I attended one of Perth's elite boys school and caning was still practiced well into the mid 1990s.

Does anyone know which schools in Australia still use caning?

Thanks.

I know of some that do, including my own, but the question you ask is very unlikely to be answered in an open forum, and without good reason, anywhere else. Part of the reason schools are allowed to continue with such practices is that they don't attract too much attention.

There are schools in Perth that still cane but don't publicise it and bill it as a last resort.

As Doctor Dominium has said elsewere, the so called "last resort" policy may be leaving it too late to make a difference. It was that sort of line the state schools were following before dropping it altogether, so this is probably the beginning of the end.

I have not feel for what the elite schools are doing these days, blah. You may be able to tell us.

Hi Doctor,

Any chance of posting some more photos of your canes? Do you just have the one cane?

Oh dear, sorry Doctor Dominum. I obviously shouldn't have linked to your picture in a previous thread to make a point in another thread!

Don't worry, AL. I put it online.

But to answer Blah's question - yes, I do have more than one cane, but I'm not in the business of taking photographs of them. Besides that, this is a matter of 'seen one, seen them all.' We use a standard design so they all look very similar.

Hi Doctor,

Do you know if it is just a handful of elite schools in Australia which still practice caning? Or do most of them have some sort of CP regime?

Are parents made aware of CP when they enrol their children?

In my experience, caning was used as a last resort and viewed as the ultimate sanction. It was reserved for the most serious breech of school rules or for repeat offenders which have been punished by other means (detentions etc).

When it was used, it was not broadcasted and done quietly. But rumors did quickly spread about the boy who received a caning.

Thanks for answering.

Blah

Do you know if it is just a handful of elite schools in Australia which still practice caning? Or do most of them have some sort of CP regime?

Corporal punishment is banned in all schools - government and private - in New South Wales, the ACT, and Tasmania.

In the other states and territories, there's probably some variation between states.

In states where it is allowed, only a reasonably small number - I don't know exactly how many, but if I had to guess, I'd say less than twenty, perhaps less that twelve - 'elite schools' still make regular use of corporal punishment. A considerably large number - perhaps as much as a third to a half, either use it very occasionally, or have not officially banned it, even if it has fallen out of disuse.

Elite schools are not the only schools that still use corporal punishment, though they probably represent one of the two main groups along with parent controlled Christian schools. The cane is not always the implement used, but I would think is probably the most common.

Are parents made aware of CP when they enrol their children?

I would believe so. Certainly at every school where I know it's in use, this information is given to parents quite early in the enrolment process.

In my experience, caning was used as a last resort and viewed as the ultimate sanction. It was reserved for the most serious breech of school rules or for repeat offenders which have been punished by other means (detentions etc).

When it was used, it was not broadcasted and done quietly. But rumors did quickly spread about the boy who received a caning.

This is probably how it's handled in most schools that still use corporal punishment here, but not all. We use it pretty regularly as a mid level sanction and while we don't really broadcast it around the school, we don't really try to keep it quiet either. Most boys know if somebody they have contact with is caned.

Have there been any problems with headmasters being excessive with a cane?

What is deemed appropriate when it comes to reasonable application of the cane?

Thanks again.

Blah

Have there been any problems with headmasters being excessive with a cane?

Yes, in about 1875.

For some reason - and I don't think it's because every single headmaster has always done the right thing - I think most have, but I'd be stunned if all had - there's been very few cases in Australia where misuse of corporal punishment has become public knowledge, and if that hasn't happened, obviously most people won't know about it.

There was a case a few years ago, dating from the 1980s where a strapping was held to be excessive, but it wasn't administered by a headmaster, and that ruling was rather complex (two strappings were administered to the same boy in one day - the court more or less ruled that the first strapping was unjustified but not excessive, while the second was justified but excessive.

What is deemed appropriate when it comes to reasonable application of the cane?

There's no absolutely clear guidance on this, I'm afraid. I wish there was - but partly because cases didn't reach court as I mentioned above, there's been very little case law on these points developed in Australia and so we are left with a rather ludicrous situation where a strict interpretation of the law means that if we don't scar a boy for life, or blind him, it's OK. Now, presumably a court would rule if such a case ever came before it that that was unacceptable, but until and unless that happens we don't have a clear answer.

Most, if not all, Australian schools that still use corporal punishment rely on two papers published in 1983 as guiding our practice (Corporal punishment in schools and the rights of the child written by Helen Ware for the Human Rights Commission, and The legal limits of corporal and other punishment at school by Richard Chisholm of the University of New South Wales, Faculty of Law). Together these laid down seven criteria that must be met for corporal punishment in a school to be reasonable.

(1) The child must be old enough to understand correction
(2) The implement used must be a suitable implement
(3) The force and number of blows must be reasonable
(4) What part of the body is struck is critical
(5) The age, sex and general health of the child must be taken into account
(6) The seriousness of the offence must be considered
(7) The medical consequences outweigh all of the above (ie, if a child is seriously injured, showing you followed 1-6 would not be a defence).

They didn't define any of these precisely, but they did express the view that current laws and regulations that applied in every states goverment schools across Australia (Victoria was the only state to have banned corporal punishment in state schools at this time) met the criteria, and so most schools state and private decided to accept those regulations and laws as the 'safe limit' for corporal punishment.

When you look at those regulations, each criteria breaks down as follows.

(1) Age 7 is probably the minimum safe (legally speaking) age at which corporal punishment (at least with an implement) can be applied.
(2) Canes and straps are clearly suitable implements (as at least one state allowed for each of these to be used in state schools in 1983). Other implements might be suitable.
(3) The maximum was six - a number of states set this as a maximum. Some set no maximum, but this was the number when a maximum was expressed.
(4) The hands and the buttocks were clearly acceptable targets. The head most clearly was not. Other areas might or might be acceptable.
(5) No clear guidance on this, but common sense should apply and many schools (mine included) developed policies to try and address this issue. Special care should be taken in administering corporal punishment to girls (this was probably at odds with Equal Opportunity laws that were starting to be passed at this time, but in 1983, they were still on the horizon for the most part).
(6) Corporal punishment should not be used in trivial cases - we've had one bit of guidance on this since - you can't use corporal punishment for uniform infractions.
(7) Self evident - don't cause injury requiring medical attention and policies should be designed to avoid that.

End result, most schools adopted a policy that set maximums of six strokes of the cane or strap to the hands or buttocks if they hadn't done so previously. Many schools already had regulations like that in place. Many co-educational schools and girls schools limited the corporal punishment of girls (and often boys as well in co-ed schools) to four strokes when NSW set that as the limit in their schools in 1989 or so, expressly because they introduced corporal punishment for girls.

Schools might well be able to exceed these standards and be legally safe - it would be up to a court to decide - but sticking within these guidelines is generally considered sensible.

Hi Doctor,

Thank you for your detailed answers. They are always interesting to read.

Is anyone else surprised that some Australian schools still practice caning?

In my opinion, it should be brought back into all schools.

It surprises me at times. If you'd asked me in 1979, if we'd still be allowed to cane in 1989, I'd have said there was an even chance. If you'd asked me in 1989, if we'd still be allowed to cane in 1999, I'd have put the odds at ten to one against. And if you'd asked be in 1999, if it would still be in use in 2009, I'd have said almost certainly not.

I've given up on predictions - all I'm prepared to say is if it is in use in 2019, I won't be the one doing it.

yeah right, you're a phd who canes high school students in australia these days. if you care to provide the name and address of your school i'll mail you a $1,000US check to dr. whoever at your school. i'm certain it will never get cashed.

I don't mind being challenged, but it would be nice if people would observe simple conventions of literacy like appropriate capitalisation if they are going to waste people's time.

Yes, I am a PhD - it's what happens eventually if you spend a lot of time over the years doing university courses. And, yes, I do teach at an Australian school, and yes, I do administer corporal punishment on occasion.

I don't name my school or myself for reasons I've explained in a lot of detail over the years, and while there are still people who doubt me, I've managed to convince of people of my veracity.

Look, I don't really mind being doubted or being challenged. I'm just baffled as to why people find this so hard to believe. Are people really so insular that they can't accept things outside of their own narrow experience?

Oh - and if you want to bribe me, you'd have to offer a lot more than $1000.

*Are people really so insular that they can't accept things outside of their own narrow experience?*

Yes. It is quite astonishing how little of the outside world or even the recent past some people know. If you get your "news" from popular mainstream outlets only, don't read books and travel only to resorts or not at all it is apparently possible to stay in an advanced state of ignorance. It also helps if you don't have grandparents and are careful not to mix with older people. Many of the World's current troubles are caused by ignorance of the past and ignorance of that ignorance.

D D is to be congratulated as being perhaps the only Phd to admit that he got it by doing a lot of time in Uni.
Nothing to be ashamed off by any means.
Having a Phd does not mean that someone is necceserely ( spelling? )clever, it sometimes means that someone is very au fait witha narrow subject.
One could say, able to split an atom but unable to change a fuse.

whatever... phd or not you're a heck of a lot smarter than some of the gullible idiots on this site. if any cp was going on down under it would be on the news just like in the states.

If Dr D is wholly genuine - I say wholly - then he is both pretty unique and quite a remarkable person. Some posters believe him, some do have understandable doubts, but there is common ground:

- Firstly, Dr D is an expert on the subject of CP, and is so utterly conversant with school procedures and wider aspects of schools and schooling that he must be / have been employed in education.
- Secondly, he has a pretty good understanding of the psychology of young people, especially boys: he understands how their minds work and the dynamics of their relationships; he correctly identifies the sort of traits which Joseph Mercurio identified in the Christchurch, NZ study of 1966.

Ironically, that second point also undermines him somewhat. The attitudes which prevailed forty years ago have been utterly swept aside - regrettably, many of us think, for I too believe in the usefulness of occasional and very moderate corporal punishment, even though we realise it is now probably gone for good. So - how on earth has it survived in just a tiny pocket of God's own Australia ? If the Doctor were recounting events from much earlier in an obviously long career, that would be perfectly credible: a truthful but historical account of a Mercurio world, tinged with just a little nostalgia. If, on the other hand, he were telling us of a current school (private and "elite") where CP was just - only just - clinging on within the law, and maybe used a handful of times a year, that would also be credible.

But the sheer number of canings that he lists - in great detail on the Yahoo group - must run into hundreds per year. This is the great stumbling block. In the last three or four years, I have had in my own school two gap year students from independent schools in Victoria (as well as others from Sydney and elsewhere) and both of them were clear that they knew of absolutely no CP still being used. Naturally I only asked the students briefly and obliquely, but surely if there were just one Melbourne/Victorian school using CP at these levels - as opposed to at very occasional level - then everyone would know. There would be government agencies interested, and reporters and anti-CP lobbyists working on exposes ?

We saw the rather curious thread recently, evidently between Dr D and a former pupil: I think that thread included a list of the "elite" schools that might not have fully abolished CP. It also alluded to good old "MGS", as if that was Dr D's school. Yet a glance at the respective websites of Melbourne Grammar and Mentone Grammar show absolutely no mention of CP among their detailed lists of policies and sanctions - for instance their anti-bullying measures; and the pastoral structure of both those schools is based on vertical houses and quite different from Dr D's. I haven't bothered to check out all the others - this isn't a witchhunt and unlike the Good Doctor I haven't the time to devote hours per week to these discussions.

This also - honestly - isn't an unworthy attempt to smoke out Dr D. If he is authentically a senior teacher with a respectable career, he is perfectly entitled to keep his identity private. Nothing that he describes is dishonourable or unprofessional. Indeed, the same applies if he is, say, a senior teacher who would like to be able to give CP as in the old days, and who has chosen to perpetuate the myth. Or a retired teacher whose distinguished career once included some use of the cane. And the latter, I have to say, might just be the case.

P J you have just about summed him up.
My teacher ladyfriend reckons that he would not be allowed amongst school children anywhere.
He has a fetish for CP and uniforms and is posting and has posted on many fetish sites.
The familiarity he suggests with his pupils goes beyond any reasonable boundaries.
Buying burgers for bereaved kids. God help us if he is real and does such things.
Absolute nonsense about health and safety issues and a smart answer for everything.
The amount of canings he claims is draconian, even Mr Ing would be concerned.
What daft parent would send their offspring to such a school.
If by some unlikely miracle he is genuine then the sooner he retires the better.
Apart from the evidence of his own claims here and seeing his email addy on various fetish sites I cannot of course proove my conclusions.
If he is genuine he would be best advised to be less conspicuous.
At least there was a chance of Headmaster George being cridible due to the era he posted about.
Such an amount of floggings in the 21st century I doubt it.
I certainly won't be feeding his fetish any longer.

I demand you list the fetish sites you've supposedly found my e-mail address on.

That is a serious allegation and I want you to substantiate it.

I'll respond in more detail later, but this I want to speak up about right now.

I don't believe I am on any fetish sites, although sometimes it can be hard to tell the difference.

I'm not going to get too involved in this. I've cast my die in the great Doctor Dominum debate. Despite the fact that he's an Honorary Life Member of this estimable Forum, usually conclusive evidence of fakery or worse (unless you're a cat of course ) I'll stand by my opinion. If I'm ever proved wrong I'll stand up like a man and admit I made a mistake.

All I'll say here is that PJ rather spoils his credentials as a researcher by even mentioning Mentone Grammar. I very much doubt that he looked at that school's website, because unless he's running with graphics switched off he wouldn't have gone any further than the home page!

Even if he is running with graphics switched off, he wouldn't have needed to go much further into the site to discover that that school is co-educational!

How about the yahoo school uniform site where you discussed girls pe wear last week. No one in your supposed position would be so daft as to be so wide open. Imagine the press headlines. Deputy headmaster of private school discusses girls underwear on web site.
Unless you can proove who you are and where you teach you have no credibility.
Don't bother threatening me because you are just plain unimportant.
I want nothing more to do with you.

Mimi suggests above, concerning Dr Dominum The amount of canings he claims is draconian ... which shows how much standards and expectations differ. I would be more concerned about the mildness of the canings. I doubt whether they would have much effect on some of the robust teenage boys I know.

How about, Mimi, you report the context of the remarks I made on that site and how about you actually let people know what I said.

I'm prepared to do it.

The group in question is called 'oldschooltie' - http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/oldschooltie/

It is not a fetish group, although it does contain a number of fairly obvious fetishists posting in it, who, for the most part I ignore.

In a thread last week some of the members (including some of the fetishists) were posting messages strongly suggesting that girls should return to wearing old style gym knickers for PE at school. They were also suggesting that girls who came last in a cross country run should be caned. One person even went so far as to claim girls should run in sports bras with no blouse or shirt.

Now, I don't normally post in that group, mainly because of the number of fetishists, but that last suggestion really got to me, and so I decided to post in an effort to inject some common sense into the discussion.

The following quotes represent everyhing I said in that discussion.

While, in general, I support traditional school uniform and would be
glad to see many schools that have moved away from that reverse that
direction (I'd much rather see schools abandon uniform altogether than
go too trendy or fail to enforce it), one exception in my beliefs is I
don't see any reason for girls to go back to gym knickers.

Even when I was a boy, over fifty years ago now, we used to tease the
girls from our sister school unmercifully about the fact that they had
to do sport in their undies (yes, I know there's a difference but
that's how we teased them and it did upset a lot of them). Perhaps
more problematic is the fact that such images did play a role in the
sexual fantasies of many adolescent boys - rather tame by today's
standards, perhaps, but the fact remains girls were being forced to
wear costume that boys got a sexual charge out of seeing.

That problem would be far, far greater today.

I use the cane and have done so for fifty years. I'm regarded as an
exceptionally strict teacher. And even I am surprised at the things
some people in this forum seem to think the cane should be used for.

Genuine laziness - maybe in some cases (although almost certainly not
with girls) - but you can't assume that just because a student is
performing poorly in a run that it's because of laziness. I was a
champion miler as a boy (and when you are attending the same school as
John Landy only a few years behind him while he and Banister were at
their peak, that's a high pressure position) and there were times when
I fell away from the pack myself. I also had a friend who trained as
hard as I did - because he often trained with me in an effort to
change things - who was by far the slowest in our form. We found out
later he had a hip deformity. His life was made hell by assumptions he
was lazy. In actual fact he was running just slightly slower than most
of us in constant agony.

If you can be absolutely sure poor performance is down to idleness,
it's one thing. But it's hard to be that sure.

I have no hang ups about the human body. In my younger days I was a
naturist - a nudist in more common parlance. I no longer do this
because once you reach a senior position in education in Australia,
you must be like Caesar's wife - beyond reproach. But I certainly
don't think there's anything wrong with the human body.

But there is a big difference between the clothes an adolescent
chooses to wear and the clothes they are forced to wear. Now, I
believe in school uniforms and so I do believe schools should be able
to require schoolchildren to wear particular clothing, but I also
believe that with that power to make demands of children comes a
responsibility to ensure those demands are reasonable.

Are gym knickers as decent as shorts? I don't believe so. Why not?
Partly it's because when I was a boy, we boys used to tease girls
about wearing them, to deliberately embarass them, and because many of
us fantasised over images of girls wearing those clothes. As an adult
involved in education, I'm also aware that when girls schools have
required such clothing, they have often had to deal with certain types
of men hiding in the bushes trying to take photographs of the girls
during PE lessons. The men went away when the girls started to wear
shorts.

Yes, it's possible to be too prudish - but it's also possible to bury
your head in the sand and pretend there isn't a problem when there is.
And there's a big difference between what may be acceptable inside a
school's buildings where the only people who are likely to see it are
other students, and people the students know and should trust, and
what is acceptable outside where anybody can see it. Sure, for some
isolated schools, this difference might be very minor, and in those
cases, policies may be acceptable that might not be elsewehre, but
most schools aren't all that isolated. Our sister school's sports
grounds face onto quite major roads.

No, it doesn't. But I do think that if you want to teach children
about modesty forcing them to wear clothing that resembles underwear
and which by their adolescent years they are aware is likely to arouse
sexual feelings in some of those observing them is a bad idea.

Yes, she must. Which is why the adults making these decisions must
ensure that she is not being asked to do something that is
unreasonable, and exposing her to unnecessary risk and ridicule.

I am a rather strict teacher teaching at a rather strict school, which
does not have significant 'problems'. I think I have a fairly good
insight into what is and isn't necessary to avoid them.

Steve, I am the Deputy Headmaster of a traditional and strict school
and my belief that students near to learn obedience and respect of
school rules probably borders on the obsessive. If you think I don't
realise how important that is, you're off the planet. It's at the core
of fifty years at the chalkface.

"Girls not like to be seen in traditional school knickers" is not the
issue. If this was just about what they liked and disliked, it
wouldn't be worth worrying all that much about. But girls who are old
enough to be aware of their developing sexuality, not being
comfortable in being forced into clothing that enhances sexual
features is another matter entirely.

"Boys laughing at girls" is a disciplinary matter, yes. But the best
way to deal with disciplinary issues is, where possible, to avoid the
situation where they develop in the first place. Punish - and punish
severely, if necessary - but prevention is better than cure.

I really wonder at some people's attitudes here - maybe it's the
difference between those who can simply theorise, and those of us who
have these policies work in the real world. It's easy to criticise -
it's a great deal harder to actually do it.

That's what I said - because I haven't quoted anybody else, it's somewhat disjointed, but that's it. There's nothing there I don't think I should have said. Yes, I discussed girls underwear - in the context of saying that I don't think people should be forcing girls to do PE in clothing that looks like underwear because that will attract undesirable consequences.

Mimi, I'm not trying to threaten you. But I will defend myself against unfounded allegations. You don't need to respond, that's your choice.

To be fair to PJ, A_L, Mentone Grammar has only recently (and rather controversially) gone co-educational. Until quite recently, it would have been difficult to find a more traditionally male school. Many of us remain baffled by the way it's changed and how fast it's changed.

My only association with Mentone Grammar is that I was a pupil there for a time. We lived in Cheltenham, quite nearby, and when my father returned from the war, he initially chose it for me as the closest independent school to our home.

I'm not going to get into a game of twenty questions where people name schools and I rule them out. I'm happy to rule out Mentone Grammar as the school I currently work at, only because it's co-educational status means it couldn't possibly be my school.

Mimi is free to ignore me, of course, if that is what she wants to do. I would appreciate it however, even if she makes no other response, for her to give us a categorical list of all the 'fetish groups' she claims I am involved with, so I can address that accusation. I think it's rather unjust for somebody to make an accusation and then fail to substantiate it or withdraw it.

People wonder why I post under a pseudonym - well, this is one of the reasons why. If I was posting under my real name here, that name would now be linked with a public accusation that could be damaging to me, even though I don't believe it's justified. Mud sticks.

Also, another reason - and these are not the only ones - Mimi has made an issue of the fact that I dared to discuss girls underwear. I believe - and I've quoted what I've written - that what I said was completely acceptable and proper to say. But because mud sticks and because even the suspicion of impropriety can lead to what can only be described as a witchhunt in the modern day, if I'd been posting under my real name, I probably wouldn't have been writing those messages - and that would have meant that something I consider rather important to say - that girls shouldn't be forced into wearing clothing that is likely to cause them sexually-or-developmentally related embarassment by school uniform rules - would have remained unsaid. Too many teachers feel themselves censored today in what they can and cannot say, and I don't think that's healthy for education or society in general.

if any cp was going on down under it would be on the news just like in the states.

It has been. The fact that some schools still use corporal punishment in Australia has been reported in Australian newspapers on a few occasions over the last few years.

It even gets on TV occasionally - Behind the News - 26/6/2007 - Corporal Punishment is one example. Watch that through. It's nearly a year and a half old now, but it mentions quite clearly that some schools still use corporal punishment.

It is news - but it's not big news.

As I've said on other occasions, I don't mind if people doubt me. Nothing wrong with healthy scepticism and if I choose to hide behind a pseudonym if I do, I must allowance for doubting too. But I'll address where I can.

If Dr D is wholly genuine - I say wholly - then he is both pretty unique and quite a remarkable person. Some posters believe him, some do have understandable doubts, but there is common ground:

- Firstly, Dr D is an expert on the subject of CP, and is so utterly conversant with school procedures and wider aspects of schools and schooling that he must be / have been employed in education.

Well, I am.

- Secondly, he has a pretty good understanding of the psychology of young people, especially boys: he understands how their minds work and the dynamics of their relationships; he correctly identifies the sort of traits which Joseph Mercurio identified in the Christchurch, NZ study of 1966.

I think it was 1969, but I'm not going to go grab the book to make sure on such a minor point.

I think I do understand boys. I hope I do.

Ironically, that second point also undermines him somewhat. The attitudes which prevailed forty years ago have been utterly swept aside - regrettably, many of us think, for I too believe in the usefulness of occasional and very moderate corporal punishment, even though we realise it is now probably gone for good.

The thing is, they haven't been 'utterly swept aside'. Mainstream views have changed, sure, but old traditional ideas still resonate with significant numbers of people - some might argue that John Howard managed to hold onto power by tapping into that. You might not talk about it publically, but the old ideas don't vanish, they just get suppressed. In an environment where they are protected, they can continue a long time.

My school has changed a lot in the fifty years I've been there - it's changed a lot and in a lot of different ways. But not everything has changed. A few older ideas have been preserved, as have a few older practices.

So - how on earth has it survived in just a tiny pocket of God's own Australia ?

It's not all that tiny a pocket, really. Yes, the number of schools using corporal punishment is quite small, but the number that support traditional practices of one sort or another are much larger and we support each other in preserving our collective traditions even if we don't all practice every single one of them. We're allowed to get away with it, because we are not receiving large amounts of public money, we keep things fairly quiet, we don't crow about our successes and embarass governments. That's a big part of it - we play down comparisons between ourselves and other schools that aren't, perhaps, doing as well, and the powers that be appreciate that. And leave us alone much of the time.

But the sheer number of canings that he lists - in great detail on the Yahoo group - must run into hundreds per year. This is the great stumbling block. In the last three or four years, I have had in my own school two gap year students from independent schools in Victoria (as well as others from Sydney and elsewhere) and both of them were clear that they knew of absolutely no CP still being used. Naturally I only asked the students briefly and obliquely, but surely if there were just one Melbourne/Victorian school using CP at these levels - as opposed to at very occasional level - then everyone would know. There would be government agencies interested, and reporters and anti-CP lobbyists working on exposes ?

There are a few hundred canings a year, yes. But, really, not many people outside our gates would have any reason to know that, even boys from similar schools. Some would know, if they have friends within our school, many wouldn't. Even if they did know, they might not talk about it. Gossip's rather frowned upon.

Government agencies are sometimes interested, but once they establish we're not acting outside the law, they lose interest. Child welfare groups in particular - while most of their workers probably disapprove of what we do, they've got a lot more to worry about than what is happening to 'privileged' children (and frankly, their class envy is very apparent at times - I've known a couple who, though generally opposed to corporal punishment, seemed to approve of it in schools like mine because our kids deserved it for being 'privileged'. Reporters - occasionally they do write a story on it. But not that often. I don't know why, except that a lot of them send their kids to elite schools and perhaps they don't want them interfered with too much.

Anti-cp lobbyists - for the most part, don't seem to care what happens in rich schools.

We saw the rather curious thread recently, evidently between Dr D and a former pupil: I think that thread included a list of the "elite" schools that might not have fully abolished CP. It also alluded to good old "MGS", as if that was Dr D's school. Yet a glance at the respective websites of Melbourne Grammar and Mentone Grammar show absolutely no mention of CP among their detailed lists of policies and sanctions - for instance their anti-bullying measures; and the pastoral structure of both those schools is based on vertical houses and quite different from Dr D's. I haven't bothered to check out all the others - this isn't a witchhunt and unlike the Good Doctor I haven't the time to devote hours per week to these discussions.

As I say, I don't want to get into a game of twenty questions where somebody tries to identify my school by making me rule out what school it isn't - but I have to say, the only time I've seen 'MGS' mentioned on this forum was in reference to Manchester Grammar School in England. To me, MGS is automatically Melbourne Grammar, so whenever I see it, I do a double take and have to work out that it's not the one I'm thinking of.

This also - honestly - isn't an unworthy attempt to smoke out Dr D. If he is authentically a senior teacher with a respectable career, he is perfectly entitled to keep his identity private. Nothing that he describes is dishonourable or unprofessional. Indeed, the same applies if he is, say, a senior teacher who would like to be able to give CP as in the old days, and who has chosen to perpetuate the myth. Or a retired teacher whose distinguished career once included some use of the cane. And the latter, I have to say, might just be the case.

I believe you're not trying to smoke me out as you say. And, as I say, I can understand the scepticism. Unfortunately some people go well beyond that and start throwing accusations around.

Hi Doctor Dominum.

I'm happy to rule out Mentone Grammar as the school I currently work at, only because it's co-educational status means it couldn't possibly be my school.

Yes indeed, my very point. PJ betrayed a complete ignorance of what he was supposedly posting on by including it.

To be fair to PJ, A_L, Mentone Grammar has only recently (and rather controversially) gone co-educational.

I'm afraid the fact that the school has only recently gone co-ed doesn't excuse him. He claimed to have looked at the website. The homepage of the website has a large image. There are 5 pictures which can be displayed in this image, depending on the state of the cookie the site places, but they've all got girls in them in circumstances which make it fairly clear they're not just visiting. If he'd said Mentone Grammar can't be the school because it's co-ed, fair enough. Rambling on about the pastoral arrangements indicates to me that either he didn't know much about what he was commenting on, specifically that you say your school is a boys only school, or he never looked at the site.

As I've said, Mimi doesn't have to respond to me, but I'll respond to her.

My teacher ladyfriend reckons that he would not be allowed amongst school children anywhere.

Well, I guess that settles it - because your 'teacher ladyfriend' is obviously the number one authority on education all around the world and can make these determinations.

He has a fetish for CP and uniforms and is posting and has posted on many fetish sites.

I do not have a fetish for corporal punishment, or for school uniforms. I am interested in both these issues as somebody who uses corporal punishment as a teacher, and who teaches in a school that has uniform and where there has been recent discussion as to how and if it should be modified. I have already asked you to name these fetish sites you refer to, because to the best of my knowledge I am not on any fetish sites.

I'm going to list all the sites I am curently on using the Doctor Dominum identity. I will post the date of the last message I posted to any of those forums. Some I joined because people linked to them from schoolcp. Others I've been asked to join.

This one.

schoolcp - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/schoolcp/ (last post - 13th January 2009)
corporalpunishment - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/corporal_punishment/ (last post - 8th January 2009)
corporalpunishmentofyoungpeople - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/corporalpunishmentofyoungpeople/ (last post - 26th April 2008)
disciplinetoday - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Disciplinetoday (last post - 24th September 2008)
reclaiming_england - http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/Reclaiming_England (last post - 24th September 2008)
reclaiming_our_schools - http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/reclaiming_our_schools/ (last post - 11th January 2009)
School_Uniform - http://http://groups.yahoo.com/group/School-Uniform/ (last post - 22nd October 2006)
oldschooltie - http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/oldschooltie/ (last post - 12th January 2009)

None of these are fetish groups (placed by yahoogroups in their adult category) though many contain some fetish members. Most of them I don't post regularly in, many I don't read regularly.

It is possible I may have used the id in some other groups as well - one reason I have asked Mimi to name these groups she claims I'm in.

The familiarity he suggests with his pupils goes beyond any reasonable boundaries.
Buying burgers for bereaved kids. God help us if he is real and does such things.

Mimi, yes, I'm fairly familiar with my students. More so than most teachers. But I don't cross the line. To an extent, my age and reputation means I can be more familiar with students than most teachers - many of whom have to worry a great deal about the way things might be seen. I've built up enough credibility over the years that I no longer have to fear silly little innuendos.

But the students who I am particularly familiar with - ones I've brought burgers for, for example - are not my typical students. They are nearly always boarders - do you understand what that means? They are boarding students, they live at the school, and they are far more in our care than any other students. We have to have close relationships with them for that reason - because they are kids and they need that.

I've spent a fair number of years throughout my career working in the boarding house - mostly recently as acting Boarding House Master because we couldn't get anyone qualified to do it. In that position - what would you do when you get a phone call and get asked if you'll tell Matthew, 14 years old, that his Nanna has died. Do you think I just go up and say: "Hey kid, grandma has dropped off her perch"? No, I don't. How I handle it depends on the boy and how he handles it. But if needs somebody to be there for him, then sometimes it's got to be me.

Absolute nonsense about health and safety issues and a smart answer for everything.

I help to run a safe school, and a fairly healthy one, though it's not all down to me. What I don't do is obsess about these things to ridiculous levels. We consult, as most boarding schools here do, with the Royal Childrens' Hospital about what we need to do to maintain a safe and healthy environment. The menus for our boarding house are approved by dieticians for example - and we also take their advice on what else our boys should eat. And if they tell me that having MacDonald's occasionally won't do a boy any harm, I tend to assume that they know what they are talking about. I also do a bit of checking to see if what they say stacks up. I'm not going to alter practices developed in consultation with a major pediatric hospital based on what somebody on the internet thinks.

The amount of canings he claims is draconian, even Mr Ing would be concerned.

I doubt it. Our rate of caning is probably about a third of that that was occurring at Bacons under Ing - I comparing our figures to those reported by STOPP in the late 1970s (at which time they regarded Bacon's as the fourth 'heaviest caning' school in England.

What daft parent would send their offspring to such a school.

Plenty who value the education and environment we provide.

If by some unlikely miracle he is genuine then the sooner he retires the better.

I'll be retiring at the end of this year if that makes you feel any better.

Apart from the evidence of his own claims here and seeing his email addy on various fetish sites I cannot of course proove my conclusions.

I've asked you to name these fetish sites.

If he is genuine he would be best advised to be less conspicuous.

Why? I've done nothing I'm ashamed of and my identity is reasonably protected anyway.

"I do not have a fetish for corporal punishment, or for school uniforms. I am interested in both these issues as somebody who uses corporal punishment as a teacher, and who teaches in a school that has uniform and where there has been recent discussion as to how and if it should be modified. I have already asked you to name these fetish sites you refer to, because to the best of my knowledge I am not on any fetish sites."

this should beat some tough competition to win most fictional post of the month.

btw dr., do you think orderlies who use enimas and head nurses who work in hospitals where there has been discussion about uniforms often talk about what happens at work on naughty nurse fetish sites?

" from me" please realise that you are dealing with someone who has deep seated prejudices that they can not even see that they are looking at fetish sites that are totally at odds with their occupation. Based on course as to wether it is real or fictitious.
Would any parent on this site really want this type of person involved with their children?

Once again, Mimi - name these fetish sites I am supposedly on.

I want to point out to everyone reading that Mimi is making this allegation repeatedly but when asked to substantiate it by such a simple measure as naming the sites he or she fails to do so.

The allegation is false. It is disgusting. It is dishonest. It is, in short, a lie.

I was willing to give Mimi the benefit of the doubt until now. I no longer am.

And then people ask why I use a pseudonym. Because I'm not willing to deal with the accusations of liars being made against me under my real name.

I am not on any fetish sites. I am on sites I consider legitimate that contain some fetishists posting. Unfortunately certain subjects always attract a certain number of fetish posters who masquerade as if they are not (including this site). Unless we're going to decide any site that a fetishist happens to dishonestly join and post on automatically becomes a fetish site (in which case, those of us who want to seriously discuss issues may as well give up completely on the internet and leave it to become nothing but a cesspit) no matter what it was set up to be, the sites I am on are not fetish sites. I don't, personally think, I deserve criticism because I refuse to unsubscribe from groups simply because a few perverts seek to corrput the groups. Instead I tend to stay there to try and keep things going in the way they were intended.

Teachers, and other interested people, should be able to discuss school discipline on the internet. Teachers, and other interested people, should be able to discuss school uniforms on the internet. Yes, we're all aware that there are people with fetishistic interests in those things, and a sad minority of those people (at least I hope and assume it's a sad minority of them) sometimes seek out legitimate discussion groups and post fake information for their own sexual gratification. Our choices boil down to not trying to discuss things sensibly at all, or accepting the existence of these people and ignoring them as much as possible.

On yahoogroups, I do unsubscribe from any group that finds itself moved into the 'adult' category because YG has judged (accurately or otherwise) that it's become an adult focused group. Until that happens, I will generally remain a member if the group concerns a subject that interests me. I'm not going to be forced away from legitimate discussion by perverts.

I call upon Mimi, once again, to cite these fetish groups I'm supposedly a member of. Provide evidence for your accusations. This isn't a threat - it's a matter of common decency. If you are going to make accusations, demonstrate them.

Please note - I have nothing fundamentally against fetishists. Only against those who dishonestly seek to pervert discussion forums through dishonesty. Fetishism is a fairly normal part of human sexuality, but some actions move it into perversion - and I include seeking to pervert other people or places part of that. I've no problem with them in their own groups, I've no problem with them in legitimate discussion groups as long as they don't lie about who and what they are, or pretend to be something they are not.

"they are looking at fetish sites that are totally at odds with their occupation"

what occupation's that? i'm pretty sure it's not principal or even teacher. if his imaginary school was giving out hundreds of canings a year it would be in a newspaper.

Even in Australia Fantastists exists. As For Me points out, if CP was used in schools to the extent these people living on Fantasy Island believe it does, it would most certainly find its way into the papers.

How can people be sucked into believing things like this. Posts of this nature need to be on Yahoo Groups who cater for the perversed who are paedophiles in the making-not on this board where there are still some intellegent and interesting people. Get a life and go pedal you paedophilic daydreams somewhere else and leave us genuine people alone. If this sort of thing continues the forum will eventually be closed and we don't want that.

Someone who uses a group which is not any form of fetish site will in general use their own name and have a profile.
Someone who uses a fetich site uses a nom de plume.
Those that contributes to a site that purports to discuss such things as discipline and uniforms has IMHO a fetish interest. An example would be IMHO discussing their relatives school underwear.
For instance the " school tie " site has good old J Riley as a member, another notorious member of this forum.
For someone in education involved with children to be involved in such a site would show poor judgement at the very least.
Sites such as the " school tie " one are places where people can get in touch with other wierdos by private mail to discuss their predilictions.
Someone involved in other such sites whilst retaining membership in those that on the surface seem to be respectable has in the past removed themselves from more dodgier sites.
Anyone who is in fact using CP on pubescent young persons in this day and age is living in the past and demonstrating an inability to manage their responsibilities in a mature and informed manner.
I doubt very much if they could retain their position in society if it became common knowledge, wether legal or not.
The above does not of course apply to imaginary child disciplinarians.

I am not going to pursue this till Kingdom Come (promise). But I have to say that it's this last point by "From Me" that Dr D has not answered to my satisfaction. Regardless of other diversionary issues about fetish site memberships or whatever, the number of canings Dr D reckons to administer is phenomenally high. It's the sort of figure that belongs in the 1960s or 70s at the very latest.

I repeat: either his school is a very odd anachronism, out of kilter with any others (including the other "elite" Victorian schools - or do they also cane literally hundreds of boys a year, Doctor?); or else it's Dr D who has created his own nostalgic world of "if only it really were still like this...". Yes, Doctor, we all regret - to some extent at least - the passing of CP. But the rest of us have managed to accept it.

Anyway, I'll make that my last word.

How can people be sucked into believing things like this. Posts of this nature need to be on Yahoo Groups who cater for the perversed who are paedophiles in the making-not on this board where there are still some intellegent and interesting people. Get a life and go pedal you paedophilic daydreams somewhere else and leave us genuine people alone. If this sort of thing continues the forum will eventually be closed and we don't want that.

If you are seriously concerned about the future of this group, it would be extremely wise not to make defamatory accusations about other people on its pages. Some people here are actually, potentially, very lucky from a legal standpoint that I am posting under a pseudonym and want to continue preserving my relative anonymity more than I want to own their house.

i'm sorry dr. deputy headmaster. now that we've got that straight it seems weird that a "deputy headmaster" at a school that's hiding something would draw attention to a newspaper accusing schools of hiding something. anyway, i'm sure if the school was hiding mass canings it wouldn't be too hard for the newspaper to get one of the students to sing. btw, gotta link to that?

Someone who uses a group which is not any form of fetish site will in general use their own name and have a profile. Someone who uses a fetich site uses a nom de plume.

Perhaps, in general, that is true - although I'm inclined to doubt it on the internet, especially when there is so much advice out there telling people to be careful about how much information that they put online about themselves. But even if, in general, it is true, that still allows for plenty of cases where it is not.

I use a pseudonym (which, any reasonably well informed person should know, is not the same thing as a nom de plume which I've never used) for a variety of reasons I've discussed in detail in the past. I think my reasons are good ones. You may disagree, but what matters is what I believe. I'm the one making the decision And, at the moment, given the disgusting accusations some people are throwing around, I'm more convinced than normal that using a pseudonym is a good idea.

Those that contributes to a site that purports to discuss such things as discipline and uniforms has IMHO a fetish interest.

Then your opinion is not just humble but ridiculous. If you're going to label any forum that discusses discipline or school uniforms as fetishistic, then serious discussion of these issues online becomes impossible. Plenty of people have completely legitimate reasons for discussing these issues - school teachers among them.

An example would be IMHO discussing their relatives school underwear.

I do not believe I have ever discussed my 'relatives school underwear'. I have discussed the athletics uniform worn by my granddaughter but that's not her underwear and in context I think the discussion makes perfect sense.

For instance the " school tie " site has good old J Riley as a member, another notorious member of this forum.

Joan Riley is not someone I care about too much or who I normally agree with - her views (whether genuine or not, I'm not going to judge) are far more extreme than I hold with on most issues. Unfortunately she does occasionally says something I agree with (I'd be much more comfortable if I never agreed with extreme elements, but even a broken clock is right twice a day) but she's not enough of an issue that her mere presence on a group of which I am a member is going to lead to unsubscribe. Doing that would give her far more power and influence than she warrants having.

For someone in education involved with children to be involved in such a site would show poor judgement at the very least.

I don't believe it does. I think you see everything through a fetish lens and are unable to understand that not everybody sees the world in the same way that you seem to. Some people feel these issues can be discussed sensibly, without sex at the core of every discussion.

Sites such as the " school tie " one are places where people can get in touch with other wierdos by private mail to discuss their predilictions.

Some members might well use it for that reason. I don't, and I don't think the majority of members do.

The description for the oldschooltie group is as follows:

Principally, this group has been established in order to discuss the benefits that a smart, formal uniform can bring to a school and how it helps to create the right kind of mindset and attitude in the school classroom as well as to encourage a strong sense of identity and pride in the school community.

I also feel that school uniform helps to promote the kind of values that are sorely needed in todays schools. This group also provides an opportunity for members to compare different types of uniform, the ways in which schools enforce their uniform policies and what they feel would be the best approach to take whether as a parent, teacher or concerned party.

That type of discussion is why I'm a member. I can't vouch for the motivations of any other member, but I think it's reasonable to assume that at least some members of the group are there because of the actual reasons it was set up.

And actually - as a matter of fact, I'm not sure Joan Riley is a member of that group. I've just done a search for Joan Riley, Riley, and Joan in the message archives and nothing comes up. So I think you may be really confused - perhaps you think I'm a member of groups I'm not that you are. Groups that are clearly fetish groups, perhaps.

Until and unless you back up your claims by posting a list of the groups you claim I'm a member of, I can't really address that possibility.

Someone involved in other such sites whilst retaining membership in those that on the surface seem to be respectable has in the past removed themselves from more dodgier sites.

I'm sorry, I've read this sentence a dozen times and still can't decipher it - and I'm used to deciphering some awful essays.

Anyone who is in fact using CP on pubescent young persons in this day and age is living in the past and demonstrating an inability to manage their responsibilities in a mature and informed manner.

Well, that's your opinion - and unlike most of what you've said recently, it's an opinion that I think is completely valid and reasonable. I happen to disagree with it, but it's a valid enough viewpoint and it's shared by some researchers (including Dr Leonard Sax, who I've written about in the past) who I greatly respect. I just disagree with it based on my experience and knowledge.

I doubt very much if they could retain their position in society if it became common knowledge, wether legal or not.

I don't believe that would be a problem for me - but if it was, so be it. I'm standing up for what I believe in, and I'm comfortable with my position. I don't let the slings and arrows worry me, if I'm secure in where I am.

To quote Kipling again:

If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you
But make allowance for their doubting too
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting
Or being lied about, don't deal in lies

If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken
And stoop and build 'em up with worn-out tools
If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breathe a word about your loss

I stand for what I believe in, and I don't give a damn if some see it through perverted lenses.

People who hunt foxes with dogs justify themselves by saying that the fox enjoys it.
Ps ( you know whats ) justify themselves by saying that their predilictions are acceptable and that theit prey enjoy it.
Imaginary persons who say that they flog young adults say that they are behaving appropriatly.
Real Adults who flog young adults with a cane ( unless they are in the far East with judicial remit ) would in time end up being bought to book for their actions.
Which is the odd one out.
Since a certain person is anonymous then any damage done to their dubious reputation ( which would have to be demonstrated as a tangible finacial loss )is not applicable to comments on this or any other website.
All wind and water comes to mind.
Next time a certain person pretends to visit London for a fictitious or otherwise educational seminar I will be happy to fly over and have him explain his behaviour in any public place they choose.
I am not however going to St Fantasy school in Eringsborough
Melbourne in my countries former colony Australia to meet up with some line shooting pretend sadist even if he is going to discuss underwear and " Home and Away style school uniforms.
Many are fooled  but not this one, the evidense is overwealming.
Perhaps they would be best advised to stop abusing the inteligence of the relatively normal users of this web site and stick to yahoo fetish groups.

again mimi, why are you debating why someone shouldn't cane students with someone who only canes imaginary ones? what teacher would waste so much time trying to justify himself to another person who enjoys memories and make believe? at my imaginary women's reformatory 19 year old inmates are given bare bottom paddlings for stealing. would you also eplain to me why it's wrong for an adult to do this to young adults. btw, i have a phd in criminology.

I am not going to pursue this till Kingdom Come (promise). But I have to say that it's this last point by "From Me" that Dr D has not answered to my satisfaction. Regardless of other diversionary issues about fetish site memberships or whatever, the number of canings Dr D reckons to administer is phenomenally high. It's the sort of figure that belongs in the 1960s or 70s at the very latest.

Well, that's a valid opinion, but I really don't think it's that high when you consider the number of students we have. On average, spread across our entire student population, most boys would receive one or two canings in their entire school career. It used to be much, much more common than that at many schools - including the the 1960s and 1970s, I can assure you.

The number is certainly high by modern standards. If we're not the 'top caning school' in Australia, we're certainly going to be close to that. But somebody has to be at the top of any list.

I repeat: either his school is a very odd anachronism, out of kilter with any others (including the other "elite" Victorian schools - or do they also cane literally hundreds of boys a year, Doctor?); or else it's Dr D who has created his own nostalgic world of "if only it really were still like this...". Yes, Doctor, we all regret - to some extent at least - the passing of CP. But the rest of us have managed to accept it.

My school's use of corporal punishment is fairly anachronistic. Other aspects of the school are not. Most elite schools have at least some aspect of which could be regarded as anachronistic, most have more than one, which one they have probably differs a fair bit from school to school. Most elite schools in Victoria to the best of my knowledge (and I don't know about all practices in all of them, although I certainly no a fair few of them well) either no longer use corporal punishment or use it very rarely. I know of a few exceptions, but of those only one would have a similar rate to us - perhaps a little lower, perhaps a little higher.

Anyway, I'll make that my last word.

Oh, great, so the rational, sensible person expressing honest doubt without being offensive is lost to the discussion, while others who may have somewhat different characteristics...

Imaginary persons who say that they flog young adults say that they are behaving appropriatly.
Real Adults who flog young adults with a cane ( unless they are in the far East with judicial remit ) would in time end up being bought to book for their actions.

First of all, I don't "flog." I don't want to get into one of those long semantic arguments that those who oppose corporal punishment often seem to want to engage in as if it proves some sort of point, but I believe the term flogging applies to a far more severe form of hitting than the one I use. Secondly, just for the record, I think the term 'young adult' is one of the worst ever phrases inflicted on the educational community. A young adult in my view is somebody who is above the legal age of majority (18 in Australia) and so is an adult, but isn't that old yet - say under 22 or under 25. Students of secondary school age are children, teenagers, adolescents - there's plenty of terms you can use to describe them without making up a new and inaccurate one that leads many of them to think they are far older than they really are, and get themselves into serious trouble by trying to do things they are generally not yet ready to do. Thirdly, while I don't have judicial remit to impose corporal punishment, the law of the state in which I live and work permits school teachers working in private schools to legally administer reasonable corporal punishment - if I acted unreasonably, I could brought to book, but I don't act unreasonably in the eyes of the law.

Since a certain person is anonymous then any damage done to their dubious reputation ( which would have to be demonstrated as a tangible finacial loss )is not applicable to comments on this or any other website.

As long as I am anonymous, that is true - that's why I said certain people are lucky I use a pseudonym. And I don't believe I would have to demonstrate any tangible financial loss under Australian defamation law which is not quite the same as British law on the subject, and which Australian courts have ruled can be applied to defamatory statements made by non-Australians in non-Australian forums if they affect an Australian resident. I've no idea how they'd ever enforce their ruling overseas (I can't see any way they could) but I'm just as happy I don't need to turn this into a test case to protect my reputation.

Next time a certain person pretends to visit London for a fictitious or otherwise educational seminar I will be happy to fly over and have him explain his behaviour in any public place they choose.

A fascinating offer - would you promise to be reasonable in response? Could you make such a promise? If you can, can you make it now?

I am not however going to St Fantasy school in Eringsborough
Melbourne in my countries former colony Australia to meet up with some line shooting pretend sadist even if he is going to discuss underwear and " Home and Away style school uniforms.

(1) Australia is not a former colony of anywhere - learn some history, I'd rather now waste anymore time arguing with the ill-educated (to make it simple for you, the Commonwealth of Australia is a federation of six former colonies of the United Kingdom, that now comprise the six states of Australia).

(2) I'm not a sadist, pretend or otherwise.

(3) The only time I believe I have discussed underwear on any group was in a plea to other people to stop suggesting that schoolgirls should be forced to wear pe uniforms that resembled underwear, and that's a context I'm entirely happy to discuss it in, and I can't see how suggesting girls shouldn't be forced to wear clothing that is likely to appeal to fetishists is being used against me.

(4) I don't think I've ever talked about "Home and Away" style school uniforms. For that matter, I don't believe I've ever watched an entire episode of "Home and Away".

Many are fooled  but not this one, the evidense is overwealming.
Perhaps they would be best advised to stop abusing the inteligence of the relatively normal users of this web site and stick to yahoo fetish groups.

Once again, I ask you to name these supposed fetish groups I'm meant to be on. You keep making this allegation and you keep failing to justify it. And I'll keep pointing that out.

again mimi, why are you debating why someone shouldn't cane students with someone who only canes imaginary ones? what teacher would waste so much time trying to justify himself to another person who enjoys memories and make believe? at my imaginary women's reformatory 19 year old inmates are given bare bottom paddlings for stealing. would you also eplain to me why it's wrong for an adult to do this to young adults. btw, i have a phd in criminology.

When somebody accuses me of perverse sexual interests, I feel compelled to respond. My professional reputation is at risk when people make such accusations and all too many people seem to be of the opinion that silence when accused constitutes guilt. Of course, it does not. But mud sticks no matter how unjustified it might be, and so I respond.

As to why I'm wasting so much time on this - the fact is, I am bored. It's the long summer/Christmas holiday here in Australia. For administrative reasons I need to be at my desk much of the day in cases issues arise which I have to deal with, but I honestly don't have that much to do in between minor crisis situations. Once school resumes properly, in just under two weeks, that will change.

Besides, to be completely honest, I'm rather enjoying myself. In my professional life, it is very important that I remain calm even in the face of abuse directed towards me. If a pupil calls me something horrible, I have to stay professional and not respond in the way I might like to respond. It's rather liberating, in many ways, to be participating in a forum where I can freely defend myself against abuse directed at me.

As for your last statement, I think I've successfully demonstrated I understand education, educational administration, educational law, educational psychology, etc, to a fairly high level over a large number of posts. I can't prove my degree to anybody, but I'm not just relying on a claim of qualifications. I think I've demonstrated that type of education in more than just wild claims.

Enough! It is very easy to see why the cane was invented and how tempting it was to use it when we see behaviour of the type demonstrated here. If you don't agree with me you are a pervert, mad, bad, your feet smell and your mother was unmarried when you were conceived, etc. etc.

If Mr Roarke was still about he would say, "Welcome to Fantasy Island DD. The little boys bottoms await your cane".

The only thing you're head of is the local Bollocks department. Stop trying to defend yourself. You have finally been caught out in your fantasies.

I despair at the quality of some of the thinking of certain members of this forum.

On the basis of false allegations which the person who made them refuses to supply evidence for, something that he should easily be able to do if he was telling the truth (all he needs to do is provide a list of fetish groups I allegedly post on - that wouldn't be hard if I did, the reason he is finding it so difficult is because I don't), and because they cannot conceive of a school that does not fit their personal experiences, I'm being labelled as a fraud.

Well, I'm not a fraud. It's amusing in many ways, I have to say. But it's also starting to get very tiresome.

I will defend myself against any allegations. But, in general, if I continue to participate in this group, I intend to simply continue posting as I have been posting. Giving my honest views, and my honest experience. That's what I am here to do, and I dare to believe there are probably some people here who appreciate having somebody who actually knows what they are talking about on the group (or - if they hold honest doubts, which is fair enough though I am genuine - somebody who sounds like they know what they are talking about).

I apologise to readers of this group who have found it disrupted in recent days by this brouhaha. I'd prefer it wasn't happening, but I'm going to respond to allegations directed against me, especially absolutely false and offensive ones. If people make those allegations, I am not going to remain silent. I'd like nothing more than to simply get on with serious and sensible discussion, but that's not entirely in my hands - not when I'm being lied about and attacked. Some things I can ignore. But not attacks on my personal propriety.

Certain people who if they were educated might have a better understanding of arithmetic.
If they had been beating childrens bottoms for say up to 50 years and if they were under retirement age then they would have been teaching at the age of 15 or under.
Of course this would not be possible if one had to do further education to obtain ones teaching certificate.
It would take even longer to get a degree, masters and then Phd. This in the 50s would have taken a minimum of 7 years from the age of 18.
All the time that they were attempting to carry out this further education they would have been teaching and beating boys bottoms, evan as a probationary teacher.
I think not.
1,000 beatings, 10,000 beatings, 15 years old, 25 years old , 50 years, under 65. Computer says no.
Just imagine that this person like a Nazi running a gas chamber, justified beating children on the basis that it was legal,
Just imagine that this person admits to making mistakes and still carries out the same course of action thus making further errors and learning nothing from it.
Just imagine that if this person was unfairly caning children that not one of them would put his details on the internet or persue them for damages through the courts as others have done.
Perhaps because they are from a relatively new country that was obtained by the violent genocide of the indiginous population that this type of throwback would still use whatever excuse they can find to intimidate, humiliate and assault those who can not answer back.
Of course none of this applies to imaginary disciplinarians ( what an archaic self important pathetic description of oneself )

Some people have suggested this forum gets an influx of posters to coincide with university holidays.

I think it's rapidly becoming clear that some of them have escaped from some sort of residential care situation.

Let me make it simple for you. I will try to use words that are easy to read.

Just because somebody chooses to tell lies about somebody does not mean that their accusations are true and it definitely does not mean that they have proved anything.

That is what has happened here. And some people are stupid and ill educated enough to believe them.

Mimi has made accusations. He or she had refused, repeatedly to substantiate these allegations (that's a big word, isn't it - sub-stan-ti-ate. It means to provide evidence. In this case a list of the 'fetish groups' he or she claims I post in. He or she can't provide that list because I don't post in any fetish groups.

I have to say, I wonder, if there's anyone here at all who has enough understanding to realise what the hell I'm talking about - an allegation has been made, I've asked it to be proven. Can anyone here see that Mimi hasn't responded with the list of groups I've asked for?

If not, then I am wasting my time on this forum by assuming anybody here is capable of rational and reasonable thought. I don't think I am mistaken in that, I hope I'm not, but if I am, then I guess I'll leave.

I'm getting a little sick of having to repeatedly defend myself against a false allegation that I post in fetish groups when the person who has made the allegation won't back it up by listing these so-called fetish groups.

I can understand people doubting I'm who I say I am. But I ask even those people who have honest doubts about my veracity, in fairness, speak up if you, like me, can see that Mimi's allegations about my membership of fetish groups are something he or she has refused to substantiate.

There's a difference between being accused of being a fraud, and being accused of being a pervert.

Someone has obviously not understood that the groups that they are visiting are groups that attract dubious characters who solicite or groom information from others of the same types.
Some apparently very highly educated people also think it acceptable to correct someone who has dyslexias spelling.
Like my stupid teachers they could not see that I cannot check my own work. It looks correct to me but sometimes it isn't.
Its caused by a brain that works faster than the persons eyes and fingers.
Better to have a physical disability than a serious superior attitude problem.
If by any slight chance this person is really what they claim to be I hope that one day they are called to account for their actions.
Just like the Irish abusive priests. It may have happened years ago but one day someone speaks out and then it all comes out in the open.
CP may be legal for the punishment of an errant child in some places but if its carried out without reason then its abuse and punishable by the law. One day someone will start a civil suit, then we will see.

Certain people who if they were educated might have a better understanding of arithmetic.
If they had been beating childrens bottoms for say up to 50 years and if they were under retirement age then they would have been teaching at the age of 15 or under.
Of course this would not be possible if one had to do further education to obtain ones teaching certificate.
It would take even longer to get a degree, masters and then Phd. This in the 50s would have taken a minimum of 7 years from the age of 18.
All the time that they were attempting to carry out this further education they would have been teaching and beating boys bottoms, evan as a probationary teacher.

You've missed one big, important fact, Mimi - and that is that, in Australia at least, I'm not sure about other countries, people are not forced to retire at 65 if they don't want to. That's the age where you can get an Age Pension if you're entitled to one (I'm not, I have too many assetts). In actual fact, because I'm a returned serviceman, I reached retirement age at 60. I chose not to retire and my school has allowed me to continue.

You've also missed some other facts like the one where not everybody gets all their university education at once.

I was born in 1937 and am currently 71 years old. I finished school at the end of 1954 and went on to the University of Melbourne when I completed my Bachelor of Science degree (specialising in psychology) between 1955 and 1957. I then spent a year at the Secondary Teachers' College, Melbourne (earning a DipEd). I began teaching in 1959.

During my teaching career, I've spent considerable amounts of time studying part time while working. I acquired my BEd, and then MEd in the late 1960s and early 1970s, began working on my MSc in the 1990s, and only completed my Doctorate in 2006.

I have at this point been teaching for fifty years (1959-2008) but because so many people are mathematically illiterate and can't work out that that is fifty years, I've decided to retire at the end of 2009 - people will get 1959-2009 as fifty years even though it's actually fifty one. During my teaching career, I have taken various periods of leave, including two deployments with the CMF (which later became the Army Reserve).

Could a grain merchant have the knowledge and skill to write the plays and sonnets attributed to Shakespeare? Some doubt it but all agree that whoever did the writing had a considerable talent.

Is Dr Dominum really an active caning deputy headmaster at a prestigious Melbourne school? Perhaps he has fudged a few details to help hide his and his school's identity?

If Dr D is not real he has managed to create a very elaborate, detailed, self consistent world which is based very closely on real modern day schools and local laws and conditions. He has provided here and elsewhere quick and detailed responses to complex questions. He really knows his stuff. The truth is always easier to remember than a fabrication.

If Dr D is not real then his creative powers exceed those of Tolkien. A very considerable talent! He is also patient, tolerant and courteous in the face of considerable provocation. He has dealt with the issues rather than attacking others. I want him to continue posting here.

I agree entirely with KK's observations, both in general and in particular.

From an observer's point of view, the most likely (by far) possibility is that Dr D is exactly as he says he is. The next most likely possibility, although a long way behind, is that he is a teacher or ex-teacher who has some experience of using (or observing the use of) corporal punishment and that he has created for himself a well-documented imaginary world. It is just about possible that an academic educationalist might have done the same. I can't imagine any other scenario which is even remotely likely.

I think it is worth mentioning that the school described by Dr D is explicitly classified as a statistical outlier: it can in no way be regarded as typical of private schools in Australia. An analogue might be the Rodney School in Nottinghamshire, which featured in Michael Moore's TV Nation clip (viewable online here).

Someone has obviously not understood that the groups that they are visiting are groups that attract dubious characters who solicite or groom information from others of the same types.

No,

Someone underestand very well that there are people out there who will seek to pervert legitimate discussion groups for their own sexually deviant purposes, and is sick and tired of letting them get away with it unchallenged, and so he chooses to stay in those groups (up until a point at least - with yahoogroups, that point comes if they are moved into the 'adult category') to attempt to keep them on topic and serving their legitimate purpose. There doesn't seem to be any totally effective way of keeping those people out of the groups, so if you just give up every time one or more of them appears, you'll never have long lasting discussion groups at all.

I don't want to let the perverts win by default.

Some apparently very highly educated people also think it acceptable to correct someone who has dyslexias spelling.

If that is aimed at me, I don't think I've corrected anyone's spelling here. If I have, then I apologise because it's something I don't think is appropriate in a discussion forum except in those rare cases where a spelling error could lead to confusion. But I really don't think I've done that because it's not something I agree with doing. I did, I admit, become slightly frustrated earlier today and that lead to an unacceptable display of sarcasm and I do apologise for that, but my point was that some people seem to be assuming facts not in evidence about myself, based on no evidence at all that I can see.

Like my stupid teachers they could not see that I cannot check my own work. It looks correct to me but sometimes it isn't.
Its caused by a brain that works faster than the persons eyes and fingers.

As it happens, I do know a fair bit about dyslexia and I would never intentionally seek to embarass who had that condition, but I don't believe I have. My display of sarcasm, which was unjustified I do agree, wasn't based on spelling or written expression but on a perception that some people don't understand that accusations don't equal fact.

Better to have a physical disability than a serious superior attitude problem.

I admit that I can be prone to arrogance at times, but a great deal of that arrogance has been honestly earned. I've worked hard for fifty years to reach a high level in my profession. I've spent a great deal of time acquiring postgraduate qualifications in two separate areas. I've been honoured by my Queen and country for my services to education. Yes, I'm arrogant at times - because I'm proud of what I've achieved and in the modern world, expressing pride in ones accomplishments is often seen as so close to arrogance anyway, that it often seems pointless to avoid the successes of arrogance. Especially when I find myself under constant attack by people who are making unsubstantiated claims about me, accusing me of not understanding how internet groups can be corrupted by people (I've been running net groups since the early-1990s, including running one devoted to the subject of corporal punishment in schools since the late 1990s - if you think I'm not fully aware of why some people join those groups, you are mistaken - I just choose to remain in them for what I consider to be very good reasons - to stop giving ground to these people because we're too afraid to fight them.)

Most of the time, I'm actually a rather placid person. But constant attacks get wearing.

If by any slight chance this person is really what they claim to be I hope that one day they are called to account for their actions.
Just like the Irish abusive priests. It may have happened years ago but one day someone speaks out and then it all comes out in the open.
CP may be legal for the punishment of an errant child in some places but if its carried out without reason then its abuse and punishable by the law. One day someone will start a civil suit, then we will see.

You seem to think there must be grounds for a civil suit. I really don't believe there are. I have always acted within the law. I have never administered corporal punishment without reason - and except in the very early part of my career, without pretty good reasons. I have made errors on occasion, but they were honest errors and nobody is expected to get things right one hundred percent of the time.

I don't know why you think I'd be at risk of a civil suit. I really do wonder if you are projecting what may be well justified feelings that you were unjustly punished as a child onto me. If you think there is something I have said that demonstrates I have acted inappropriately in a legal sense, if you'd like to quote it, I'll willingly respond.

There is one occasion in my career where I believe I administered a caning that was too severe. But even on that one occasion, I was still within the bounds of the law and I stopped as soon as I realised that whatever the law said, continuing would be morally wrong (in my view). And there were definitely occasions in the early part of my career when I caned where another approach would have been better and I wish I hadn't done that, and I'm ashamed that I did it with the benefit of hindsight, but again, it was within the law.

An answer for everything and a comprehension of nothing.

I'm afraid that I have been taking the coward's way out on this one for the past few days. To see two fellow contributors, for both of whom I have considerable respect, involved in the above exchanges has been extremely painful and I almost decided that perhaps I'd stop looking for a few days and hope it would go away.

Mimi, clearly something said by Doctor Dominum has deeply upset you, and I'm sad about that. However, irrespective of his authenticity, which you are perfectly entitled to question, his presence here doesn't threaten you, or the forum. Barring the odd diversion that we all indulge in from time to time he posts on topic, possibly more so than many others including myself. I personally take your point regarding the multiplicity of places Doctor Dominum posts. I wouldn't do it in his position. However, none of the various forums which have been quoted here can strictly be said to be fetish forums and Doctor Dominum has explained why he posts in them.

I made a determined effort to oust someone from this forum in the case of Eric, whom you might remember. He eventually went, though not necessarily because of my efforts. However, in the process I know that I did myself some damage in the eyes of people here. I hope that this present dispute is now going to be laid to rest before you do the same.

Doctor Dominum, the affirmative statement I made about your authenticity in the opening post of the 'Kinky Teachers - maybe not?' thread still stands. Like KK and Alan Turing I hope that you will continue to post here.

A L I could not care less if D D posts here or not.
However if I find that his posts do not ring true then I will present reasons why I feel that way.
He is inconsistant, he constantly alters his stance, his figures are not plausible.
If he is real, and I doubt it myself, then he is doing an injustice to the education system.
He admits mistakes that cannot be changed.
He has been all over varous yahoo groups for years posting weird things. He has chosen to close those accounts pretty quick.
Please look at the School tie group, look at the some of the people that post there, they show up on other strange sites.
I have been on many similar sites in the past, when I realised what some of the people were about I quit them. I have not posted on a yahoo ( or similar ) site for over 5 years.
In the UK we call the type of person that would cane a boys bare bottom a nonce. Those unfamiliar can look the word up.
His posts titalate those who like that kind of thing. I ask you what kind of idjit posts about his grand daughter regarding their clothing.
Its about child abuse for Gods sake, think about it.

Mimi,

Please do not continue with this. Doctor Dominum is exactly who he says he is.

He has been all over varous yahoo groups for years posting weird things. He has chosen to close those accounts pretty quick.

This is either a mistake or a lie.

I'm not sure which at this point. I hope it's the former, but it's so at odds with the truth, I'm finding it hard to see how it can be a mistake.

I have not closed any account on any yahoogroup since, at least, the 2nd January 2005. I can give that date because it was the creation of my gmail e-mail address which I've used exclusively since that date for all interactions on yahoogroups. I still have every single message sent to me and sent by me using that account, and there's no unsubscription messages.

Could you please provide an example of at least one of these 'weird things' I've supposedly posted. Just one, please. I'm really wondering what the hell is going on here. You don't seem irrational, but you're repeating false accusations over and over again.

However if I find that his posts do not ring true then I will present reasons why I feel that way.

But you don't - when you are asked to provide evidence for any of your claims, you simply repeat the claims. By all means, challenge me if you think I'm wrong - but making false accusations about groups I'm supposedly a member of or that I've supposedly 'closed accounts' which I certainly have not done, is not challenging posts I've made on the grounds you don't think they ring true.

I don't believe I've been inconsistent, by the way, and I intend to respond to that later, when I have a little free time. For the moment, I just want to say two things.

(1) Mimi, I don't think it's likely you've read everything I've written in this forum, and it's extremely unlikely you've read everything I've written on other forums. Most of the statements I've made in recent days are pretty similar to statements I've made over the last seven or eight years on this forum and in other places. I think it's possible that you have only seen and read a small proportion of what I've written and have erroneously concluded that those posts represent the sum total of my beliefs on corporal punishment, whereas I have probably erred in assuming that anybody reading what I've written now has a reasonable understanding of previous messages I've posted and so I don't constantly have to qualify everything I say with disclaimers like "I only believe in corporal punishment in circumstance A, B, and C," because I've said that numerous time in the past. In the absence of those disclaimers, though, somebody who hasn't read large amounts of what I've written might well draw conclusions that I believe in it far more widely than I do.

(2) While I appreciate the efforts of the forum management to intervene in this case, I would hope that Mimi, or anybody else, doesn't feel they shouldn't raise legitimate concerns about me or any other poster. What I object to, isn't legitimate challenge, but constant and repeated allegations that I'm unable to defend myself against, because the people making the accusations won't present the evidence they feel justifies them. See - in this most recent post, Mimi has referred to me discussing my granddaughters clothing. That's a concrete statement I can respond to (and I will) because I know where I made those statements and I know why I made them. I disagree with Mimi that I shouldn't have made them - in the context of the discussion we were having, I think they were perfectly reasonable statements for me to make. Now, I could be wrong on that, I suppose, but at least I can respond and explain my position.

When I accused of being a member of 'fetish groups' and I know I'm not, I can't even begin to respond to those accusations unless I'm told which groups I'm supposed to be a member of. But when I ask for that information, I don't get any answers.

When I'm told I have supposedly 'closed accounts very quickly' on the other hand, I can respond because that simply is not true. I can ask where these accounts supposedly were, as well. Either a mistake has been made, or somebody is messing around dishonestly - and not necessarily anyone here. There was somebody impersonating me (or impersonating my pseudonym) for a while on some groups back in 2003, but they were a very obvious fake (wrong e-mail address). I'm really hoping that isn't happening again.

Mimi, I've looked at exactly the Yahoo group you mention, the 'Old School Tie' group. I joined it specially a couple of days ago to try and understand what was going on here between yourself and Doctor Dominum, which as I've said, was causing me some distress.

I didn't like what I found. As you say, there are some very strange people on there, one of whom posts screen grabs from spanking videos to illustrate his claims about desirable schoolgirl clothing for classroom and sports activities. Yes, alright, I admit it, I have seen the odd spanking video! Personally I wouldn't touch that forum with a very long barge pole.

However, while there I saw some of Doctor Dominum's posts, specifically those on the schoolgirl sports clothing issue. They appear to tally exactly with what he reposted here in justification of his presence on that group. He was saying that the nutters on there were wrong to propose the sort of ludicrous things they were proposing, and he was saying it in exactly the sort of calm, measured language he uses here. What I don't know is if he realises that they are nutters and that they don't have any influence whatsoever over what real children wear, thank goodness!

Yes, he did mention his grand daughter. He said that she was a high grade athlete and that at her level of competition abreviated athletic clothing was necessary and justifiable to enable the required performance standard, but that it was ridiculous and unjustifiable to impose it on ordinary schoolgirls for ordinary sports activities. Pretty much that anyway, I don't have Steve's photographic memory, and I'm not going back there to check it.

I've already said that if I was Doctor Dominum I wouldn't post in some of the groups he posts in. In fact, to be honest, I wouldn't post here! However I see Doctor Dominum as a man whose job, and every aspect of his job, is his life. I think I know where he's coming from because I used to be just such a man. I was a lot younger than Doctor Dominum then, and things altered for the worse in my job, or rather in the political environment I had to do my job in. However at one time if there had been such a thing as dodgy mainframe computing groups on the then non-existent web I'd have been posting in them because I'd have felt I had something to offer and I would have really wanted to talk about anything related to my job with anybody who would talk about it with me.

I think Doctor Dominum has been very lucky. He still loves his job at 71 the way I loved mine in my 30's. That love makes you obsessive, and, without meaning it in any way as an insult, more of a compliment really, I think Doctor Dominum is obsessive. That can blind you to a lot of things other people see as weakness or folly. Most people thought I was a pretty strange character back then!

If I'd seen Doctor Dominum post anything, here or elsewhere, that was suspect sexually, or an incitement to anything sexually suspect, I'd fall straight in with your arguments. I've got plenty of things urging me to do so. I respect you and what you usually post here and we've had some great discussions. However, I haven't seen him post anything suspect. In this forum he posts on topic, and even though he's aware that a number of people think he's a fake he doesn't do what I'd do and go in for all out war.

Nobody, least of all me, disputes your right to think that Doctor Dominum is not genuine. Even Doctor Dominum doesn't seem to dispute that. I'm not going to say any more on the issue. Web forums aren't real life, but you come to ascribe personalities to people, and once someone has a personality, in some way they start to matter to you, or, at least, they do to me, and two personalities I like and respect going at each other hammer and tongs hasn't been good. If that makes me somewhat strange then so be it!

Doctor Dominum, I had not read your last post, or indeed the post from Big Ray's Old Mum, when I posted the above. I frequently get interrupted in the middle of writing posts and though I try to remember to update the thread again and check for developments before posting I frequently forget. I have thus inadvertently commented on a point you intend to return to, which Mimi made in his response to me. My apologies for this. Had I seen your post first I should not of course have done so.

Mimi is not a man to be taken seriously. On 17 January in this thread he wrote:

"Unless you [Dr. Dominum] can proove who you are and where you teach you have no credibility."

But on 5 September 2008 in 'Kinky Teachers - maybe not?' he is of this opinion:

"I have always thought that Dr D and Headmaster George were more than genuine."

LAUGHING BOY

Mimi hadn't in Sept last year discovered Doc's presence on the aforementioned forum.

That might change anyone's opinion, regardless of whether you feel he's right or wrong in what he's said now.


Steve M

Well, I think there are two different issues regarding the posts here by Dr Dominum; I hope he will forgive me for the way I have expressed matters below.

Q1. Is he who he says he is?

A1. I've said above that I'm pretty well convinced that he is. I have not looked at any of the other groups mentioned, and don't feel particularly inclined to do so; but in any event I can't imagine how the evidence there would affect my opinion on this particular question.

Q2. Does he have an unhealthy interest (whatever that might mean) in certain aspects of this topic?

A2. This is a very different, and much more complicated, question. I think that part of Mimi's argument is related to this: that "if it's wrong now, it was wrong then, so the only reason you did it then was because you were a pervert" -- again, Mimi will correct me if I have mis-stated his allegation.

I think, though, that we need to ask whether either of these questions is an appropriate matter for discussion in this forum. In my opinion, it is appropriate to discuss the first question, for fairly obvious reasons. But I would prefer the second question to be reformulated to be much more impersonal: there are many issues here, and discussion of these issues is being drowned by a mass of accusations and denials.

Anybody with half a brain who is employed in education and was warned that he was visiting dodgy sites on the internet which could cause harm to their career and character would be grateful rather than dogmatic.
My contention is this:-
If a person is a fraud and posts about falagelating boys bare bottoms he is at best feeding other perverts fantasies or at worse phishing for contacts.
If he is genuine then that person is running very close to the wind and in severe danger of being traced by the authourities.
Why I hear you think?
Well its because anything involving the removal of clothing of a child when administering " discipline" ( and I use discipline loosly ) is conceived by the authourities as obscene and plain dodgy. ( Remember the case of old P and his spanking kit and cream in a shoe box)
If that type of person was working with children they would at the very least be banned from working with children ever again.
Peerhaps being dogmatic and set in their ways they think erroniously that they behaved correctly.
I contend that this is not so.
I posted that I thought a certain persons posts seemed truthful at a time when they had not gone to OTT. They like some criminals can be plausible.
Then it all goes just a bit to far and becomes very worrying indeed.
I could not care a toss if I am wrong, but I would rather bring someone to task than see them get themselves and others in deep trouble.
In deference to Big Rays old Mum ( who can be quite frightening ) I will now desist as its getting too time consuming.

Before continuing, let me just point out that as I said I would, I have responded to Mimi's statements about me supposedly inconsistent. That message can be found in the side effects of caning thread, and I don't see any need to repeat it here unless people want me to.

Mimi, I've looked at exactly the Yahoo group you mention, the 'Old School Tie' group. I joined it specially a couple of days ago to try and understand what was going on here between yourself and Doctor Dominum, which as I've said, was causing me some distress.

I want to make it clear. I don't wany any conflict here. I'm quite prepared to put this all down to misunderstandings but I can't if people keep making false and offensive accusations about me.

I didn't like what I found. As you say, there are some very strange people on there, one of whom posts screen grabs from spanking videos to illustrate his claims about desirable schoolgirl clothing for classroom and sports activities. Yes, alright, I admit it, I have seen the odd spanking video! Personally I wouldn't touch that forum with a very long barge pole.

I have to say, I'm not aware of those images. I rarely check the photo section of the yahoogroups I'm in unless reference is made to an image by somebody who I consider trustworthy. I do occasionally have a look, and even occasionally post images that I believe are fully suitable, but months can go between me entering the photo sections. On groups that allow them, I do get photo attachments if people send them, but I can't recall seeing any such images as have been described here come in that way.

However, while there I saw some of Doctor Dominum's posts, specifically those on the schoolgirl sports clothing issue. They appear to tally exactly with what he reposted here in justification of his presence on that group. He was saying that the nutters on there were wrong to propose the sort of ludicrous things they were proposing, and he was saying it in exactly the sort of calm, measured language he uses here. What I don't know is if he realises that they are nutters and that they don't have any influence whatsoever over what real children wear, thank goodness!

Yes, I am aware that some of them are definitely nutters. There are others I strongly suspect are nutters, others I have no opinion of, and a few I trust. I'd like to just ignore the nutters and normally I do, but sometimes, as in the recent case under discussion, I decided to try and bring things back a little on topic. Some people in that PE discussion were genuine - Mr "Girls should wear sports bras and no blouses" obviously wasn't. His post is the one that prompted me to post in the thread, although I don't think I directly addressed him.

Yes, he did mention his grand daughter. He said that she was a high grade athlete and that at her level of competition abreviated athletic clothing was necessary and justifiable to enable the required performance standard, but that it was ridiculous and unjustifiable to impose it on ordinary schoolgirls for ordinary sports activities. Pretty much that anyway, I don't have Steve's photographic memory, and I'm not going back there to check it.

That's an accurate summary. Personally, I'd prefer girls didn't wear such clothing at all but as somebody who, in the distance past, had a shot at going to the Empire Games or the Olympics, I know that I would have run in a tutu if it would have made me five seconds faster over the mile because that would have been enough for me to qualify. I can understand why elite sprinters will sacrifice modesty for a tenth of a second.

I've already said that if I was Doctor Dominum I wouldn't post in some of the groups he posts in. In fact, to be honest, I wouldn't post here! However I see Doctor Dominum as a man whose job, and every aspect of his job, is his life. I think I know where he's coming from because I used to be just such a man. I was a lot younger than Doctor Dominum then, and things altered for the worse in my job, or rather in the political environment I had to do my job in. However at one time if there had been such a thing as dodgy mainframe computing groups on the then non-existent web I'd have been posting in them because I'd have felt I had something to offer and I would have really wanted to talk about anything related to my job with anybody who would talk about it with me.

Yes, I'm passionate about being a teacher. It's at the core of my life and though I've now decided I will retire at the end of this year, I keep regretting that decision because all I want to do is teach.

I think Doctor Dominum has been very lucky. He still loves his job at 71 the way I loved mine in my 30's. That love makes you obsessive, and, without meaning it in any way as an insult, more of a compliment really, I think Doctor Dominum is obsessive. That can blind you to a lot of things other people see as weakness or folly. Most people thought I was a pretty strange character back then!

Well, I prefer passionate to obsessive, but there are people close to me who would agree your term is more accurate.

I don't think I'm blinded by my passion. If I was still in my forties with a long career ahead of me, I probably wouldn't be in those groups either, because I'd be risking too much to be willing to risk any accusations. From the secure position of somebody who can retire any time he wants and who also has enough of a reputation behind him that those who matter would never believe I was a pervert, it's easier to make a stand and not let the perverts drive me away from discussions I believe should be occurring.

Mimi is not a man to be taken seriously. On 17 January in this thread he wrote:

"Unless you [Dr. Dominum] can proove who you are and where you teach you have no credibility."

But on 5 September 2008 in 'Kinky Teachers - maybe not?' he is of this opinion:

"I have always thought that Dr D and Headmaster George were more than genuine."

That is unfair.

While I certainly have taken issue with much of what Mimi has said recently, he (it is he, isn't it) is certainly entitled to change his mind.

Anybody with half a brain who is employed in education and was warned that he was visiting dodgy sites on the internet which could cause harm to their career and character would be grateful rather than dogmatic.

Mimi, as I've said numerous times, I consider the sites I visit to be legitimate discussion sites. The presence of fetish posters masquerading as real does not change that - not when there are plenty of legitimate members as well. If you could absolutely guarantee some way of keeping perverts out of such groups, I might agree that no legitimate person should use ones that fetishes that happen to join, but as that can't be done, all such a policy would do is make legitimate discussion impossible and leave the entire net to the perverts.

My contention is this:-
If a person is a fraud and posts about falagelating boys bare bottoms he is at best feeding other perverts fantasies or at worse phishing for contacts.

Well, I'm not a fraud.

If he is genuine then that person is running very close to the wind and in severe danger of being traced by the authourities.

I don't believe I am. I've done nothing illegal and if I haven't done anything illegal, I have no real fear of the authorities.

Yes, I'm aware that sometimes police can act without sufficient reason - but, well, I have the added advantage that even if that did happen, my reputation, personal and professional, is high enough to resist false accusations.

Why I hear you think?
Well its because anything involving the removal of clothing of a child when administering " discipline" ( and I use discipline loosly ) is conceived by the authourities as obscene and plain dodgy. ( Remember the case of old P and his spanking kit and cream in a shoe box)
If that type of person was working with children they would at the very least be banned from working with children ever again.

If I was doing this in the present day, then, yes, I would have reason to worry. Today, such practices are (rightly, in my view) considered unacceptable.

But I'm not doing it today. I haven't done that in at least thirty five years, and it's probably closer to forty. At that time, it was considered an acceptable practice in elite schools in Australia. Should it have been? No, I don't think it should have been - but it was. What I did was accepted at that time - the late 1960s and early 1970s.

Peerhaps being dogmatic and set in their ways they think erroniously that they behaved correctly.
I contend that this is not so.

And I agree with you. What I did was not right. I wish I hadn't done it. But it was not illegal so I've got nothing to fear on that basis. And as I am not a religious man, I've really got nothing to fear at all. Regret, yes. But I've no reason to run scared.

When I've had a chance to, I have apologised to the men I caned in that way. None of them seemed to think it was that a big a deal and at least one feels it was completely justified and he said he was actually grateful for it, because he knows it saved him from expulsion. But they accepted my apologies.

"reputation is at risk when people make such accusations and all too many people seem to be of the opinion that silence when accused constitutes guilt. Of course, it does not. But mud sticks no matter how unjustified it might be, and so I respond."


rothlmao once again. if you actually were a real teacher your professional career would be over if anyone ID'd you and believe what you write here is true.


"Besides, to be completely honest, I'm rather enjoying myself. In my professional life, it is very important that I remain calm even in the face of abuse directed towards me. If a pupil calls me something horrible, I have to stay professional and not respond in the way I might like to respond."


oh i'm pretty sure your "pupils" get just what you'd like.


"As for your last statement, I think I've successfully demonstrated I understand education, educational administration, educational law, educational psychology, etc, to a fairly high level over a large number of posts. I can't prove my degree to anybody, but I'm not just relying on a claim of qualifications. I think I've demonstrated that type of education in more than just wild claims."


you've demonstrated you've read everything you can get your hands on about school cp and have demonstrated no knowledge of anything else about education. what subjects do you teach anyway?

hey, here's an idea. since i've also gotta lot of time these days how about i make up a sock puppet saying i'm an australian assistant headmaster. i'll go around the internet to teaching sites posting nothing but quotes and stories from you. whatcha think are the chance a single real teacher will believe you or in the chance they do think you're not a total wacko?

It is sad that this thread has mutated into a witch hunt.

Here is an observation about two of the posters in this (and other) threads who have been critical about Dr. Dominum.

Mimi has made many posts over the years, on a number of different topics. His views on many matters are well known here, and (like everyone) he is entitled to change his mind when new evidence appears.

From me has made posts only over the past seven days, and has offered only criticism of Dr D; there have been no posts on any other topic.

I attach considerable weight to Mimi's views, even if I might disagree with them. This is because Mimi has established a strong online personality. But without knowing any more about the personality behind From me, the latter's posts simply come across as unthinking abuse.

Alan Turing, as so often in this estimable Forum, you express my exact sentiments in about half the words I would have required!

From me, you say:

you've demonstrated you've read everything you can get your hands on about school cp and have demonstrated no knowledge of anything else about education. what subjects do you teach anyway?

And you've demonstrated that you certainly haven't read very much of what's been posted in this forum. There is ample evidence of what Doctor Dominum teaches, and substantial evidence that his interests and expertise in education extend far beyond school cp. I suggest that you do some research before you jump into someone else's disagreement and start spouting rubbish.

i was directed here a short while ago from another site. i think i visited it or one like it off and on a while back. i quickly saw most of it was as you say "rubish". i've surfed and read enough on the net about cp to know a fake when i see one. the fact that no one can find a single other australian teacher doing what he claims and willing to give his identity says something. i'm sure you also can't find any press items describing what he does in any australian school.

hey, don't let me ruin your fantasies and go on believing whatever you want. i'm sure he's not the most rediculous person here. the only difference is that when "mary" from England comes along saying she got caned on her panties in school in 1965 there's a 0.01% chance it's true, not 0%.

why the fear of real world tests? could it ruin too much imaginary "rubbish?"

Watch this space for the full expose of Melbourne caning schools, it will take a week or so......

Meanwhile, with apologies to Harry Hill....
Who has caned more little boys bare bottoms, George from Biglakeside or Dr D from Eringsborough...
George or Dr D.....
George or Dr D.....
Theres only one wat to find out....

FFFFIIIGGGHHHHTTTTTTT........

That's a 'no contest', Mimi. If I recall correctly Doctor Dominum claimed less than ten BB canings, whereas George dealt with hundreds .... and hundreds!

Yep, there's what I was looking for:

Doctor Dominum, then posting as Dominum, on 5 July 2002 in the 'Bare Behinds' thread here.

While many such stories are fantasy, bare bottom canings have certainly occurred at times. In over 40 years as a teacher, I administered the cane across the bare buttocks less than half a dozen times (and not at all after the early 1970s). I did it only in cases where for special reason, an unusually severe caning was justified - most notably in a case where a boy had manipulated me into giving another boy six strokes for a crime the second boy had committed, and extreme punishment seemed called for - but I felt some degree of lenience was justified as he had eventually come forward and confessed (and expelling him would have been problematic for other reasons).

He received 9 strokes across the bare backside - when I started I had intended to give him 12 but my nerve failed after 9 strokes.

Dominum

Some other quotes from Doctor Dominum on the subject taken from various places in this estimable Forum:

Bare bottom canings back when I handed such canings out, was meant to be an extremely severe punishment

I never, personally, experienced a regime where these punishments were totally routine either as a boy or as a Master, although I did receive a couple of such canings myself, and administered a small number of them

In my experience, these punishments were administered only in pretty extreme situations. As a boy it was in cases where more severe than normal punishment was expected, as a Master, it was even rarer.

Bare bottom canings were exceedingly rare

Sorry to be a pain Mimi, but when I back a man I don't abandon him without good cause. It would be exactly the same if I was defending you against something.

A L I hope to be able to conclude, within a while to a 99% certainty if a certain Dr is genuine or not. It involves lots of e mails and the assistance of personal contacts in the Melbourne and Perth area.
I have already shown he uses fetish sites contributed to by fetish afficianados.
I have shown some of his posts to be contradictory.
His declared age is a nonsence.
His teaching times and qualifications are not compatible.
It is most unlikely that anyone in his supposed position would contribute to this or any other site in the way he does.
10K canings my arse!

OK Mimi, we'll have to to agree to differ on this one at present, and on my side it's an amicable agreement. I hope the same goes for you.

I am seriously puzzled though as to why there is such polarisation on this issue. A number of people, yourself included, seem absolutely convinced that there's something wrong. A number of others, including the Forum Management in the person of Big Ray's Old Mum (and they don't often get this sort of thing wrong) and myself say that Doctor Dominum is exactly who he says he is.

I await your findings with interest, but they'll need to be pretty conclusive. People saying they haven't heard of it won't do it. Schools like that stick together against outsiders and don't spill the beans - I know, I was at one!

A L well you won't be convinced then. But I am not falling out with a gentleman like yourself.

rothlmao once again. if you actually were a real teacher your professional career would be over if anyone ID'd you and believe what you write here is true.

I really wonder why people seem to think this is the case. Nothing I do now is illegal, the corporal punishment I administer is well within the guidelines (such as they are) that apply within my state and country. While some of the canings I administered in the past would no longer be considered acceptable due to changing standards over the years, they were considered acceptable at the time I administered them.

Teacher's careers do not get ruined because standards change. People accept that you worked under the standards that applied at the time.

There have been two recent court cases in Australia which addressed these issues specifically.

Hogan v. the Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church and Fricot in 2003 clearly indicated that there are situations where corporal punishment is acceptable in schools (as long as no law has been passed against it) and other situations where it is not (even if the law allows it).

The Lepore decision (also in 2003) also indicates that, historically, punishment on the bare bottom by a teacher was permissable, for people who continue to be obsessed with the fact I did that on a few rare occasions in the distant past. Some people think it even implies that it remains acceptable as far as the law is concerned although I would never make that argument myself.

you've demonstrated you've read everything you can get your hands on about school cp and have demonstrated no knowledge of anything else about education. what subjects do you teach anyway?

OK - well, this just shows you've read very little of what I've written on this forum in the past.

For the record I'm a science teacher. I teach general science, physics and chemistry as core, and am sometimes called on to teach other subjects as well.

http://www.network54.com/Forum/198833/thread/1219979891/last-1222385907/Kinky+Teachers+-+maybe+not- - that thread will give you one example where I've discussed aspects of the teaching of science in some detail.

I've discussed other issues as well.

hey, here's an idea. since i've also gotta lot of time these days how about i make up a sock puppet saying i'm an australian assistant headmaster. i'll go around the internet to teaching sites posting nothing but quotes and stories from you. whatcha think are the chance a single real teacher will believe you or in the chance they do think you're not a total wacko?

If you did that, you would be engaging in a deliberate fraud. I would hope people would identify you as such and the fact that they did would prove nothing at all except that you were a fraud.

I, however, am not.

A L I hope to be able to conclude, within a while to a 99% certainty if a certain Dr is genuine or not. It involves lots of e mails and the assistance of personal contacts in the Melbourne and Perth area.

I am genuine. If you conclude I am not, you will be in error, but I doubt there's any way to convince you of that. But I will respond in the interests of other people.

I have already shown he uses fetish sites contributed to by fetish afficianados.

You have not done so, because I do not participate in fetish sites. The fact you claim a legitimate site is a fetish site does not make it so. The fact that some fetishes choose to join a legitimate site (and there's no particularly effective way of keeping them out that I've ever found) does not change it into a fetish site. You've also failed, despite numerous requests to do so to name most of these sites you claim I'm a member of, making it impossible for other people to make personal assessments of your claims, and making it extremely difficult for me to respond to them. Once again, I make the request - name these 'fetish sites' I'm a member of.

I have shown some of his posts to be contradictory.

I do not believe you have because I don't believe they are. You seem to have made assumptions about what I believe that are not necessarily correct, and when I have said something that doesn't match your assumption, you've labelled it contradictory even when I have been able to demonstrate previous occasions where I've said almost exactly the same thing.

His declared age is a nonsence.

On what basis do you make that claim? Merely because I'm beyond retirement age? In most of Australia (and I believe this is true of many other places) nobody is forced to retire simply because they reach an arbitrarily determined birthday. In fact, in this state, it's actually illegal for an employer to require a person to retire on the basis of reaching a particular age - it has been since 1995.

His teaching times and qualifications are not compatible.

Born 1937
Started school 1943
Matriculated 1954
Teaching Studentship - BSc 1954-1957
Teaching Studentship - DipEd 1958
Began teaching - 1959
Part Time Study BEd - 1965-1969
Part Time Study MEd - 1970-1972
Part Time Study MSc - 1998-2002
Part Time Study PhD - 2002-2006

It's actually not quite as neat as that - I began working towards the MEd at the end of 1969, and my most recent studies were intertwined with the MSc turning into a PhD, but that's pretty well how it went.

D D does not deserve to be numbered among those who abuse this forum by feeding fantasies of perverts or phishing. Recently, a person wrote I could care less if posters are abusing this forum for the aforesaid reasons and wrote of the good Doctor, a lifetime honorary member of this estimable forum, he has an answer for everything and a comprehension of nothing. Remember, if you point your finger at someone there are three or more pointing at you. Please listen to the message and overlook the newness and origin of the messenger. Im happy the Americans won the Revolutionary War and happy like Columbus for discovering this site.

Yawn......
If and when I find him I will be reporting him to his school governers.
At the moment I have not found anyone remotely answering his description.

this estimable forum

Oy American Way! Watch it sunshine, that's my catchphrase! And if you're going to plagiarise it, please at least take the trouble to get it right. When it follows the word 'estimable' the word 'Forum' always has a capital 'F' - except when I forget of course!

I think we are all happy that "you" won the revolutionary war. Because "you" are in fact "us"

Mimi,

You have made it very clear you do not believe Dr Dominum is real. It is also clear that this is a strongly held opinion.

It is logically impossible for you to PROVE he does not exist. The best you can do is to say that you looked and could not find anyone one answering his description. (It would be better if someone who had not already made up their mind were to do the searching. How can you diligently search for something that you know does not exist?)

And if you do find a plausible Dr D you are proposing to out him? I do hope not. Please reconsider. It is a dangerous precedent.

Mimi, with all due respect I'm going to join with KK on this one. Many, in fact possibly most, people who post here would probably rather that the world didn't know exactly who they are and what their interests are. Otherwise why would people use pseudonyms? Your name isn't Mimi, my name isn't Another_Lurker!

You are perfectly entitled to disbelieve Doctor Dominum's claims. Should you so wish you are perfectly entitled to take action to substantiate that disbelief. If you find evidence that Doctor Dominum is not who he says he is you are perfectly entitled to post that evidence here.

However, if you use material you obtain to attempt to damage Doctor Dominum in his own environment then, like KK, I feel that you set a very dangerous precedent indeed. I don't believe you have any evidence that Doctor Dominum has done anything illegal at any time, which might be a valid justification for such action.

If even a few of us start hunting down and publicly outing others on the forum whose opinions or claimed actions annoy us then this estimable Forum will not be around much longer. I very much hope you will reconsider the action you suggested in your post at 19:53 yesterday.

"Can we all just get along?"

If DR D is who he says he is then I consider him a danger to children and will expose him.
It is incompatable for someone who administers CP to children to be interested in fetish sites.
If he is a wind up merchant he is a nuisance to this and other forums.
If I have no proof either way I will leave it be.
The difference between our use of nicknames is that we do not do any harm to anyone or solicite contacts with those interested in abusive behaviour.
He may just not know any better but his behaviour is just like those who "groom" innocents.
My perogative.

By the way I will not be exposing anybody on this or any other website.
I would not risk any website owners being sued for damages.
It would be a matter for the authourities.
If he has done nothing wrong there is nothing to fear.

"If DR D is who he says he is then I consider him a danger to children and will expose him." (mimi, 29 January, 8.22PM)

"I will not be exposing anybody on this or any other website." (mimi, 29 January, 8.30PM)

If you cannot understand the difference then you are having a laugh!

If DR D is who he says he is then I consider him a danger to children and will expose him.

I have fifty years of service working for the benefit of other people's children. I find the idea that I am a danger to children both laughable and offensive. I've always done my best to give the boys I teach what they need. I haven't always succeeded but I think I've done a great deal of good. And I think most of them would agree.

I have always acted within the law and the guidelines which my employer has set for me. I have always try to behave ethically towards the boys in my care.

It is incompatable for someone who administers CP to children to be interested in fetish sites.

I'm not interested in fetish sites. It seems to me that you have a very odd idea of what a fetish site is. It seems to me that just about any internet site could fall into your definition of fetish site. I could be wrong on that, but as you've refused to list these supposed fetish sites I'm a member of, it makes it rather hard to me to work out what definition you are using.

The difference between our use of nicknames is that we do not do any harm to anyone or solicite contacts with those interested in abusive behaviour.

I do not 'solicit contacts with those interested in abusive behaviour' and I would like to see you provide some evidence for that claim.

You make a lot of claims, Mimi, and then you fail to back them up with evidence when you are asked to.

To a great extent, Mimi, I don't care about your threats. I find them somewhat perplexing and puzzling, given that they bear little resemblance to reality, but my reputation is, I believe, secure enough that I don't need to worry about misinformation coming from the internet, whoever it's passed on to. I am capable of responding to any allegations and have the credibility I need that given that I have not done anything wrong and could respond to any allegation by making my e-mails and other messages available to anybody of substance investigating me demonstrating what I've done and haven't done and I am comfortable with what I have done. I have the added bonus of being financially secure and able to retire anytime I want to - as has been made clear recently (and it's not the first time it's been made clear) I am beyond retirement age and while I have not been forced to retire I could certainly do so if I chose to.

I think, however, Mimi, that what you may have done in recent times is made it rather less likely that any other serving teacher will post on this forum, ever again. Mud sticks, and most teachers do not have the same security of reputation and position that I have available to me. I would recommend any colleague, anywhere, steer clear of this group.

I do not believe I have done anything illegal in my entire career. I do not believe that when it comes to corporal punishment, I have ever acted outside the conditions imposed by me on my employer. There have been occasions where, either at the time, or in retrospect, I feel those conditions should not have been in place and there are actions I regret carrying out, but that does not change what the conditions were.

I believe I am entirely safe from criminal prosecution because I haven't broken the law. It is possible that there are some cases where a former student might be able to bring some sort of civil action against me - cases where, despite my best efforts, I mistakenly punished an innocent boy, for example, as we have seen here. I don't particularly fear such a case. If I did wrong to one of my former students, I'm prepared to face up to that, and that means being willing to face up to it through compensation in a civil case if that is what is appropriate. If one of my former pupils thinks I did something wrong that hurt him, I want him to step up so we can sort that out - and if he's right, so I can make amends, if possible. I'm not afraid to face consequences for what I've done, for my own actions. I wouldn't relish it either, but I'd be a complete hypocrite to take any other position.

But I object to accusations being made that are unfounded and I'll fight them in any way I have to.

The school year is resuming here, and I will probably not be reading this forum as often as I was, and I hope I won't need to post as often as I have in some recent times. But I just want to put down the following thing for people here to think about.

I can't really tell what is motivating Mimi here, but one thing that he certainly seems to have a problem with is the fact that I have admitted that on a small number of occasions back in the 1960s and early 1970s I caned a number of boys on their bare bottoms. Now, I can understand that Mimi has a problem with that. There's absolutely no reason that he shouldn't. It was legal. It was permitted by the practices of my school. And it was expected of somebody in my position.

But I don't believe it should have been any of those things. It should not have been legal, the school should not have allowed it, and a relatively inexperienced and relatively young teacher should not have been expected to do it.

It was, and I did. And whatever the expectations were, it was ultimately a decision that was in my hands, and that I, for the most part regret - I don't regret the fact that in some cases, it helped to stop the boy experiencing an even worse punishment, but that's the only part of it I don't regret.

Now, I can understand Mimi and others thinking that that was wrong, and that it was indefensible. But the fact remains I did it.

And, given that I did it, I have no intention of concealing that fact. I get the distinct impression that there are some people here - possibly Mimi included - who think I shouldn't have discussed such cases because they could titillate fetishists. Well, yes, I'm sure they could and I'm not particularly happy about that - but the alternative of being silenced means failing to admit the mistakes of the past and participating in covering up practices that should not have been allowed. Oh, I'd be much more comfortable on this forum, and others, if I'd only ever talked about the cases where I believe I got everything right, and where there's nothing uncomfortable to think about concering the implication of what I did. If I only ever talked about caning a few dozen boys who were clearly guilty of the most heinous offences imaginable. Yes, it would make things much more comfortable and pleasant.

But it would be a lie. It would be the worst kind of lie - suppressing unpleasant truths in order to paint a very rosy picture, a nostalgic, misleading, romanticised view that accentuates the positive and ignores the negative.

I believe corporal punishment has a role to play in schools - if used appropriately, with proper safeguards in place to prevent its misuse. Such has been the case in the school I teach in for between fifteen and twenty five years (it's been a gradual process of reform - I think we had it mostly right by 1983 but there were still refinements and improvements after that).

But the first fifteen years or so of my career... that's another matter. Abolition would have been better than what we had here until at least 1970 and maybe even a little later. I'm not saying no good was done, because some was, but the good was done amidst a lot of potential for harm and misuse.

I believe that we've got it pretty much right today. I'm not saying further improvement isn't possible, but I think we've got a decent, workable, fair and effective system in place with the safeguards we need, and the alternatives we need.

That's the system I'd defend. I wouldn't defend much of the system we had in place prior to 1970 and there were aspects I wouldn't defend even later. But at the same time, I won't ignore the problems we had, not the mistakes we made. The mistakes I made.

I support corporal punishment as an option in schools. But I will not support it by claiming that there were never any problems, because denying mistakes makes it more likely they will be made again.

I agree with Dr D.

I my experience, boys very quickly work out which teachers care about them. They are inclined forgive the ocassional mistake made by a teacher who is acting in their best interest and especially so when the teacher admits the mistake.

Enough already. No further defense needed nor explanation warranted.

Which wise words rather echo what Richard Millhouse Nixon said in 1971, when automatically pardoning Lt Cally for an allegedly excessive massacre of Vietnamese villagers at My Lai.

Not that Doc has quite committed anything like as bad.


Steve M

Ford pardoned Nixon but Nixon never pardoned Calley but gave a tacit pardon. According to the American Heritage Dictionary, to excuse is to pass over a mistake or fault, usually a minor one, without demanding punishment or redress. To condone is to overlook an offense, usually serious, and thereby give tacit pardon. To forgive is to grant pardon without harboring resentment, and to renounce anger or resentment against the other party.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-485983/Found-The-monster-My-Lai-massacre.html

"If you did that, you would be engaging in a deliberate fraud. I would hope people would identify you as such and the fact that they did would prove nothing at all except that you were a fraud.

I, however, am not."

has anyone ever been charged with fraud for passing along someone's internet fantasies? like i said that would be like charging someone with fraud for passing along postings about their secret dodo bird farm.

mimi, what the heck r u getting so worked up about? save your campaign of justice for someone who isn't imaginary.

I actually hope that he is imaginary because if by some bizare miracle he is real..........

Mimi wrote on 27 January
Watch this space for the full expose of Melbourne caning schools, it will take a week or so......

He has continued his campaign against Dr D using strong language while ignoring reasonable requests to back his accusations with details. It is time to shut up or to provide facts.

Immoderate attacks on those who participate in forums such as this drive off those who have the most to contribute and stiffles reasonable debate.

If Dr D is not real he describes in detail and with great understanding a world that was real, and acceptable to many, very recently. It is abundantly clear and easily verifiable that school CP is still legal in parts of Australia even if little used. The lack of news about canings is understandable to those who know Australian society and schools. Not everything makes the news.

I am sure Australians are concerned about the wellfare of their children and quite able to protect them without foreign interference.

In the link below W. Collings of the Wilston State School, in the Queensland, showed that even educated people can spout nonsense even as much as the anti CP zealots in the United States do now. Judging by opening questionnaire, little has changed, the well paid expert always knows more than the one who is doing the work. Contrast their attitude to the teachers polled and found this in the link below. I wonder if any member of this esteem Forum, within that bailiwick would care to opine. Whether or not alcohol played a part in inflicting CP may be worthy of a new discussion but hardly a reason to abandon it. Different nations have been known to hold alcohol better than others but the Australians are not counted among the bottom of those nations. 1921 Collings gave this lecture to the Workers Educational Association.

In addition, he claimed that the use of corporal punishment was influenced by the teacher's condition at the time. It was well known that a teacher with a 'bad head' after a night's 'enjoyment' was more prone to cane. Furthermore, he claimed that boys were often punished for the same offences as those committed by teachers, namely swearing and smoking.

http://education.qld.gov.au/library/edhistory/topics/corporal/union.html

I know for a fact ( his son told me ) that one of my primary school teachers could be erratic and down right sadistic at times. He was having marriage trouble.
This is yet another reason for not giving teachers carte blanche to use CP.

Are any members of this esteem Forum permitted to access this archived data? Or has this already been discussed before?

Items for Series 6149 - Corporal Punishment Register
Click on the Record Type/Description to view its details and order the item. Please note that items may only be ordered if you are in the Public Search Room


Corporal punishment registers were kept by the Head Teacher of each school, and record all corporal punishment administered by the Head Teacher or an assistant [authorised by the Minister]. The corporal punishment register of Warwick East State School contains the following information for each entry: the date, the name of the pupil or pupils receiving corporal punishment, the fault or incident requiring punishment and the kind and extent of punishment.

http://www.archivessearch.qld.gov.au/Search/ItemSearchResults.aspx?SeriesId=6149&SeriesTitle=Corporal%20Punishment%20Register

Published by Samuel Turner on Feb 21, 2009 Category: Law Reform
Region: Australia Target: NSW Government or Federal. Background (Preamble):

I ask that the Corporal Punishment laws in Schooling should be made legal, it was abolished in the 1980s. Children of my generation are absolutely disgusting, i go to a school in Seven Hills, Sydney, NSW. And i have seen some sights, the children are disgraceful, they show no respect what so ever, i myself am 15 and i agree with it. The circumstances are: Children may retaliate though it should me made punishable. Children may be bruising, though there should be laws restricting the amount. Petition:
I hereby request signatures to reinstate the old disciplinary laws of the Corporal Punishment in the School environment to give the students a better more disciplined academic education and to show the men and women that devote there lives. We, the undersigned, hence call on the State Government of NSW to reinstate Corporal Punishment.

http://gopetition.com/petitions/corporal-punishment-the-cane.html

American Way, you sometimes baffle me, but I have to admit that you certainly must know your way around the search engines!

Thanks. Another_Lurker. I hope I dont bewilder you but I do my best around the search engines. It was good to hear from a student in Australia and now a student in Malaysia from the 23 girls caned non-event. They look like theyre being brought up right. The student put it best about his teachers caning. "But Students do not hate him, as this is his duty, to make sure that the students are disciplined. They like him because of his friendliness and he his very understanding, like a father."

The anti zealot crusaders focus on the sanction (CP) but the teachers focus on the THE BEHAVIOR. The students are at home 180 days a year and half their waking hours the other 180 days. Schools can't take credit for their behavior but they can see that their parents' will be respected. The question to ask is what would the parents do and if the youngsters would behave any differently if a parent was there and the infrequency and nature of the infractions. It attests to reason and respect sorly lacking says more about their reasonableness (few infractions)& respect The behavior most insisted upon), both qualities lacking in many of the anti CP zealots.

Did you see any schools abolishing CP since the national TV episode in Booneville, Arkansas? The paddling may have been atypical (mixed gender) and the principal may not be my liking, but I think on a pain level thats exactly what the parents expect and the school districts permits and even encourages for what they perceived to be for the schools best good. Torture is what teacher have put up with disrespectful kids you can't reason with. UN and ACLU are unreasonable and disrespectful and you do not have to search hard to see that. Look at the nature of the infractions and then look at the sanctions and then focus on the most important thing, THE BEHAVIOR. Look at there report card, they must be doing something right? Just because they live in Alabama doesnt make them either ignorant or stupid.

ftp://ftp.alsde.edu/documents/ReportCards/2006-2007/143/1430020.pdf

http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:HYISEitxub8J:reports.ftpayne.groupfusion.net/modules/locker/files/get_group_file.phtml%3Ffid%3D462241%26gid%3D107778+ft+payne+group+fusion+report&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

During my schooling I received the cane three times. I attended government schools from 1975 to 1987 and the cane was applied to the palm of the hand or my high school headmaster applied the cane to your fingertips which really stung and made it difficult to write afterwards. The maximum number of strokes that could be administered was six strokes and some teachers would give you three on each hand or all six on one hand. Only once did I receive all six on one hand and that was from the Woodwork Master and my hand was swollen for the rest of the day.
As far as school Cp still in use my understanding is that in government schools it is not and in private schools (excpet in QLD for some schools-depending on its administration) corporal punishment can be used.) The education authorities ruled that in order for private school curriculums to be acknowledged from the government they had to abolish corporal punishment.

On a personal note I don't feel that the times I received the cane were unjustified and I believe I was treated fairly when I was punished with the cane. As far as I am aware there wasn't much by the way of excessive caning, but I went to school toward the end of the corporal punishment era and I can't speak for those who went to school in the 30s, 40s, 50s and 60s.

Listing of CP Registers archived.

http://www.archivessearch.qld.gov.au/Search/SeriesSearchResults.aspx

Susan Osborne, RN, Invercargill "Corporal punishment has its place". Kai Tiaki: Nursing New Zealand. FindArticles.com

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb4839/is_9_12/ai_n29301143/

Liz Banks, RN, PGDip, Christchurch Corporal punishment opinion horrifies.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb4839/is_10_12/ai_n29386352/?tag=rbxcra.2.a.32

Evan Maloney, the screen writer shares Wagga Wagga anecdotes. Should this be considered true or apocryphal? No, not the name, but the story that follows. Just Google: Do you enjoy a good spanking? Enjoy the rest of the article. Does this resonate with anyone?

One of my form masters in secondary school had a name for his strap; it was Betty or something like that (a name you might expect to see on the nose of a Wellington bomber during the war). After explaining why we had been sent to see him, this form master would rub his hands together and smile a greasy little smile and say, I think you better talk to Betty.
Im thinking today that, if he had been getting some kind of sexual gratification out of beating us, at least I must have been cognizant of the fact that he seemed to be honouring a heterosexual tradition. I imagine that, at the age of twelve, I would have been quite a bit more disturbed had we been forced to submit to a strap called Harold.

On a more scholarly note this decade old PDF on school corporal punishment in the Northern Territories is Im sure familiar to readers of this esteem Forum. But I'm not 100% sure?

Just Google: RP1996No.13.pdf