Was Jack the Ripper a prostitute?

I'm afraid I don't buy this at all. The murders were sexually motivated and show a fear of female genitalia. All the victims were strangled first with swift and enormous force which is evidence of immense upper body strength, hence a male killer. And actually you are wrong, there is proof that a man killed these women, because in at least two cases, witnesses reported seeing the victim with a man only minutes before they were murdered. The truth is that most of the women were worse for drink and desperate for rent money - so desperate that they couldn't be picky. As for the letters, by the time DNA testing could be used, DNA would have broken down, only RNA would have remained, and you can't tell anything as specific as gender through RNA, so I don't know where you picked that up from. In any case, even the police at the time said they knew the letters were written by journalists, and only modern investigators suggest the Lusk letter could have been real. The police at the time were spying on several suspects, all men, and two policemen's diaries say that "without a doubt, he was the murderer, but no evidence could ever be presented" which chimes with Anderson's and Swanson's assertion that they had identified the killer, a local poor Polish Jew, but could not provide evidence of his guilt. In those days the only way of truly ascertaining guilt apart from a confession (which Anderson cleverly tried by saying the image of the killer was photographed on Mary Kelly's retina) was by catching the culprit in the act. The only man who saw the murderer (a man) with a victim bare minutes before she was killed refused to testify even though he apparently recognised the man in custody at once. I'm afraid there is no evidence for a Jill the Ripper at all, and mountains of evidence for a Jack the Ripper. My money would be on Cohen, but I wouldn't be overly surprised if it turns out to be Kosminski, it's just that there's as much for him as against him.

1 - Knowing the victims doesn't mean JR was a prostitute. Many people lived in Whitechapel and knew the area well. Regular customers would have been trusted, as well as neigbours. Knowing the killer doesn't mean they were trusted as well. Prostitution is very dangerous because the women are vulnerable. They didn't have a choice in trusting or not - the only way to put food on the table and a roof over their head was to take risks.

2. An ambush attack would have taken the victim by surprise. Lurking in a dark alleyway and attacking in a rush would have been effective.

3. You've forgotten one very important fact - it was common for the wealthy to be seen in Whitechapel. There was nothing unusual about the rich to be seen looking for prostitutes or opium dens. They would not have stood out. You are also making a conceptual leap that the only people familiar with the area, that would fit in, were prostitutes. It was a heavily populated area, butchers, breadmakers, homeless ex soldiers, tavern keepers, street urchins etc. They all would have been intimately familiar with the area and with the victims.

4. Re: midwife and blood - same goes for the butchers that lived in the area.

5. The letter has never been definitively proven to be from JR. It is suspected, not proven.

6. You can't prove a negative. Lack of proof as to the identity is not proof a woman did the crimes.

Not saying your theory is wrong, I'm just saying there is room for doubt.

No. He was a serial killer.

He was a killer

I don't believe so

He was a Jew