What I describe was at the time in the UK all perfectly legal, provided it complied with the law, and was in line with the local education authority rules. It may seem incredible but it was. If you think about it, no-one in their right mind would proceed to commit an obviously illegal act in front of potentially 750 to 1000 people, many of whom, at best, could not be relied on to believe your actions were justified. In the mid-sixties I would guess even STOPP was just an idea being bandied round the common rooms occasionally, probably following some particularly unfortunate incident.

You and members of our collective interest group will no doubt not have missed the references to the appalling green knickers we wore, and universally hated, on the relevant sites of perhaps more consistent factual record. This is not an issue which requires any further supposition to lead discovery of further fact. This one is nailed to the door.

As we know, consistently declaring that things cannot be true (remember the tennis players attempts with 'you cannot be serious') eventually leads to doubt if kept up consistently. Similarly consistently declaring things to be matter of fact may eventually establish the 'myth' as reality. The choice is correctly always with the observer.

I do wonder whether the same zeal would be applied to another fairly uncontroversial recollection of my senior schooldays. As did all the girls in those days, I attended domestic science (now food technology)classes. I was quite good at cookery, and am still considered so. It was the custom that the girl, or in some cases girls, who made the best products of the lesson, particularly if it was cakes or buns, would be asked to take her handiwork to the Headmaster and present it for him to taste with his tea. For many reasons I dreaded this, although this occurred more than once in my case. When I took the cakes in to his study, he was always sitting behind the desk stroking a small dog sitting on his lap. He would stroke the dog while trying the cakes, which I found unpleasant in hygene terms if nothing else. After a while of standing in front of his desk, he would dismiss you after some comments on how good the cakes etc were. I always came out of the room shaking.

I have no way of proving this, and it does not appear as a similar recollection from anyone else on Friends Reunited or elsewhere as far as I know. I just leave it as it stands, a personal memory, believable or not to others.

I totally accept that this may be only a female perspective but as generally only the head of the dog was visible over the desk it did give me pause for thought about the associated actions as I stood in front of the desk. There were only three obvious items of interest in the room at that point(dog, cakes, me).

As a final thought, I remember that on other forums the what I call the 'telephone number thing' (I may be considered literate, or even in old-fashioned terms numerate, but I am not technical!!) like 123.456.789.012 used to appear with the post. My Son tells me that this identifies who sent it and from where (like 1471). Could we use this to determine who is or is not who? If we can't see it, can the Moderator see it? Can this tell us at least when sources are duplicated?

You are right in the assertion of relatively low incidence of genuine (and believable, even if not directly verifiable) events, and in the even lower value of probability associated with combined 'fortuitous' events as she describes. The incidence of the events I personally witnessed was indeed quite low. I only received formal CP on one occasion during my whole school career. What is recognised statistical fact is however that in those instances where CP was the general form of punishment in a UK school, it was generally also used quite often, at least up to about 1980. If it was witnessed at all (rather than being wholly private) it would also therefore be likely to be witnessed more often under these circumstances.

The numerical total of first-person related descriptions, textual anecdotal and documented matters of record that I have encountered either privately or officially over the last 30+ years is (not surprisingly) quite large. Given that there is a 50 year embargo on UK School and Local Authority written records, and the internet in its various forms has only been available relatively recently, it is only in the last few years that the tools have become available for lay people to coordinate evidence about a period in which numerical incidence of CP increased (particularly for girls as schools became progressively co-educational).

I quite accept that since I have an intense interest in the factual side of our shared subject area, and actively seek engagement with dialogue, I can be classified as a 'spanko'. This interest was originally engendered some time after leaving school by a combination of review of relevant personal experiences and academic curiosity (i.e.Where is the data? OK then where has it gone?). I also feel strongly that the truth should be told, particularly where people are actively trying to ensure it is not. The effects of allowing social history to be written-out rather than fading in due time have been seen in devastating form in Europe over centuries. It also leads to a widening of the understanding-gap between parents and children particularly in respect of explaining the effects of opinion-forming influences on subsequent attitudes and actions. I do (and will continue to) try to make sure that I am making it clear whether information is about events in which I was personally involved, first-person descriptions related to me by friends and acquaintences, matters of public record, or simple hearsay and speculation (which have their place in forming debate and a focus for research).

Except for clear cases of abusive and/or illegal acts, the general push to expose and expunge CP as a mode of punishment for both boys and girls did not really start in earnest until the 1970's. Cases such as Court Lees Approved School (combination of excess CP and other young person abuse) triggered some of it. Even then it was not clear cut (e.g. Nottingham Childrens Homes effectively re-establishing caning on the bottom for senior girls as well as boys in the 1970's). Some cases did begin to be published routinely as the debate (ironically originally driven by ideas from the USA, which still retains school CP in 40% of its states)gathered momentum. In 1975 the 'Miss Dines, Northwich Girls Grammar School' case (originating in Northwich Magistrates Court) established, albeit temporarily as things progressed, that in the UK it was still not illegal for a headmistress to cane a girl on the bottom with her skirts raised, provided this was done formally according to local authority rules, for recognised behavioural reasons and the punishment was properly recorded. (The punishment book was presented as an evidential exhibit in court. We won't see it for 50 years). That this was not a single incident (which was not the issue in court) can be determined from information on Friends Reunited. The later very retrospective re-examination of this case under changed European Court of Human Rights rulings was about the legality of the UK Government inaction in not having caused all local authorities to have changed their rules to meet European standards of expectations regarding the rights of state school pupils. The Government was found negligent, rather than the headmistress being found guilty of any improper or illegal act, and the pupil involved was (eventually) compensated by the government for their 'derogation of duty'.

On another front in the developing debate, it was not until 1978 that the Headmasters Conference (the Private School 'club' for places like Repton, and other more minor private schools etc at that time) was told by a speaker effectively that it 'was no longer a good idea for male headmasters to cane female pupils on the bottom' unless with very good reason, permission from parents etc and in the presence of other female staff. This was about likelihood of complaint, legal action etc rather than the basic issue of whether punishment was appropriate in any sense. Caning on the hands, undoubtedly more common for girls, was not a particular matter of issue at that date.

Anyway to return to the local (related) issue. As my previous (probably now describable as 'many') posts here and elsewhere about the single occasion I received CP have made clear, my Deputy Headmistress was aware of the situation leading up to my punishment. If I had not received the particular punishment described, I am certain that I would have been caned (on the hands) by the Deputy Headmistress. (Other girls were caned on the hands for things such as persistently wearing non-uniform items, smoking, truancy etc. My offence amounted to persistent truancy from PE lessons, no surprises there then.)

In respect of the overall situation, there were separate gym and changing facilities for girls and boys. We girls were actually quite nervous at times when changing as it was not unknown for male PE staff to at least 'be around' the girls changing room when we were there, or for male PE staff to usher girls out to receive punishment of whatever form. Until one of my female school colleagues of the period contribute corroborating evidence, or we wait for the release of the relevant documents, I cannot prove to non-involved third parties the truth of these statements, and totally accept that. No-one took a fly-on-the-wall video, no-one had a tape recorder, there were no spy cameras at that date.

Yes the punishment did hurt, quite a lot. I am quite small, was notably so at school, and the teacher was quite big. It was however, no more than I was expecting, based on what was going on around me, and in terms of the period I can say it was probably appropriate. (I feared getting the cane a lot more, but never did.) At that date, no school pupil of either sex would dream of telling their parents about any punishment in school, if in line with standard practice for their environment, for fear of further reprisals. (I was never beaten at home, but at that date I know other girls were, even just for less than satisfactory school reports). For us girls especially, it was also a personally humiliating (and socially reducing) thing to 'have to be' punished at all, and particularly if anyone else knew. (The parallel with other minor and less minor 'personal assaults' and how they were viewed at that date is, at least for me, quite clear.) We tend to take our hurt home with us, and internalise or hide it, rather than putting another notch on the public scoreboard of battle scars like the boys did.

Why don't we publish and sue? Some of the instigators are undoubtedly dead. In most cases the actions were legal in the terms of the time. In my case I do not think the primary driver for actions which took place was anything other than a genuine belief (by more than one person) that disciplinary action was required, and was appropriate to stop undesirable behaviour. (Which it did!) My teachers were genuinely angry rather than anything else. Today if my children were to persistently do the same thing it is a matter of fact that in the UK I could be put in prison. (Even now I would prefer the slipper as an option!)

On a personal belief front in my view of establishment of genuine female equality, I do not subscribe to the application of the 'its not fair' test, particularly retrospectively, when males in exactly the same kind of situation would have been treated exactly the same under the accepted and acceptable 'rules of the game'.

In respect of what is maintainable in the public domain, remember that my and your friends and relations have equal access to sources and this forum. My children at least know the stories (what happened when you were at school mummy?) As (definitely in my case) do the relations and friends of those teachers and other school staff involved, at least by implication, in the environments where described events took place.

My so-called nickname is my everyday name, and was at the time. Serious question: What would you do in this situation? (Please, not what you would like me to do.)

We did have female gym teachers, but sometimes the men took our classes as well. As far as I can remember, none of the female PE teachers used standard corporal punishment (slipper etc). What they tended to do as 'punishments' however could be termed CP as it consisted of making us hang from wallbars, take up and hold uncomfortable positions, or do things like running on the spot until exhausted. In some ways this was worse as it took longer, and left me at least completely out of breath for some time.

The person who punished me (for not attending PE lessons) was appropriately already head of the PE department by that date, and therefore had at least 'acting deputy' status, shortly afterwards to be confirmed by further promotion. The fact of this status and progression is indeed a matter of public record.

I must leave your individual or collective degrees of certainty in this matter entirely to yourselves.

However in respect of my personal experience, to my knowledge ( = personal observation, sight and/or sound) and subject always to standard caveats and burdens of proof applicable to veracity of personal recall after extended time periods, during my time at my particular senior school three girls in addition to myself were slippered in, after, or in connection with PE activities.

Until verifiable supporting evidence is available from other quarters, I now have to leave this aspect of the quest for further information to yourselves and others who at this point are now in a better position to do so without 'disturbing the local wildlife' than I am.

From December 1999 until its closure in February 2001, the School Corporal Punishment message board at InsideTheWeb.com received many contributions from Fran. The following, from 2 February 2001, is all that remains.

I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say 'back in the real world'in respect of the male/female CP situation as you experienced it, or indeed now see it. It is a matter of recorded fact that many girls, including myself, in many mixed schools in the UK, certainly in the fifties, sixties and seventies, were as subject to corporal punishment for the same offences (smoking, theft, truancy etc)as were boys. This was particularly so in the case of Secondary Modern Schools and Comprehensive Schools where boys and girls single sex schools had been merged to form one institution, typically resulting in the Headmaster of the boys school taking over the Headship. Reference to such academic books published at the time as 'A Last Resort' will independently satisfy anyone that the caning of girls in mixed schools in the sixties and seventies by both female and male teachers was hardly unusual in the UK, and was a matter of recorded fact for many.

For regular and uniform corporal punishment almost without any sex bias, talk to Scottish women of my age about the use of the strap/tawse in Scottish schools during the sixties and seventies.

I will say that from my experience and information received however for girls at school in the UK, the slipper seems to have been a more common implement for beatings on the bottom, the cane and strap more often on the hands and (with the exception of one of our family grandmothers who was birched at a convent school in Southern Ireland before the First World War)I have never come across any woman of my acquaintance who even implied that any beating of girls of any form at any school they attended in the UK was ever given on the bare bottom.