Almost every CP story on almost every CP website is a fantasy from start to finish.

The seasoned pork pie spotter knows that CP fantasies have a number of hallmarks and school fantasies are most quickly identified in cases where the writer omits to name the school at which the events took place.

The reason for the omission is obvious - if the school were to be named it would be easy demonstrate that the alleged events could not have taken place there.

In a tiny fraction of cases there may be good reason for not naming the school - e.g. where to do so would bring embarrassment upon the writer or upon some other person identifiable from the events described - but in the overwhelming majority of cases it would be impossible to identify anybody and in cases where identification is possible there often is no scope for embarrassment.

Millions upon millions of people are happy to tell their stories (CP-related and otherwise) on sites where the schools are named but on CP sites, the schools' identities are almost always shrouded in mystery.

Why? Because in almost every case the alleged events never took place outside the mind of the writer.

Lotta has not given a real name or address. Presumably, if we were we would be able to prove Lotta didn't exist. Alternatively, Lotta has some valid reasons for with holding this information.

Some accounts are undoubtedly fantasy but some are not. I don't believe it is possible to reliably determine percentages.

As most readers with treble-figure IQs will realise, there is no suggestion that contributors should identify themselves.

If a contributor wishes to remain anonymous, that's understandable - but there is usually no good reason to withold the identity of a school mentioned in a posting.

Unless the story if a fantasy, of course.

As most readers with treble-figure IQs will realise, there is no suggestion that contributors should identify themselves.

If a contributor wishes to remain anonymous, that's understandable - Unless the story if a fantasy, of course.



Well I do apologise to readers of this thread for having a very low IQ , OR at least one less than lotta/sarajane.

(Incidently lotta you have never publically denied my accusation that you were indeed SaraJane)

Lotta/SaraJane said ----If a Contributer wishes to remain anonymous that is understandable.

In a degree yes, but hey no ones going to win a bravery medal for slagging someone off under an anonymous handle especially when they are not prepared to come out real time and meet the people their slaggin off.

Lotta/Sarajane continued-----but there is usually no good reason to withold the identity of a school mentioned in a posting.


So lotta/sarajane what eveidence do you base that fact on that there is usually no good reason to withold a schools name.

This is now interesting Please Answer.

As usual Freddie tries to get off the hook by a combination of changing the subject and attacking Lotta on matters not relevant to the matter under discussion.

Lotta may be a thorn in the side of the fantasy merchants and all those who want to believe their fantasies but her arguments are logical and make good sense.

It's easy to understand why most people on sites like this wouldn't want to have their identities known but, except where naming a school would identify the writer of the posting, a refusal to name a school is as good as an admission that the story is untrue.

I disagree that refusing to name a school is anything like admitting a story is a fantasy.

I have named two of my schools on this forum - and frankly, I'm very uncomfortable about the fact I did. If I could take it back - I might well do so. I worry that some of the things I've posted might embarass my school, or perhaps more importantly might embarass some of my former teachers - because one of the schools was quite small, with consequently a fairly small class, and because there's a published history of the school which gives the teachers names someone could potentially identify them.

I'm a historian by training, with an interest in the history of education, particularly Australian education, and a further interest in the specific area of the history of corporal punishment. Because of my specialised knowledge in these areas, over the past year reading accounts on other forums, I have been able to identify specific teachers at specific schools as the perpetrators of particular events. There's only a limited number of schools I can easily do that with - about fifteen schools - but there's a lot more where if I really wanted to, I could probably track down someone if I knew the school involved - I have access to the confidential roll of Victorian teachers from the 1920s to the 1980s - I can identify virtually anyone who was teaching in any state school in Victoria, Australia, at any time. That's my local area - so I could do that quite easily if I wanted to take the time.

I think a lot of people might be surprised at how much information is out there about a lot of schools - if you know where to look.

I see from his post that our "Retired Police Officer" is not what he claims to be. Either that or we should be thankful that this person is no longer serving.

As Dean says, there are postings from which one might be able to identify the contributor if one knew the name of the school. Under such circumstances, one can easily understand why the contributor might wish the school to remain anonymous.

However, in the majority of case, there is no possibility of identifying the contributor.

Take for example a posting which says "When I was a schoolboy, the local girls' school used to cane girls on the bum". There is simply no way on earth that naming the school could lead to the identification of the contributor.

As we all know, such postings abound and yet the schools are hardly ever named.

Why not? Could it be because many such schools exist only in the imagination of the contributor.

The thing is Lotta, it's not always a matter of being worried about personal identification. That is one concern for some people certainly. But there can also, in some cases, be personaly concerns about naming the school involved.

The prep school I attended is one that I owe a huge amount to. I'm very fond of it, I loved my time there. And because of that, I want to protect it, and its reputation. It used corporal punishment for a considerable amount of time after such measures had become very politically incorrect, and some people could use that fact to attack it. And I wouldn't want that to happen, so my natural inclination would be to not name the school.

Now I did name my school - but I only did that because the official history of the school published in the late 1990s acknowledged that corporal punishment was used at the school at the time I was there. If it's been officially acknowledged, refusing to name the school doesn't really accomplish much in terms of protecting it.

But if that information hadn't been published, I never would have named my school. Not because I was saying anythiung untrue about it, and not because I think it did anything wrong. But because I have a natural inclination to protect it from attack, even if attack is unlikely.

Now, there are many cases where you read a story and you can't see any good reason why a school hasn't been named. I think in most cases, it wouldn't matter. But I don't like the idea going around that there can't be a reason not to name a school. Sometimes there are real reasons why a person might be reluctant.

In my first posting on this thread, I allowed that there is sometimes good reason for not naming a school, albeit in only a small number of cases.

In Dean's case, he believes he has good reason for not naming schools and his reasons appear perfectly sincere.

Where Dean's case differs from that of most other contributors is that his memoirs have always been credible. Even the most cynical reader would find them so at a fundamental level.

When we read Dean's stories, we accept readily that the type of school he mentions did exist. We accept equally readily that the type of event he describes did take place. In telling his stories, Dean does not fly in the face of our common sense, our experience or of historical fact as we know and understand it.

A small number of other contributors have told similarly credible tales but the vast majority are obviously pure fantasy.

If you tell someone you've seen a troop of flying monkeys, you must expect to be asked where you saw them. If you decline to answer, you're likely to be met with a certain amount of incredulity.