireland has been screwing over pregnant women and their children for the past 90-odd years. it might be difficult to find good sources though for some things as again there aren't many comprehensive resources. examples of the kind of thing the article would cover would be the aforementioned kerry babies case, the death of Savita Halappanavar, irish abortion law and Case X, mother and baby homes, how irish abortion law affects maternal care, historical treatment of unwed mothers in ireland, role of catholic church in irish education, the death of Ann Lovett and the way disabled people have been treated in ireland. it would be depressing but i wonder if anyone thinks there should be an article about it or would be interested in writing it. — Unsigned, by: HeadlessDenise / talk / contribs 21:50, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

You could add it to the suggestions page. Alternatively, you could write an essay. CowHouse (talk) 08:49, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
Or you could write a draft in a sandbox page of your own and invite others to check it out. ScepticWombat (talk) 09:35, 28 January 2018 (UTC)