<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

sixth form spankings?

July 31 2004 at 6:03 PM


Ive noticed a lot of spanking films feature sixth form girls, However at the time when CP was most used the 60's and 70's weren't most sixth formers at a sixth form college rather than at a school?

If so sixth form collage's use CP? I assumed 17/18 year old girls were a little too old to be put over the headmasters knee for a spanking? so was the slipper or cane more likely?

I'm sorry if I seem a little unknowledgable but I only developed an interest in the subject a couple of years ago and have only just discovered that other people had a similar interest sice typing in 'spanking' on google. I'm not old enought to know anything about CP myself as I've only been out of school a few years.


 Respond to this message   
Lotta Nonsense

Re: sixth form spankings?

July 31 2004, 6:35 PM 

Only an extremely tiny percentage of 6th Formers ever received CP and only an extremely tiny percentage of CP recipients were girls.

On that basis, we can assume that the total number of 6th Form girls who received CP is either zero or close to zero.

The world of CP videos is one thing.

Reality is another.


Re: sixth form spankings?

July 31 2004, 6:51 PM 

Welcome, Harry, to our Happy Circle. I agree with Lotta.

We know of two instances where sixth form girls were subjected to corporal punishment and you can read all about them at ‘1964 Helston Grammar School spankings’ and ‘1964’, currently on Pages 2 and 6 respectively.


It did not happen - in my experience

July 31 2004, 8:07 PM 

In my part of the World teenage girls were not "spanked" at school. Education board bylaws specifically prohibited the practice and it would have been considered unthinkable by the vast majority. Any incidents would have very likely have come to public notice and caused outrage. No such thing happened This was at a time when boys and girls had very different destinies (1950's & 60's).

I am not at all sure that many were "spanked". A much more common term, for minor punishment of young children, was "smacked". This usually involved slapping the buttocks with the open hand. I suspect "spanked" is more an American term. It often seems to be a euphemism. School boys were strapped or caned. It would have been considered demeaning to have described a teenage boy's strapping or caning as a "spanking" except perhaps for jocular effect.

Lotta Nonsense

Re: sixth form spankings?

July 31 2004, 8:14 PM 

The Helston case is indeed one in which 6th Form girls were subjected to CP. It is also (like most M/f school CP events) a classic example of sexual abuse under the guise of CP.

No pun is intended above but the headmaster was in fact a Mr Guise!

My blood is heated almost to boiling point by the idea that the disgusting old perv treated the girls in the way he did but it's heated way past boiling point by the idea that neither society nor the law saw his behaviour as a sexual offence.

In a world where schoolteachers were perfect, I would happily support the reintroduction of CP to British schools.

In any real world, however, I would (equally happily) shoot anybody who attempted to take us back to the days when men like Mr Guise were allowed to prey upon our children.


Re: sixth form spankings?

July 31 2004, 8:31 PM 

I agree, of course, with the general points made by Lotta and Gillian about the rarity of cp ever being used particularly on older girls. However, there is a discussion of the Helston case in the most recent issue of "Rawhide," which plausibly quotes another girl from the school as saying these kinds of punishment were fairly common at this school, and the only difference with this particular case was that it hit the headlines. Forty years is a long time, and what would be unthinkable today was not viewed by society in the same way in 1964. The fact that the headmaster and his assistant were only fined £50 and £30 respectively for an excess of zeal, rather than being locked up as they would be today, suggests in itself how much attitudes have changed. I am not, of course, suggesting this kind of thing was common even in 1964, merely that a minority of schools clearly did still exercise their right to practice it.


cp of 6th formers

July 31 2004, 11:00 PM 

It was very rare at my school but in my 6th form year (1973) 3 of my classmates got it for smoking in the school grounds. Rather hypocritcally the administrator of it smoked himself. I could never understand that - if smoking was a no-no why did the ban not apply to teachers also?


Re: cp of 6th formers

August 1 2004, 12:55 AM 

Ok I get that it was unusual and probably only to younger girls, but in the few times it happened were smackings always over the headmasters knee? or could they be over te desk?

Also were the smacks counted like strokes of the cane or would a smacking be just untill the headmaster thought the girls bottom was pink enough?

Also would the knickers be pulled down and if so would'nt that mean that the girls virgina would be visable to the headmaster during the smacking?

Lotta Nonsense

Re: cp of 6th formers

August 1 2004, 8:24 AM 

My eye is immediately taken by an interesting spelling mistake that reminds me of a similar error in another posting.

Perhaps that earlier posting might be found and its content and authorship compared with these two missives from Harry?

Murray E

re: sixth form spankings?

August 2 2004, 1:32 AM 

Producers of spanking videos will encounter problems if they use models under 18. Methinks it's highly unlikely any schoolgirls that age would have received corporal punishment. For girls up to 15 or 16 I can believe a cane or equivalent across the knickers from a woman staff member but that's all.


Re: re: sixth form spankings?

August 2 2004, 4:41 PM 

Yes Harry, the headmaster may be able to see everything if the girl was at the right angle, also some girls have bigger bums than others so what could be seen would differ from girl to girl.

schoolgirl spanking were rare but certanly not unheard of, Colin West amongst many others was responsable for a many a schoolgirl's tanned bottom. West like may ex headmasters actually ended up facing criminal charges for spanking girl pupils bare bottoms.

As well as the five or six incidents that resulted in legal action, there must be many headmasters who have never had to face up to the reign of terror they held over their pupils both boys and girls, maybe there will be many more incident come to light in the futre which will keep this forum disputing their reliability for many years to come.

I hope so anyway!


Sixth Formers

August 2 2004, 6:16 PM 

"My eye is immediately taken by an interesting spelling mistake that reminds me of a similar error in another posting."


"My eye is immediately taken TO an interesting spelling mistake that reminds me of a similar error in another posting."

Or, once again, is it context?


Re: re: sixth form spankings?

August 2 2004, 7:18 PM 

Also Harry, check out the gymslip caning shocker article on www.corpun.com which desribes how lots of schoolgirls in London were getting their bums caned by strict headmasters in the 70's.

The slipper and strapp were certanly used on schoolgirls at most schools in the UK including the small collection of schools I attended during my time as a school boy.

It's amazing but there were very few rules regarding the punishment of girls at school, unlike who had a whole list of do's and dont's. (I guess it was a oversight as most people didn't think girls would get into much trouble) Anyway in general headmasters would be told just to discipline girls as a caring and reasable parent would, and in many cases that meant a jolly good spanking.

Hope this helps!

Lotta Nonsense

Re: Sixth Formers

August 2 2004, 7:59 PM 

'Taken by' is correct.

'Taken to' makes sense but is different in meaning and is less elegant.

Lotta Nonsense

Re: re: sixth form spankings?

August 2 2004, 8:05 PM 

"The slipper and strap were certainly used on schoolgirls at most schools in the UK".

Yes, just as birching was commonplace in Eire convent schools in the 1970s.

Absolute and utter gonads!


Canings and punishment of girls

August 2 2004, 9:03 PM 


Look up Riddings Comprehensive School, now known as South Leys school. The punishment book might be a matter of public record. Look between 1970 and 1975 and you will see that girls up to 16 were indeed caned and slippered, namely by a Miss Williams I think. And never by a male.

Boys were slippered on the bottom by the PE teacher, a Mr Williams and Mr Hubbard (geography) and caned across the hands by the deputy head, another Mister Williams(English). Other teachers known to own a cane were a Mr Brattan (Woodwork) and a Mr Attenborough (Geography).

As far as I know, in that particular era, punishments had to be recorded and made available to school inspectors. It is a long time ago, and the book may have been lost or destroyed, but it certainly existed.

If the punishment book is not available, then you have only my word for it, and respectfully request of you that you take my word as truth. My own wife can verify that it happened, along with other people I know.

Big B

Lotta Nonsense

Re: Canings and punishment of girls

August 2 2004, 10:43 PM 

Big B,

You may well be correct in every detail but Riddings School doesn't constitute more than 50% of the schools in the UK.


the 'smacked bottom'

August 3 2004, 2:25 AM 

The use of the smacked bottom in schools and at home is very interesting; the idea of a boy getting a smacked bum at school or home beyond about nine is almost comical. This is because boys are then seen as being too hardy to be properly punished that way, and the beyond that age the idea of a boy being put over his dad or headmaster's knee and getting his bare backside spanked would be seen as effeminate by his schoolmates etc. suggesting that the smacked bottom is fundamentally a girls punishment.

Boys in general are disciplinarily promoted to getting punished bending over a table desk etc. and with an implement e.g. a cane belt or slipper.

This is backed up if I look back on my home and school discipline experience.

At home my brother or me got the belt beyond about eight or nine but my dad smacked my sisters bottom up to the age of about 15. At primary school boys got the slipper or strap beyond about seven but I remember one girl coming out of the heads office in tears after getting a smacked bottom and she must have been at least ten or eleven as it was the last year at the school. Then in secondary school the smacked bottom was relaced by the slipper for girls and the cane for boys.

Can anyone give a good explanation to why the 'smacked bottom' is such a girly punishment and why boys tend to cringe at the very mention of smacking or spanking.


Re: the 'smacked bottom'

August 3 2004, 9:09 PM 

Adams question about why the 'smacked bottom' is such a girly punishement could Perhapse Harry's comment that the headmaster would be able to see the girls vagina. (well he said 'virgina' which could mean both that the head would be able to see the girls vagina and that he may be able to tell if she was a virgin?) This sexual element could perhapse be why the 'smacked bottom' is such a girly punishement.

The added humiliation of a man seeing a girls most intimate parts as well as being punished physicaly and in an etreamly juvinile way, would have made the 'smacked bottom' a most effective punishement and must have acted as a great deterent to all but the naughtiest of schoolgirls.

Although of course M/F spankings would have been extreamly uncommon beyond primary school.

Any thoughts?


Lotta Nonsense

Re: the 'smacked bottom'

August 3 2004, 10:57 PM 

M/f 'over the knee' spankings were indeed extremely uncommon beyond primary school.

They were also extremely uncommon at primary school.


Re: the 'smacked bottom'

August 4 2004, 12:44 AM 

They certanly happened at my primary school!

The headmaster also strapped girls although I'm not sure if this was across the bum or the hands.


Actual Research

August 4 2004, 1:28 AM 

Data gathered by surveys in British schools in the early 1950s indicates the following about the corporal punishment of schoolgirls.

Out of 144 LEAs,

3 considered corporal punishment undesirable for girls under any circumstances.
7 considered it undesirable except for serious offences.
1 considered that it should stop being used, but didn't actually say it was undesirable.

28.46% of girls considered to be 'difficult' had received slight corporal punishment at school (slight seems to have indicated smacking, spanking, or the slipper or similar implement).
3.84% of girls considered to be 'difficult' had received more severe corporal punishment (the cane, strap, or similar)

I have a lot more data from these surveys - the above are just a couple of basic statistics of possible relevance here.


Re: Actual Research

August 4 2004, 5:14 PM 

If it will convice Lotta Nonsense then I will give the name of one of my old schools were girls did get a smacked bottom from the headmaster on rare occasions.

St Margarets primary, Manchester.

Lotta Nonsense

Re: Actual Research

August 4 2004, 6:19 PM 

It's never been my wish to offend the truth-tellers on this forum and I have always been happy to concede that almost anything you care to name might have taken place somewhere at some time.

There are two main types of pork pie on CP forums: claims that something happened and claims that something happened to the person submitting the posting. The latter are almost infinitely more numerous than the former.

In determining what might reasonably have happened in our schools (and in particular what might have been commonplace) we must allow that headmasters and teachers were for the most part highly respectable members of society who were very much concerned with proper conduct.

Where the law was vague and/or where LEA's allowed scope for the exercising of discretion, the only question a teacher needed to asked was 'What view will right-thinking people take of the punishment I intend to inflict upon this child?'.

My contention is that M/f OTK spanking would have fallen into a greyish area where a number of right-thinking persons of the day would have supported it while many others would have thought it at least bordering upon the improper.

That situation was, of course, the equivalent of a green light to pervy teachers and I therefore have no doubt that a number of such spankings took place.

However, the fact that most people (and therefore most teachers) are repulsed by child sex abuse leads me to believe that such punishments were by no means commonplace.


Re: Actual Research

August 4 2004, 7:49 PM 

You are articulate and convincing as always, Lotta, but I think you may be underestimating the role of the unconscious, of mixed motives, in teachers of a former era. I'm sure, as you say, that the number of teachers who could be classified outright as "perves" was very small. But I strongly suspect that there was a larger group of teachers who gained a certain amount of pleasure from administering cp, even though they would not have wanted to admit this, even to themselves, but who used their position to take advantage of "greyish areas," as you call them, in the law and/or custom. They would justify this practice by telling themselves they were acting on the most moral and altruistic of motives; they would not themselves have recognized it as any form of child abuse, even though that's what we would undoubtedly call it today.


Re: Actual Research

August 5 2004, 12:12 AM 

Just some reflection on what Nero has said.

As I've made clear previously, for four years (1985-1988), I attended a school where corporal punishment was normal and routine.

I have absolutely no reason to doubt the sincerity and good intentions of the vast majority of the teachers I had at that school, when it came to corporal punishment.

But there are two cases where I do have *some* doubts.

The first related to one of the religious staff of the school. During my first two years at the school, he used the strap a lot. This man always struck me a little odd - he was a Jesuit Brother, and *every* other Jesuit I ever encountered during my time being taught in Jesuit schools, and since, were highly literate, highly educated, highly intelligent men. This man didn't come across that way at all. I don't think he was stupid - he just didn't seem anywhere near as smart as the others, and while he was extremely well educated on the catechism of the Catholc church, he didn't seem to be educated in any other way. His sole teaching duties in the school seemed to be to teach 10 year olds the catechism, and some duties teaching PE.

Anyway, this man used the strap more often than every other teacher in the school put together, I think. He was the only man who routinely strapped 10 and 11 year olds. He used to always be on yard duty at recess and lunchtime and he carried his strap around in his pocket, and used it whenever he detected any form of misbehaviour, right there, right then. Now, during my first and second year at the school, the school reviewed its corporal punishment practices, apparently for the first time ever - and one of the reforms they initiated involved them taking the strap off this teacher. So for my last two years at the school, instead of using the strap, he used to hand out smacked backsides in the playground. He punished just as often - just not in the same way.

Now... I really have no idea what to think about this man. Today, I'd have really serious suspicions about any man who managed to administer corporal punishment on a daily basis in the way this man did. But - well, in his case, I'm just not sure what to think, as I say. He hardly ever hit hard - well, it was hard enough when you were ten, I suppose - but nothing compared to what some other teachers did. Being strapped by him was actually considered a 'rite of passage' in the school, and he knew that, and I suspect he felt under pressure from that as well. He never, to my knowledge, handed out a punishment that wasn't deserved. His punishments seemed very effective in ending behaviour then and there - and a minute later were forgotten.

I suppose what I am trying to say is, this man used corporal punishment so often, I do wonder if he enjoyed it on some level. *But* at the same time, he never seemed to use it inappropriately, and if he did feel that way, I'm pretty sure it was unconscious on his part. He believed he was doing what his job required.

The second case - well, this one is one I'm not that comfortable talking about. I kept it hidden for fifteen years, because I believed (apparently wrongly as it turns out) that the teacher involved - who I greatly respected, in fact, in a way I loved her - had broken the law. When I was 13 - this was 1988 - this female teacher, pulled my pants down and spanked my bare backside. Now today, this would *certainly* inspire some negative comment. Back in 1988 - less clear cut, but certainly a significant number of people probably would have considered it inappropriate.

In her case, I have no suspicions regarding her motives. I am pretty much convinced that she did what she did because she considered it an appropriate punishment for what I'd done. Presumably, she knew the law - because I very much doubt she'd have done it unless she knew it was legal. I'm also sure she knew that many people would consider it inappropriate. But, and I am guessing here, I don't think it's likely she cared about that - she was the type of woman who did what *she* felt was appropriate - and wouldn't have really cared about other peoples attitudes who were in less of a position to make a valid judgement.

I think there would definitely be some teachers out there who simply would not care what the community at large thought. Frankly, at my school, they were doing so many things that were frowned upon in the outside world, that I suspect teachers had very little regard for outside opinions. We all saw our school as unique - we really did think our school was completely different in many ways from virtually any other school in the country. So nobody let outside attitudes have much influence on us within the school context.

But - here's the other thing. A teacher probably could have had a good chance of getting away with just about anything at that school if they had wanted to. As I say, apparently my teacher didn't break the law in anyway - but for fifteen years I thought she had - and to protect her, and to protect the school, I never even mentioned to anyone what had happened. Nobody told me not to. It just seemed the right thing to do.


Re: Actual Research

August 5 2004, 1:41 AM 

Just to point out that I am, of course, willing to get any other data out of these surveys that anyone might be interested in - they were very detailed. If you can think of a question that might have been asked in a survey of corporal punishment, ask and I'll see if I can find the data.


Re: Actual Research

August 5 2004, 2:20 AM 

The incident I remember at St Margaret’s was when I was about ten or eleven, so around the mid 70's.

I had been in trouble and was punished by being made to sit on a desk outside the headmaster’s office for a couple of days instead of going to lessons. This meant that I actually got to see a lot of what went on outside the lessons, for example I got to talk to the boys and girls who had been sent to the headmaster. As you might expect the majority were boys but I vividly remember one girl from the same class as me and so the same age being made to wait outside the head's office. She was very much a 'difficult' pupil and I actually remember her being warned a few times by our teacher that she would be sent to the headmaster to be smacked if she didn't start to behave herself.

Of course I don't remember what I said to her but I do remember that she knew she was going to be spanked, when the head opened the door told her to go in his office there was no way I couldn't get on with my work, I just found myself trying to hear what was happening inside. I remember hearing him shouting at her for at least ten minutes and then a few moments later I heard muffled slapping sounds with the occasional cry from her, this lasted for about five minutes, then after a pause the door opened and she came out with very damp eye's and rubbing her bum, he followed her out with a bright red face from his exertion and told me agitatedly to get on with my work. (obviously full of testosterone from his display of authority)

There was also an event in the second year of secondary school, which makes me believe that girls very occasionally received smacked bottoms otk there too.

Girls were certainly slippered there quite often, the q for the slipper outside the head's office, often comprised of about seven or eight boys (of which I was a regular) and often at least one girl. (At the school the slipper was always across the bum and usually four whacks)

I always imagined my school to be fairly normal!


Re: Actual Research

August 5 2004, 2:25 AM 

Dean, I would like to know if any headmasters ever caned girls on the bum M/f as I've never heard of this happening?


Re: Actual Research

August 5 2004, 3:15 AM 

I'll look at the data a little later, but from memory, while it makes it clear that it was within regulations in a lot of areas for a male teacher to punish a female student, it doesn't really give any indication about how often this happened.

However, from another source, I have found evidence of one case where a girl was punished on the bottom by a male teachers - probably with a cane, but that's not 100% certain. This doesn't mean it only ever happened once, of course - it just means that this is one case where the evidence does exist.

It is contained in Hansard (the official record of proceeding in the British Parliament) on the 12th December 1946.

Mr Peter Freeman (Member for Freeport) "asked the Minister of Education whether she has any report to make on the conduct of a headmaster who recently inflicted corporal punishment on a girl of eight years of age; whether the inquiry of the local education authority has been completed; and what action she proposes to take.

Miss Wilkinson: I understand that this case will be considered further by a subcommittee of the local education authority on 18th December. It is for the authority to decide what action should be taken in the matter.

Mr. Freeman: Is the right hon. Lady aware that at a medical examination soon after the event two heavy weal marks were found by an independent doctor on the buttocks of this little girl? Is it in accordance with the regulations of the Department that a headmaster can inflict such assault and punishment on a child without witnesses, without inquiry, without informing the child of the fault or crime committed, without giving any reasons, without any knowledge of the state of health of the child, without informing the parents or anybody else, and without anything being done by her Department?

Miss Wilkinson: I am sorry, but this is one of the matter which come with the purview of local education authorities and they must deal with their teacher on these questions of discipline.

Mr. Freeman: In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment."

This seems clear evidence - the injuries were on the buttocks, and as they were 'weal marks' that strongly suggests a cane was used.

Mr. Freeman did raise the entire issue of corporal punishment in schools in a speech in Parliament on 24th April 1947. As part of this speech, he refers to what seems to be the same case - but the girl is now described as 12 years old:

"I want to quote one or two illustrations. I raised a case during Question time in the House just prior to Christmas concerning a child of 12. She was dealt with by a teacher in such a brutal way that the case was brought before the court. The injury was very serious, but, unfortunately, when the case was before the court it was considered to have been properly administered, and no action was taken and no conviction recorded against the teacher in view of the fact that the teacher was, strictly speaking, within the grounds allowed by legislation. It was claimed that the teacher was acting within his rights to inflict the punishment he had, and nothing was done."

Brendan B

Peter Freeman MP

August 5 2004, 9:06 PM 

A typo there I think. Wasn't Peter Freeman MP for Newport, there's no such place as Freeport in the UK.


Re: Peter Freeman MP

August 5 2004, 10:57 PM 

You're quite correct - the 'Free' in his name must have decided to assert itself for a second time when I was typing that.


Re: Actual Research

August 6 2004, 3:32 PM 

I imagine that this girl must have been twelve not eight, my primary headmaster didn't even cane boys of eight. Even at secondery school the cane was reserved for rare incidents but as I've said already the slipper was an everyday punishement for boys and girls, both given by the headmaster who was one of the very few memeber of staff who could inflict corporal punishement at my school.


Re: Actual Research

August 6 2004, 3:54 PM 

Dean, in this data you have is there any recorded evidence for M/f otk smackings at school or were they all done unofficially? And is there any evidence of bare bottom punishments of any kind involving girls?

Also is there any evidence of girls getting the strapp on the bottom rather than on the hands as seems to have been more usual?


Re: Actual Research

August 7 2004, 2:12 AM 

The problem here is, how you define an 'official' punishment versus an 'unofficial' punishment.

There isn't a nice neat way of defining these things when talking about British schools during the twentieth century.

The vast majority of regulations on corporal punishment in British schools were set by the Local Education Authorities (which only had real influence over state schools, of course - they weren't always called LEAs, either, but I'll use that generic term). Some LEAs set detailed regulations, which were constantly reviewed. Others set very vague regulations in the 1890s which remained in effect until the 1980s! Around 1950 - the period I have statistical data for, there were 144 LEAs in England and Wales.

There was only *one* regulation that applied all of England and Wales (Ireland, later Northern Ireland, and Scotland were handled by different regulations). That is, from sometime between 1906 and 1910, all schools were supposed to record all incidents of corporal punishment in a punishment book. This regulation was so vague that it's difficult to even pin down exactly when it came into effect.

Now, what this means is, there are two practical definitions of 'official' corporal punishment. One is that official punishments were those properly recorded in a punishment book.

The major problem with that definition is that up until the 1960s, the vast majority of corporal punishments were not recorded in such books. The regulations said they were supposed to be - but the regulations were often ignored. Some schools maintained complete records. Most, probably, recorded serious incidents of severe punishment. But relatively few seem to have recorded all incidents, and most schools at best, only recorded those incidents involving the cane (or the strap if that was the common method used in that locality). Spankings, smacks, even slipperings, typically went unrecorded.

There was generally no attempt to hide these things, the fact that they weren't recorded doesn't mean people were trying to conceal what they were doing or that these punishment were viewed as anything other than official and routine - it's just people didn't do the paperwork, and it wasn't until the 1950s and early 1960s, that schools started to get in trouble for not doing it.

So, that's not really a good measure of whether or not a punishment was official or not.

The other practical definition of official or unofficial, is, whether or not a punishment was *permissable* under the regulations in force in a particular LEA. If it was allowed, it was official. If it wasn't allowed, it's obvious that the punishment was unofficial.

This definition has a couple of problems as well - the first is that private schools were a law unto themselves. They could do just about anything provided it didn't cross the line into grievous bodily harm. And the punishment regimes used in private schools are largely unknown to the general public. It's not that hard to find out how punishment was inflicted at famous schools - but it's very difficult to find out how it was inflicted at schools that were less well known. In most cases, there was probably nothing unusual about corporal punishment at most schools - but there could be exceptions.

The second problem is even when dealing with LEAs and state schools - well, really, there's no easy record of what their policies were either. These certainly weren't hidden - but it's not that easy to find out.

It wasn't until 1947 (inspired by Mr Peter Freeman's speech in the House of Commons, mentioned earlier) that there was any real attempt to gather information about what was allowed in different LEAs.

The results of that attempt are contained in the statistics I have. Now there are a lot of statistics - this report runs to 432 pages in length. But it is statistical, and it doesn't look at individual cases. It was trying to get a broad picture. It looks at questions like 'What regulations exist?' 'How often are 'difficult' children punished?', 'How common is corporal punishment (and other forms of punishment) used for particular offences?', 'How effective are various forms of corporal punishment for particular offences?', 'What punishments do children regard as better or worse?', 'What do teachers think of corporal punishment?'.

It didn't look at really specific information on how corporal punishment was used - it covers that in a little bit of detail - but in general, it just considered 'severe corporal punishment' which was defined as the cane, strap, or similar, and 'mild corporal punishment' which was smacking, slapping, slipering or similar. Because they were trying to get a broad picture, they didn't go into any more detail than that.

What I can do, is look at the information from the LEAs - all 144 filled in surveys on their regulations - and from that we can see if there were any areas where male teachers were not allowed by regulation to punish girls.

My view is that, considering how often 'normal' corporal punishment was used, and how many teachers and students there were involved. then *unless* there was a specific regulation against it, in a particular area, it almost certainly happened at least sometimes. If there was no rule against it, I'm sure at least some teachers did it. There's one exception to this - I very much doubt bare bottom punishments of males or females happened very often at all in state schools - they certainly happened to boys in private schools - and may have happened to girls (I've no real data). The reason I think we can safely dismiss the idea that such punishments occurred in state schools, relates to another statement in parliament by Mr Freeman - who would have certainly exposed any incidents he knew of - but I'm not sure I can immediately put my hand on that statement. I'll check around later.

OK - of the 144 LEAs,

1 stated that corporal punishment should not be used on girls
3 stated that its use was undesirable on girls
7 states its use was undesirable on girls except in special circumstances ofvarious sorts.

The 11 cases above were expressions of *principle* - not binding on teachers - they had no legal force.

In the case of girls in mixed schools headed by a headmaster

20 LEAs required the headmaster of a school to authorise a female teacher to administer corporal punishment - he could not do so.
3 LEAs required the headmaster to do this *if possible*
2 LEAs required the authorisation of a female teacher, but the Headmaster was to be present during the punishment
1 LEA authorised the headmaster to administer such punishment by required a female teacher be present
1 LEA approved a female teacher to administer such punishment themselves
1 LEA required the headmaster of a school to authorise a female teacher to administer such punishments, and also said it should be done only in exceptional cases.

In addition, 5 LEAs banned male teachers from corporally punishing girls

The 33 cases above were binding on teachers. 24 of these cases, meant that male teachers could not administer corporal punishment in schools.

120 LEAs out of 144 had *no* regulation that completely banned male teachers from inflicting corporal punishment on girls. 111 out of 144 had no formal regulation even restricting their powers.

This *doesn't* mean that all teachers in those 111 LEAs could administer corporal punishment - because there were a lot more regulations about that. It's just that in 111 LEAs, the teacher's gender was irrelevant to the power.

The problem is, these are the *regulations*. And while I feel, personally, that unless a regulation existed, some of the tens of thousands of teachers, and millions of students in the country, almost certainly were punished in any normal way - the regulations only tell part of the story.

Male/female over the knee spankings almost certainly occurred in state primary schools, where they would have inspired very little possibility of negative comment. In secondary schools - except with the most junior girls, they would have been viewed with some suspicion, and I doubt most male teachers would have risked arousing that suspicion. Bare bottom punishments were almost universally (I won't say they *never* happened in a state school, but it would have been very rare indeed) confined to private schools, and I've never found a compelling reference to such being inflicted on a girl in the twentieth century by a male teacher.

I have encountered *one* reference to girls being birched in industrial schools in the early twentieth century (I think - it may have been the late nineteenth), but they were close to reformatries. If people want I should be able to find that reference again. It wasn't very detailed at all, but it seemed reputable.

I also have references - which again, I'll search out if anyone wants to see it - to Mr Freeman, asking the Minister of Education whether state schools needed regulations to prevent bare bottom punishments after there were reports of an incident occurring in the 1940s in a private school (the case got to court, but charges were dismissed against the teacher).

A lot of this stuff, I've probably posted before - but trying to search this forum to check is slightly difficult.

In case people wonder why I have this material - I'm an historian by training, and it's what I do for a living as well. Because I have an interest in corporal punishment, as a hobby, I use my training to gather as much historical material as I can on the subject - I have hundreds of documents that I am slowly working to make publically available. I was doing it fairly quickly at one stage, but, to be honest, the lack of response from people left me wondering why I should bother to push myself. So I've slowed down.


Re: Actual Research

August 7 2004, 12:49 PM 

Well Dean, I for one hope that you continue to add your findings to the site, your detailed knowledge seems to be the best thing on this forum.

So keep up the good work!


Re: Actual Research

August 8 2004, 2:39 PM 

From the replies I see that unlike in the spanking films the girls who would have been getting spanked or slippered from the headmaster tended not to be the 17/18 year old sixth form girls, and were more likely to be the lower school girls 11-15 year olds? which they couldn't depict in a CP movie.


Re: Actual Research

August 8 2004, 6:49 PM 

pretty much, however sometimes sixth form boys at my school still got the cane, and their is a well known incident involving the spanking of two sixth form girls by a headmaster who cought them heavy petting with boys rather than praticing their lines for the school play. I forget the name of the headmaster?

So actually the ingredients of sixth form girls, stockings, headmasters and spankings did on very very rare occasions come together, however spanking movies do make out that this was anormal everyday practice, unfortunatly it wasn't!


Re: Actual Research

August 8 2004, 7:02 PM 

The name of the headmaster was John Guise. (See ‘1964 Helston Grammar School spankings’ currently on this page.)

Lotta Nonsense

Re: Actual Research

August 8 2004, 7:53 PM 

Before the Helston story is exaggerated out of all proportion, I should say that according to evidence given in court:

1) There was no heavy petting. A certain amount of kissing and cuddling took place but, it was stressed by the prosecution, no more than that.

2) The pupils 'kissing and cuddling' took place out of school hours after they had been reading Shakespeare apparently for their own pleasure. There was no mention of a school play.

My view is that both Mr Guise and Mrs Smith should have been hanged but, if forced to conjure up a plea in mitigation, I might say that both were ordinary decent people who found themselves in positions of almost absolute power and were corrupted thereby. Who, in their position, might not have done what they did?

Our new friend Harry, for example, would have loved to be in Guise's position.

I suspect he's not on his own.


Re: Actual Research

August 9 2004, 12:51 AM 

Very true, the headmaster in this case did have way too much power but so did many teachers and especially headmasters in thouse days, how many of them to advantage of situations like that back then that we will never know about.

for every case like that one which went to court there must have been a few that were never reported, how many girls would have told their parents that the headmaster had spanked them at school today, for fear that their fathers would give them a soundly smacked bottom for getting in trouble at school.

Lombard & Wallis Ltd

Re; Actual Research

August 9 2004, 2:29 PM 

Guise and Smith ‘ordinary, decent people’? We don’t think so. We accept that Lotta is putting forward the case for mitigation under duress and is defending what he/she knows to be the indefensible and this was only what he/she ‘might’ say. The following is an extract from the Rawhide article:

‘…Guise’s interest was in spanking adolescent girls, he could cane boys’ backsides any day of the week, but it was just not as sexually exciting for him. It was even stated in court that: “This question of corporal punishment for girls [our italics] had been much discussed between Mr. Guise and Mrs. Smith through the years.” Not schoolchildren… not pupils… not boys and girls… just girls! Despite the fact he was expressly forbidden to chastise schoolgirls, the headmaster ignored the rules and connived with his spanking soul-mate to regularly indulge in his sexual preferences. The fact that Mrs. Smith willingly joined in these sessions and always insisted that errant girls take down their knickers when she punished them privately seems to indicate that her interest in corporal punishment was rather more than just an aid to enforce school discipline.’

These are not the actions of ‘ordinary, decent people’. Ordinary, decent people resist the temptation of corruption and do not abuse a position of trust. Despicable as they may be, we also disagree that ‘both Mr. Guise and Mrs. Smith should have been hanged’. The article concluded:

‘Guise was fined a total of £50 and Mrs. Smith £30. It would appear that to ensure that the girls did not have to appear as witnesses and face the further humiliation of recounting their experiences, the prosecution did a deal with the defence to proceed with lesser charges. In later, similar cases, when an obvious sexual motive was apparent, male teachers and headmasters have not been so lucky to be merely fined. Although the current maximum penalty for indecent assault is ten years imprisonment, at that time it was only two years. The most common sentence for teachers caught engaging in similar activities was eighteen months behind bars! The investigating officer probably wrongly assumed that this was a single ‘one-off’ occurrence; in later cases where a prosecution was made, the police officers usually checked whether other children had been treated in a similar way.’

Under the sentencing regulations of the period, Guise deserved to be imprisoned for at least eighteen months and, in our opinion, his actions certainly warranted the full two years. Smith deserved a lesser custodial sentence, possibly suspended, but not in the way that Lotta has in mind.

The inevitable advertising pitch: The full article features in Rawhide No 2, which is available from Daisy Publications Ltd at www.daisypublications.co.uk


Re: Re; Actual Research

August 10 2004, 6:58 PM 

Hi dean, could you tell me if the strapp was ever used on across girls bums rather than their hands M/F or F/F?

I've always got the impression it was only used on the hands?


Re: Re; Actual Research

August 11 2004, 9:25 PM 

In punishments given at school, was the skirt lifted up by the teacher or the pupil herself?


6th Formers

August 16 2004, 2:56 PM 

I went to an all boys grammar school from 11 to 15 which with the abolition of grammar schools and the 11 plus became a mixed 6th form college. Smoking in grammar school carried an automatic caning whereas in the 6th form there were actually areas set aside for smoking.

Although I did get my bottom smacked on a few occasions in grammar school, including once as a 5th former I survived without ever being sent to the Headmaster, Deputy Headmaster, Head of main school who all used the cane, or Head of lower school who slippered 1st and 2nd years.

It was as a lower 6th former that courtesy of my chemistry teacher, who was also my form mistress, I paid my first visit to the Deputy Headmaster, or Vice Principal as he was now called. I had no idea what to expect. I didn't know of anyone who had been caned since the school became 6th form only. Just because smoking was tolerated though (everybody was over 16) did that mean the cane was no longer used at all ? The school was now mixed so wouldn't that cause complications ? I was nevertheless still very nervous as we entered his office.

After about 15 minutes of lecturing I left his office very relieved having learned that that corporal punishment was not considered a particularly appropriate way of dealing with young adults who after all were at college of their own free will. Who knows though, if I had been caned on that occasion would it have been enough to prevent the subsequent four visits I made to his and the Principals offices over the next 2 years ?

I have no idea whether 6th formers were caned when the 6th form was still all male.

Does anyone remember a reported incident I think back in the eighties when a group of mixed 6th formers were caught in a pub at lunchtime and only the boys were caned ? Well, em, three of my trips to the office were for just that.


Thanks Dean

August 19 2004, 8:34 PM 

Thankyou for your most interesting research Dean. Sadly the truth is most corporal punishment was not officially recorded in punishment books. From my own experience, i remember one teacher battering a boy from one end of the classroom to the other. Hitting him about 20 times or more. I am sure he never filled in a punishment book afterwards. This chap also smacked girls as well as boys brutally on the backs of the legs, he never hit the really pretty girls though! The backs of your legs would afterwards retain a perfect print of the shape of his fingers for several days. He would also swipe boys across the hand with a ruler or small rubber strap, in fact when i think about it now he was a most inventive little man.

All these individual memories are not recorded anywhere. Ive no plans to write an autobiography at the moment, although i dare say i could fill a few chapters just with memories of scholastic discipline. The trouble is not that old men forget but they make it up as they go along. As a historian you just wouldnt know whom to believe, although i notice that stern arbiter of truth, Sarajane ..sorry Lotta Nonsense is happily still sorting the wheat from the chaff. Good luck.

Regards, J.C

Current Topic - sixth form spankings?  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
Find more forums on SchoolsCreate your own forum at Network54
 Copyright © 1999-2014 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement