girls bottoms spanked by male teachers at schoolJuly 24 2002 at 1:38 AM
Hi Iv'e been reading on Abbys forum about a headmaster who spanked girl pupils on the bottom. Was this ever allowed and if so did boys get the same?
It seems strange to think of a girl at school being bent over and spanked by a man, was this not just an excuse to touch sixteen year old girls bottoms? if this was usual or unusual but did sometimes happen wher girl ever spanked on their bare bottoms by men or was it always over their skirts/knickers?
Re: girls bottoms spanked by male teachers at school
|July 24 2002, 7:12 AM |
I find it difficult to imagine a time in history when a male teacher spanking a girl pupil would not have been regarded as sexual abuse by every right thinking person in the land.
However, there seems to be abundant evidence to show that it happened in the UK in relatively modern times and still happens in the US and that it met/meets widespread acceptance (at least among those who regard CP itself as acceptable).
I have never heard from a reliable source of a case where a teenage schoolgirl was in modern times and in accordance with accepted procedures punished bare in the UK.
Also, as far as I am aware, no male teacher in the UK has ever spanked a girl pupil's bare bottom without subsequently facing criminal charges for assault - although amazing as it may seem the actual act of spanking her on the bare was not, in itself, illegal.
|July 24 2002, 1:05 PM |
Speaking for what happened at our school in the sixties the system was that a male teacher would have to send any girl deemed to be requiring corporal punishment to the Senior Mistress. There would then be an anxious time delay while she spoke with the master concerned about the incident. Then, after taking account of the girl's own side of the story, the decision would be made as to whether the offence required slapped legs (the usual outcome) or the cane. Either way the Senior Mistress would then administer the punishment and that was that. Never did I hear of any male teachers disciplining girls in this way.
Re: Male Teachers
|July 24 2002, 1:34 PM |
Hi, would it have been seen as a more severe punishment being spanked by a male teacher? or were female teacher feared as much?
Re: Re: Male Teachers
|July 24 2002, 2:59 PM |
In theory and generally speaking and most things being equal . . . a whacking will be more painful when delivered by a male than when delivered by a female.
In the real world, however, we have a multitude of variables not least significant of which are the psychological ones.
In nature, males are programmed to attack other males and to be as nice as pie to females. Also, men are programmed by society to believe that hitting women is at worst terribly wrong and at best nothing to be proud of. Also, male teachers just love to be liked by schoolgirls. All those factors will tend to soften the blow, so to speak.
Another relevant factor may be that a female teacher, in a school where both sexes whack pupils, might feel an obligation to show the world that a whacking from a woman teacher is anything BUT a soft option.
In practice therefore it may well be that a girl pupil is better off bending over for a male teacher than a female.
However, if the male teacher is sexually frustrated (notably by erectile disfunction), he may see the cane or slipper as a penis substitute and may use it to elicit from the girl the cries and moans he'd love to be elicting with his willy if only it would work and he had someone to use it on.
Taking everything into account, therefore, the answer to your question is . . . it all depends on the individual teacher and not his/her gender.
Re: Re: Re: Male Teachers
|July 24 2002, 3:37 PM |
In the previous posting, 'disfunction' should of course read 'dysfunction'
common in the us
|July 24 2002, 6:02 PM |
I'd say its pretty common in the U.S. The number of swats has decreased in recent years, however. In my day, in HS the minimum by a principal was five. Now it seems to be two or three. Teachers, in my day, could deliver three swats. Now I think most places don't allow teachers to deliver swats.
In public schools, the paddle is almost always used. Private schools vary a little. I've never heard of a cane being used. The paddles are usually quite heavy, and I think are designed to penetrate several layer of denim, the most common material worn.
Swats are ALWAYS with cloths ON. I've never heard of it any other way. I can't even remember the threat or rumor of it bare, at school.
I should say, in my experience, the paddle is a quite affective instrument. Five well delivered swats resulted in a lot of pain. Bruising was a given. Blistering, especially with a few more swats, was common. The discomfort of blistering would last for days. Bruising would often result in a dull ache for several days, especially when initially seting down.
Re: Male Teachers
|July 24 2002, 6:02 PM |
Was this a secondary school?
Was this a secondary school?
|July 24 2002, 6:37 PM |
Re: Was this a secondary school?
|July 24 2002, 6:47 PM |
Did your school have a sixth form, and were sixth-form girls subject to this? Even for a fifteen- or sixteen-year-old getting punished like this must have felt ridiculous. I think that a proper caning would have been less humiliating, all in all.
Yes and No
|July 24 2002, 7:07 PM |
Yes there was a sixth form and no, girls in it did not get corporal punishment. The cut off point appeared to be the end of the fifth form and yes you're right it was a horrible experience at age 15 or 16 to have to stand there getting the backs of your legs slapped.
Not sure about the cane - canings were few and far between but a lot more painful I am sure.
Re: Yes and No
|July 24 2002, 7:31 PM |
So I take it that this happened to you at age 15 or 16? How embarrassing indeed! I presume that the head would lift up your skirt slightly to do this - or did she simply have you bend over? Did it really hurt that much or was it more of an excercise in humiliation?
Re: common in the us
|July 24 2002, 10:11 PM |
I actually have no experiance of C.P. As I was at school in the nineties, I find it hard to imagine being at a school were pupils could be hit by teachers. I don't know why its probably a bit of a stereotype but I have always imagined that boys were caned by the headmaster 'six of the best' and girls were usually put over the headmasters knee and spanked on their bottoms, I find it imposable to imagine anything like that happening to the girls at my school whether it was knickers up or down. Also Sara when you say it was not illigal for male teachers to spank girls bare bottoms does that mean girls of 12 or 13 or did that mean all schoolgirls up to 16 and 17?
Re: Re: common in the us
|July 24 2002, 10:40 PM |
It is not illegal (in itself) for any person to strike another man, woman or child on the bare bottom.
Where it occurs in the school situation, the central questions revolve around the 'reasonableness' of the punishment and whether or not an indecent act was committed.
Re: Re: Re: common in the us
|July 24 2002, 11:08 PM |
Sorry Sarajane - I'll beg to disagree with you there.
It is highly illegal to strike anyone - with the possible exception of children by their parents reasonably, not sure of the exact legal get-out on that one.
When CP was abolished in UK schools the repealing legislation removed the existing exemption from prosecution for assault where the "assault" took place in a school disciplinary environment. I'll try and dig out the actual wording.
As far as indecent assault is concerned - it has to be proved that there was an intent to assault indecently. I remember one case up here in the NW papers around about mid Eighties where the case for indecent assault against a Headmaster who smacked girls' bare bums was halted when a House of Lords decision in a completely separate case ruled as I have said. The case against the Head was dropped because it couldn't be proved that he was intent on indecent assault when he bared their bums. Just wish I could find the papers - it was in the Liverpool Daily Post and I think mentioned in the Times.
Re: Re: Re: Re: common in the us
|July 24 2002, 11:17 PM |
Re: Re: Re: Re: common in the us
|July 25 2002, 5:34 AM |
If it's highly illegal for ANYone to strike ANYone, please explain why boxers are permitted to engage in such activities before crowds of thousands and often on prime-time TV.
Also, perhaps you can tell us why we're not arrested for striking our fellow citizens on the back in moments of congratulation?
And then we have midwives striking new-born, defenceless and totally naked babies.
And masseurs . . . and . . . well, you get my point.
P.S. Wasn't the 'other' George rather keen on quoting huge tracts of law at me? Are you related?
|July 25 2002, 7:53 AM |
It was all done in a very matter of fact way - a telling off, then the instruction to stand at the Senior Mistress' side - she remained seated and with her left hand she'd yank your skirt and slip up a good few inches - almost to your bottom - and then with her right hand she'd smack up and down each leg in turn. In those days we all wore socks up to the fifth form so our thighs were always bare for the slaps. Of course it was embarrassing as it seemed so juvenile - I was 16 the last time I got punished this way and I felt completely foolish. But it did also hurt, I mean it really stung and try as you may you would never be able to keep from crying which of course made it more embarrassing still.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: common in the us
|July 25 2002, 9:23 AM |
It is not legal to hit anyone, its a matter of bringing charges.
Boxers use gloves ( should we have spanking gloves) The police choose not to interfere.
Even S & M is illegal between consenting adults.
See you all in Barlinnie with Jockie.
|July 25 2002, 9:37 AM |
The punishment-method you describe is very rare.
It was however completely legal, in no way indecent, and was known about by the several generations of pupils at the school.
Indeed, the school and its senior mistress might be commended for punishing in that way rather than using the cane on the vast majority of occasions when CP was deemed appropriate.
There is therefore no reason why we shouldn't know the name of the school.
Which school was it?