ALAN & ANOTHER_LURKER

Perhaps I might add my twopennorth. This is, at least to start, statistical thoughts, if such things exist!

As posted elsewhere, I was aware of 25 canings or so in 3 years at MGS. That's across my year from 3rd-5th forms, the two years above me when I was in the 3rd year & the 2 beneath mine once they became the 3rd form-5 years' worth of boys = roughly 600 pupils.

I make that roughly 1 in 24 beaten.

40 years on, Doc claims to be beating 200 a year. Bit of a fall from previously, as he said himself in 2002 about earlier times:
The cane was in common use at the school - we had somewhere around 800-900 boys at the time, and canings were a more than everyday occurrence - there were around 400 properly logged canings a year - and given how lax some teachers were, I'm not sur what the accurate number was - I would guess more like 600. Canings were commented on, but were routine.

I make the present rate 1 in 5, by the most generous odds, if the school is now 1,000 register. In 2008?? Christ, the entire Tiger economies of SE Asia would be green with envy at THAT rate of caning! However, even the caning economy of Victoria has been hit by a recent credit crunch, it seems, as the rate was once 1 in 2!!

Yes, I know Bacons got up to 800 a year, but dear Wilf had at least 4 other teachers caning on occasions. Doc has had help, too, it seems, so the figures might be even more impressive.

Is it also likely in this internet-wise day that, say, of the last 5 years' worth of beaten boys, 1,000 minimum, not ONE has lagged on Doc to The Melbourne Age/Sun Herald OR, more likely, posted about him on You-Tube or Facebook etc?

These places are littered, by the way, with mobile phone pics from SE Asia, where a matter-of-fact attitude is adopted to canings in school. Rather like we must assume Docs pupils attitude to be, as the Age & other papers havent had one of his 10,000 on the front page yet.

And, again, Singapore & Malaysia have had 2 generations of their judicial CP regime to enforce acceptance of it in schools, too. I do not think Victoria is quite so isolated from the modern world, in fact its as cosmopolitan as any Oz state.

In which circumstances, Victoria will be as familiar as any with the compensation culture. So how likely is it that someone somewhere in Victoria wouldnt have gone after Doc with a large bundle of writs-not one in 10,000? Yeh!

Now, Ive personally met up with 6 of my 600 fellow-pupils since I moved here,300 miles from school, in 1994. How likely is it that just one of Docs 10,000 was angry enough about their treatment to seek him out on here?

You also WON'T find anything about him on any FR site in Victoria. I've spent a lot of hours researching that, and believe me, that was a job! However, there is not the slightest shred of evidence from FR that any public school in that state has anyone on their staff doing what Doc claims. Not even a jovial or affectionate reference to their veteran chemistry master and a boys best mate.

Equally, the one apparent pupil posting on here accuses him of getting it wrong and just happens to post in a similarly grammatically-correct manner. From my capers with Trees & Soooze, you only do that sort of thing if you are confident you can get away with anything.

Just think about that. Doc could indeed be an educationalist and, as Alan said, have the intellectual level of a Tolkien.

However, Tolkien was also, of course, a writer of FANTASY. Which doesnt demean Tolkiens astonishing grasp of detail or Doc, but when did you or I last meet a Hobbit on the bus?

Its also a fact, as Doc says, mud sticks if thrown enough. Unfortunately, by exactly the same token, people will believe the most absurd and outrageous lies if you tell them with conviction and tell them often enough.

Yes, I know thats the story of politics since Edens lies over Suez in 1956, but there were plenty of people then, and even a few now, who genuinely believe Eden never conspired with France & Israel to topple Nasser or who believe Eisenhower was telling the truth when he said hed not been told about any of this.

If we had never had STOPP or Corpun to refer to, would we have believed it if one of our two young ladies from Bacons had posted HERE and not on FR? If theyd come on here and said 800 people a year, including 200+ girls were getting beaten in 1970s/80s at their place, wed have laughed them off as one-handed typists.

And yet, if Soooze had gone on to claim similar figures at Gateacre, who would have disputed it as improbable? If I had been that way inclined, I wonder how far I would have got before someone stood up and said-This is total fantasy-it never happened.

Doc speaks with authority, have no doubt. But does that, even together with a fine memory and great intelligence mean we take his word that some ludicrously impossible numbers of canings have been dealt out by him, and are continuing to be dealt out by him in a civilised country without a word of complaint or investigation?

As others have suggested, using the school uniform site was pretty risky from someone claiming to've been in education for 50 years. If you, A_L, think the site smells on first site, the first instinct of an educationalist would surely be to draw his pupils' attention to it as a dodgy area they need be think carefully about, and if not that to get off it in 10 secs flat, when he started reading a few posts on it.

I fail to see how someone of Docs purported standing thinks he could conduct reasoned discussion about the topic in the midst of fetishists and nonces. Bit like trying to conduct reasonable peace negotiations with Attila, whilst the rest of his Huns burn Rome to a crisp!

And someone whos allegedly carried out 10,000 canings aint exactly practised in reasoned discussion in my view anyhow! Be that as it may, I think any proper educationalist would have had one response to anyone discussing the efficacy of girls in shorts or gym knickers-and you know darn well what that response would and SHOULD be- the sort of phraseology that the equivalent of Big Rays Old Mum would be working overtime on.

Also, Doc is fervent about not revealing his school to protect his professional reputation-fair enough. But then he gives us chapter and verse about his position, what he teaches, the way he works here & does the same on other forums. Does he seriously want to remain anonymous or not?

I also note when Doc revealed the electronic punishment book, he told us the kid illustrated was for real, though nothing to do with him. Now I dont doubt Doc didnt compile it, but why did he breach that lads privacy? Why didnt Doc simply say it was a CGI & not a real person?

None of us is perfect, but that was not what Id expect from someone with young boys best interests allegedly at heart. It actually would be totally irresponsible for any alleged teacher to publish that without keeping paedo interest in mind and having a fob-off ready.

I also suggest you re-read his thread A case study. If Doc wants to drag privacy laws into it, then part of that is not identifying people on line. And another part of it is not broadcasting anything that MIGHT lead to identification of people. Any school aware one of their allegedly respected teachers was posting the breadth of detail he has would have blown him out in 10 secs flat.

And why? These alleged kids are mainly under the age of consent, they are boys and there are nonces galore out here on the net. Would YOU as a Head of one of these places really want it in any way identifiable, so every paedo on the Nullabor Plain & beyond could apply for a job? Im sure that would be a fantastic pulling point for parents in the schools curriculum!

And another thing-its patently obvious the Victorian private schools ARE secretive about a lot of information, particularly about CP, getting into the public domain. So, would YOU want a blabbermouth like Doc on the staff, telling half the globe about his track record?

Because, regardless of my personal beliefs, I honestly think any parent reading that and believing it is going to think twice about letting their boy near a school like that. So theres another cold-harded financial reason why no school would tolerate the Doc on their staff-theyd be without pupils and fee-paying parents in a trice if his alleged doings were discovered!

And that also means, because the private schools are so secretive, Doc has a perfect place to hide in. Think about it, not only are most of us thousands of miles from his alleged school, most of us know next to nothing about the workings of education in Australia(though some of us are learning fast!), so just add a cliqueish attitude like the private schools have, and how is anyone going to shoot him down-or so he thought!

Now, Ive no doubt they WOULD close ranks if Doc had cocked up once in his alleged position ie presented a class half-cut or caned a clearly-innocent boy. Hed have been spoken to severly or had to do a course again like Prince Harry!

But, it aint just Doc that is internet-savvy in the world of Vics private schools. How likely is it that he could keep posting for more than 6 years without one pupil or governor or fellow teacher finding out about it?

And that is when the code of Omerta would ensure his swift removal, if he was who he said he was. You might make one mistake, you damn well dont make it week in week out in that world.

Because, if the school approved of what Doc says he did, they would not want the world knowing about it. And if they didnt approve, theyd be doubly sure the info wasnt posted everywhere on a regular basis. Either way, in that world, revealing the level of info about it that Doc does IS a mistake and it is just not feasible Doc could be who he says he is and be allowed to keep on like he does.

A look at FR will also tell you about responsible net protocol. They wont give your address out and strongly advise that you dont splash giveaway details that might result in identity theft on your profile. Can you really conceive someone of Docs alleged experience and position blithely going on at the length he does and risking discovery and the sack?

Now, I AM related, though very distantly, to an actual Head. Why do you think Polly had me post for her, without the least detail of where she had been or is now a Head, or even as an ordinary Teacher?

It sure as hell wasnt feminine modesty-it was simple professional standards. Pollys attitude was such that I virtually had to sign a flipping 7-page disclosures contract!! Quite right too!

And SHE didnt even know about my real and very unusual surname, otherwise shed have probably never said anything! THAT is what a true educationalist acts like-scant detail and let someone else post for you.

We should also note Doc is clever enough not to claim to be an actual Head. That also means people are probably less likely to start probing if he was for real, as only then would it be assumed that, as the Head, his policy was school policy and worthy of investigation or comment or even approval.

But that cuts both ways, too. Because, if Doc IS who he says he is, how do you think his Head would like the way he is portrayed by Doc?

Because, by the absence of very much if any comment by Doc on his Head, we must assume the bloke is permanently drunk, gaga or so frightlingly weak that he wouldnt be out of place fainting in a Jane Austen novel? Of course, Doc could equally just be highly disloyal to his Head & seeks to undermine him by completely ignoring him in these matters.

Whichever, do you think that Head, those governors etc would let this have gone on for so long? I dont think so for a minute.

And if they HAD decided said Head was as useful as a chocolate fireguard and fired HIM, you can also guarantee Doc would, like most messengers, have been shot, too!

Talking of Heads, is there any plausible reason why Doc has had all the caning opportunities? Even at Bacons Wilf had the lions share of the work, and from my investigations, there was one very good reason for that-he was the HEAD and ran every major aspect of the school.

Not, however, in Docland. Unlike any other school Ive read about or experienced, this one has always been run by Doc. Which should tell you its exact location in about 5 seconds!

With regards to litigation, do you seriously think not one parent of that 10,000 would ever have gone after Doc? And I mean to the press or the courts.

Kids being the way they are, the sort of proportions of boys getting caned here would surely also soon be back with parents. And would they ALL then still quietly acquiesce to Docs infinite wisdom? Not in this day and age, please!

And this idea that parents never complain is a staple of spanking fantasy sites, at least as far as the ones Ive ever read go (and I have no qualms in admitting Ive toured bloody hundreds, and not for research, either!). The kids in these are also always duly corrected and realise eventually that authority is right, which sounds a lot like Docs correspondent in An Old Master Discovered!

I have to say, guys, its not like that now in real life, even if it really was in your school days and to a lesser extent in mine. It might be in Docs fantasy world, but not anywhere else I know on earth!

And what of the press? Can you really credit a virtual caning factory existing thats NEVER been exposed or ever mentioned by Vic journos?

Weve seen the Bacons & Rodneys press coverage over here, and we are now a lot further down the line of 24/7/365 inquiring media than we were in 1978 or 1991. Aus journos are also a lot less timid than ours about sticking their noses into rubbish heaps.

Dont mean to say they would condemn it, but to have us believe its never even come to their attention? That simply beggars belief as well.

The other thing I can tell you about Australia is that there is keen interstate rivalry. Except between Victoria and New South Wales. There its sheer hatred!

The Sydney media takes any & every opportunity to knock Melbourne & Victoria. The Sydney boys are also a darn site nastier. So, as THEY also havent ever picked up on Doc, which would be an ideal opportunity to slag Melbourne off big-time, whats happening-is the Mafia bumping off any complaining pupils or parents-or maybe they just dont exist.

And, gentlemen, there is another thing that convinces me Doc is fantasy, at least about his position. That has to do with personal experience.

Earlier on in my life, I made one very serious mistake. I knew what I was doing and set out to deceive. In my case, that meant pretending to be something I really wasnt.

It also meant, to keep the deceit going, I had to pay scrupulous attention to detail. Plus, I had to stay in an area of doing things that I was familiar with.

Unfortunately, once I strayed out of that area, the ceiling promptly fell in. Questions started being asked because Steve had been unusually careless. Twice over, in fact.

Now, I didnt have the net. Doc could have got all the admin detail etc off it, or could have dealt at some time or now with teachers. Its not axiomatic that Doc is or has been in education because he seems to be a fount of knowledge about it-not with the Freedom of Information Act in force in Australia, too!

And, my partner in that little faux-pas could have, without the net, given you chapter and verse about how certain things were meant to be done in certain circles AND how they were actually done, down to the last detail. And he had never done any of those in his life until we conspired together-and he STILL never actually did them when we did mount our project, either!!

I can also tell you that the authorities had to rely on my information to sort it all out. They couldnt believe how much detail had been gone into, nor that my initially convincing denials were total fabrications just as carefully prepared for just such an emergency. Luckily, I got caught and got what I deserved as well.

All of this sound familiar? Well, it brings back memories for me, because I got away with it for 3 years, and Docs efforts are just the same as mine, stick with what you know enough about, pay scrupulous attention to detail and ensure no-ones ever likely to ask questions, because you are too well hidden, you think.

Well, guys, I hate to say this, but Docs story is just utter and total BULL. Neither of you may feel his postings are diminished by being total cobblers all the way, and that is not my business if you do.

Lets just say hes been pulling the wool over our eyes for too long. I for one have had enough of it, and I was just about finished off by the use of the bush fires in his last post.

Id contrast that with the fact that I went 2 days without any communication from Mike, our fellow member in Vic. I knew he was OK, but others might not be.

I didnt get chapter and verse from Mike about what he was doing or thinking, I didnt get a flaming word.

And THAT is what any normal person would have done-if Doc had to respond to Mimi, all he had to say was Read the news? We have emergencies here, and some of my kids could be involved-I have bigger priorities now.

So theres our great self-publicist still blowing his own trumpet about someone elses alleged woes, yet still desperate to stay anonymous-PLEASE.

I know all this may not be of any importance compared to some things that never got found out. I agree-its a flaming drop in the ocean compared to Shipman or the Wests, that much we can agree on.

Yes, they got away with something far worse and for years. And the press had no idea either.

And the other difference with them & Doc? Yes, THEY operated purely in their own or the victims homes. THEY targeted people with medical histories or no nearby relatives. So nobody talked about it, nobody wondered about it.

And private or not, no school that size has one ten-thousandth of the privacy whereby Docs alleged activities could be completely contained within house. Not in this day and age especially, with internet & mobile-phone savvy kids, parents & governors.

In the words of Lotta (bless her), who saw through him ages ago-Gentlemen, Wake Up!

Finally, one last angle. My Sarah. I got a metaphorical clip round the ear when she read Soooze. Doc got plenty of praise.

As she said If you want to lie, do it properly like he has. Lots of detail that no-one can check, because its 10,000 miles away, and have a plausible answer ready for anything.

I asked Sarah if she thought, then, that Doc was not what he claimed to be. The response was As youre always saying I believe there really are fairies at the bottom of our garden, maybe YOU need treatment if you believed that tripe! A child of six would laugh at it.

And thats all the confirmation I needed.


Steve M

Thank you, Steve, for starting this thread. I hope that discussion on the other threads can now revert to their correct topics.

I think, now, we need to give Dr. D the opportunity to reply.

yeah, that about sums it up. not only does he muddy the waters of reality alot but he also insults everyones intelligence. you can just tell from his tone that he doesnt talk like a real teacher does.

I'll comment on this one, I suppose. But I really do think this forum would be better off if I wasn't the main topic of conversation. Still, it's a change to be dealing with someone who is trying to challenge me in a logical fashion, rather than just throwing around accusations. I won't answer everything because it's 11.00pm at night and some of what is said is opinion I can't really argue with anyway.

40 years on, Doc claims to be beating 200 a year.

Not quite - it differs a bit from year to year. Last year, it was about 200, but in the few years before that it was a lower number - our database is currently undergoing maintenance so I can't easily check exact numbers for earlier than 2006. But 200 represents a high number for recent years, the average is somewhat lower. In 2006, for example I caned approximately 175 times, in 2007, it was just under 150. There have been other recent years where it's been considerably lower. I could get numbers for those years in a day or so.

Across my entire career, 200 a year seems a reasonable estimate of the average - but there have been periods in that time when the rate was 50 or less and others where it was 300 or more, depending on the period and my role.

I make the present rate 1 in 5, by the most generous odds, if the school is now 1,000 register. In 2008??

First of all, the school is somewhat larger than 1000 students. Secondly, and importantly, some boys are caned more than once - by no means a majority of those caned, but you can't extrapolate the proportion of boys caned simply by dividing number of canings by number of boys.

A quick check of last years figures - and assuming they show a reasonably typical year shows that when multiple canings experienced by particular boys are considered, the ratio individual boys caned to overall number of canings is about 0.8 - in other words, if you look at a random list of 100 canings, you'd expect to see 80 boys in that list - most of whom were caned once, but some who were caned more often.

Having said that, I'm not the only teacher using the cane in this school although I use it more than any other. Overall, you can probably say that in any given year in the twenty first century somewhere between 10-25% of boys have been caned. I could give more exact numbers if I could access the older databases but I can't right now. The number of canings was similar to current levels in 2001, but there was a substantial decline up until 2005 (when numbers were less than half last years numbers) and then a sharp increase in 2006. It's levelled off again since then.

Christ, the entire Tiger economies of SE Asia would be green with envy at THAT rate of caning! However, even the caning economy of Victoria has been hit by a recent credit crunch, it seems, as the rate was once 1 in 2!!

Go back far enough and it was probably higher than that.

Yes, I know Bacons got up to 800 a year, but dear Wilf had at least 4 other teachers caning on occasions. Doc has had help, too, it seems, so the figures might be even more impressive.

Is it also likely in this internet-wise day that, say, of the last 5 years' worth of beaten boys, 1,000 minimum, not ONE has lagged on Doc to The Melbourne Age/Sun Herald OR, more likely, posted about him on You-Tube or Facebook etc?

How do you know they haven't? Have you read every single entry on Facebook, or Youtube? Are you aware of all correspondence people have had with the Age and Herald Sun?

Most of our students support corporal punishment while they are at the school, and seem to continue to support it after they've left. The number who might want to 'lag' on me is probably pretty small. But even if they had, for example, gone to the papers, why would that necessarily lead to anything? We're not doing anything illegal.

Melbourne's newspapers, just a few short weeks ago, were bemoaning the fact that it's very hard to get accurate information about anything that happens in private schools. I believe those articles were discussed here. They don't seem to be very good at finding out all that much about us.

These places are littered, by the way, with mobile phone pics from SE Asia, where a matter-of-fact attitude is adopted to canings in school. Rather like we must assume Docs pupils attitude to be, as the Age & other papers havent had one of his 10,000 on the front page yet.

As it happens, the fact I use the cane has been in newspapers in the past - or at least references have been made to canings I handed out, even if they weren't associated with my name. Only a few times, but there was an article in the Age in the 1980s about the fact we still used the cane. I don't think it was the front page, though.

In which circumstances, Victoria will be as familiar as any with the compensation culture. So how likely is it that someone somewhere in Victoria wouldnt have gone after Doc with a large bundle of writs-not one in 10,000? Yeh!

Well, mainly because if they see a lawyer, they'll be told they don't have a case - lawyers don't generally take cases in which they sue people who were acting in line with the law. The only recent case involving compensation for corporal punishment to have occurred in an Australian court was Hogan versus the Roman Catholic Church & Fricot and that case was unusual in that Hogan was able to demonstrate lasting physical injury from the corporal punishment he'd received, because Fricot had strapped him on an already injured hand. If I'd ever caused a boy permanent injury through caning an injury he'd inflicted, I'd expect to be sued too. But to the best of my knowledge and belief, I've always acted within the law and I'm safe from being sued because of that.

You also WON'T find anything about him on any FR site in Victoria. I've spent a lot of hours researching that, and believe me, that was a job! However, there is not the slightest shred of evidence from FR that any public school in that state has anyone on their staff doing what Doc claims. Not even a jovial or affectionate reference to their veteran chemistry master and a boys best mate.

I've just signed up to it to have a look at it. I'd be interested to know what you've actually been looking at. It may be just that I am unfamiliar with the site, but there doesn't really seem to be many places on it where things like you describe would be discussed. I've looked at a number of schools I am familiar with - and most of them have nothing at all on their messageboards. In fact, checking the six most prominent of the Public Schools, there was a grand total of two messages on all their messageboards combined. I have to wonder if that's typical or if it's because such schools have highly organised old boys networks in place already limiting the need for a place like FR. But maybe I am missing something and there's far more hidden away there.

Equally, the one apparent pupil posting on here accuses him of getting it wrong and just happens to post in a similarly grammatically-correct manner. From my capers with Trees & Soooze, you only do that sort of thing if you are confident you can get away with anything.

Sorry - the fact that we teach correct grammar is now being used against me?

If you think I'm Paul - well, I'm not. I can't really prove that. As I use techniques to mask my IP, even that wouldn't be much evidence in this case.

As others have suggested, using the school uniform site was pretty risky from someone claiming to've been in education for 50 years. If you, A_L, think the site smells on first site, the first instinct of an educationalist would surely be to draw his pupils' attention to it as a dodgy area they need be think carefully about, and if not that to get off it in 10 secs flat, when he started reading a few posts on it.

I fail to see how someone of Docs purported standing thinks he could conduct reasoned discussion about the topic in the midst of fetishists and nonces. Bit like trying to conduct reasonable peace negotiations with Attila, whilst the rest of his Huns burn Rome to a crisp!

Let me try and explain this for those who haven't been paying attention. The problem is that any forum where school uniform is discussed will be a magnet for those who have a fetish about school uniforms. As soon as someone starts such a forum, the fetishists will join. This makes it more or less impossible to have a forum discussing school uniforms which doesn't contain fetishists.

That leaves those people who want to seriously discuss this issue with a dilemma. Either we just give up and don't discuss it at all - which means we basically decide to abandon the use of the internet, the most powerful tool in human history for the exchange of ideas across wide areas and wide groups as having any sort of educational use, and hand it over to the perverts, or we accept the reality that they are going to turn up and we do our best to ignore them so we can actually get on with proper discussion.

I initially joined some school uniform groups online because some boys at my school made a detailed case for making modifications to our uniform and rather than just follow my initial inclination to ignore them because I think school uniforms are a good idea, I decided to see what other people thought. I don't think that's unreasonable.

And someone whos allegedly carried out 10,000 canings aint exactly practised in reasoned discussion in my view anyhow! Be that as it may, I think any proper educationalist would have had one response to anyone discussing the efficacy of girls in shorts or gym knickers-and you know darn well what that response would and SHOULD be- the sort of phraseology that the equivalent of Big Rays Old Mum would be working overtime on.

Yes, because calling somebody a liar and a pervert does such a wonderful job of improving the quality of discourse on a forum. Everybody seriously involved in discussion recognises these people fairly easily - we don't need to point them out to each other. We just try to ignore them for the most part.

Also, Doc is fervent about not revealing his school to protect his professional reputation-fair enough. But then he gives us chapter and verse about his position, what he teaches, the way he works here & does the same on other forums. Does he seriously want to remain anonymous or not?

My concern is more with protecting the school, rather than my own professional reputation, and also with not violating agreements independent schools have made with the government over certain issues.

I also note when Doc revealed the electronic punishment book, he told us the kid illustrated was for real, though nothing to do with him. Now I dont doubt Doc didnt compile it, but why did he breach that lads privacy? Why didnt Doc simply say it was a CGI & not a real person?

Because I felt it was obvious that the image was of a real boy, not a fake, and I didn't want people falsely assuming he was a student at my school. So I pointed this out. I could have said it was a CGI image, but I would have been lying if I had, and I think most people would have known I was lying as it looked pretty real to me. I don't lie.

I also suggest you re-read his thread A case study. If Doc wants to drag privacy laws into it, then part of that is not identifying people on line. And another part of it is not broadcasting anything that MIGHT lead to identification of people. Any school aware one of their allegedly respected teachers was posting the breadth of detail he has would have blown him out in 10 secs flat.

I'm pretty familiar with Australian privacy law and how it relates to publishing case studies of students. I didn't get my PhD off the back of a Weet Bix packet. I had to do original research to get it and I had to publish that research, and that research also involved case studies of real students. I know what it necessary under Australian law to anonymise such case studies and what I did in that case is more than sufficient to meet the established guidelines.

And why? These alleged kids are mainly under the age of consent, they are boys and there are nonces galore out here on the net. Would YOU as a Head of one of these places really want it in any way identifiable, so every paedo on the Nullabor Plain & beyond could apply for a job? Im sure that would be a fantastic pulling point for parents in the schools curriculum!

We have detailed procedures in place to prevent 'nonces' getting jobs at this school - both our own internal procedures and those imposed on all schools by the state government. These procedures are, regrettably not 100% effective - occasionally someone does manage to slip through the cracks - but if we worried obsessively about this, we'd never hire anybody at all.

And another thing-its patently obvious the Victorian private schools ARE secretive about a lot of information, particularly about CP, getting into the public domain. So, would YOU want a blabbermouth like Doc on the staff, telling half the globe about his track record?

A 'blabbermouth' who manages to protect his own identity and that of the school very successfully. And who has given decades of diligent service.

Because, regardless of my personal beliefs, I honestly think any parent reading that and believing it is going to think twice about letting their boy near a school like that. So theres another cold-harded financial reason why no school would tolerate the Doc on their staff-theyd be without pupils and fee-paying parents in a trice if his alleged doings were discovered!

I've done nothing wrong and I don't believe most parents would think I have.

But, it aint just Doc that is internet-savvy in the world of Vics private schools. How likely is it that he could keep posting for more than 6 years without one pupil or governor or fellow teacher finding out about it?

I haven't - there are pupils and colleagues and ex-pupils who are aware of it.

A look at FR will also tell you about responsible net protocol. They wont give your address out and strongly advise that you dont splash giveaway details that might result in identity theft on your profile. Can you really conceive someone of Docs alleged experience and position blithely going on at the length he does and risking discovery and the sack?

You make so many assumptions here that really don't bear any resemblance to the reality of the system I work in. I don't think you understand it as well as you think I do.

Because, by the absence of very much if any comment by Doc on his Head, we must assume the bloke is permanently drunk, gaga or so frightlingly weak that he wouldnt be out of place fainting in a Jane Austen novel? Of course, Doc could equally just be highly disloyal to his Head & seeks to undermine him by completely ignoring him in these matters.

OK - because I don't describe somebody, you make weird assumptions about him. You could just as easily assume he's a philosopher-Saint sitting on a golden throne shining his countenance across the school.

Talking of Heads, is there any plausible reason why Doc has had all the caning opportunities? Even at Bacons Wilf had the lions share of the work, and from my investigations, there was one very good reason for that-he was the HEAD and ran every major aspect of the school.

Not, however, in Docland. Unlike any other school Ive read about or experienced, this one has always been run by Doc. Which should tell you its exact location in about 5 seconds!

I don't run the school by any means - and for good reason, while I think I've done a decent job on the occasions I've been called on to act as Headmaster, I'm not really qualified for or comfortable in that role. I do have primary responsibility for its discipline. That's something that has been delegated to me

Kids being the way they are, the sort of proportions of boys getting caned here would surely also soon be back with parents. And would they ALL then still quietly acquiesce to Docs infinite wisdom? Not in this day and age, please!

Parents who are knowingly choosing to send their sons to one of the only schools that still uses the cane, when they have plenty of other excellent choices around where the cane is not used, can generally be assumed to be supportive of corporal punishment.

And what of the press? Can you really credit a virtual caning factory existing thats NEVER been exposed or ever mentioned by Vic journos?

As I say, we have been in the paper on occasion, though not, as far as I know, recently.

The other thing I can tell you about Australia is that there is keen interstate rivalry. Except between Victoria and New South Wales. There its sheer hatred!

True enough, in general terms, yes.

The Sydney media takes any & every opportunity to knock Melbourne & Victoria. The Sydney boys are also a darn site nastier. So, as THEY also havent ever picked up on Doc, which would be an ideal opportunity to slag Melbourne off big-time, whats happening-is the Mafia bumping off any complaining pupils or parents-or maybe they just dont exist.

Honestly I think the fact that a Melbourne school still uses the cane, just wouldn't be big enough news for the Sydney papers to care at all.

Now, I didnt have the net. Doc could have got all the admin detail etc off it, or could have dealt at some time or now with teachers. Its not axiomatic that Doc is or has been in education because he seems to be a fount of knowledge about it-not with the Freedom of Information Act in force in Australia, too!

FoI really doesn't give you much information about non-government bodies in Australia - as the media constantly complains about. But, yes, it would probably be possible for a non-teacher to become very informed about the running of independent schools if they really wanted to, and if they wanted to fake who they are, that's not outside the realms of possibility.

But that's not what I am doing.

Lets just say hes been pulling the wool over our eyes for too long. I for one have had enough of it, and I was just about finished off by the use of the bush fires in his last post.

Id contrast that with the fact that I went 2 days without any communication from Mike, our fellow member in Vic. I knew he was OK, but others might not be.

I didnt get chapter and verse from Mike about what he was doing or thinking, I didnt get a flaming word.

And THAT is what any normal person would have done-if Doc had to respond to Mimi, all he had to say was Read the news? We have emergencies here, and some of my kids could be involved-I have bigger priorities now.

So because I'm somewhat frustrated at the behaviour of one person here who has been constantly flinging abusive insults in my direction, and dared to allow that frustration to show in one post written under stressful conditions... forget it. I think I've put up with more than enough provocation to justify my expressing myself in that way, in response to yet another provocative message.

As she said If you want to lie, do it properly like he has. Lots of detail that no-one can check, because its 10,000 miles away, and have a plausible answer ready for anything.

The thing it isn't 10,000 miles away from everybody. Not to put too fine a point on it, England has a population of about 50,000,000. Australia's is more than 20,000,000. You've got two and a half times as many people, that's not insubstantial but if I was running a risk, I'd be running nearly as much of a risk here.

You know - if I was going to fake this, I wouldn't have chosen to be teaching in a Victorian school. I'd have chosen Queensland or Western Australia - both of which have far more schools that still use corporal punishment than Victoria, and both of which are generally regarded as less.... how do I put this politely... socially progressive than Victoria. I also wouldn't have chosen to be as old as I am - I might have made myself 45 or so - which would have prevented me having to explain why I'm not retired, and also because it would have meant I could have kept up a facade for twenty years or so if I wanted to. I also would not have claimed to teach at a prominent independent school, but a Parent Controlled Christian school, because these are the schools most people find more believeable when it comes to corporal punishment.

I'm not a fake. Simple fact.

Just one other point that occurs to me - check out this link Parents asked to OK school's use of strap.

A school in New Zealand that continued using corporal punishment for eighteen years after it was actually made illegal. And the media didn't pick up on it for eighteen years or if it did, it didn't report it until 2006. The fact is, a lot of what goes on in private schools doesn't reach the media, and even if it does, they often don't publish.

Doc, if I locate you and you are a teacher, you will be going down for child abuse.

Well done Steve M, you've put together what MOST of us thought.

I'm surprised at you Doc, unable to answer my question, because you seem
able to bluff, I mean answer every accusation aimed at you.
You are indeed a fake, what do you achieve from this deception?

If they come anywhere near my kiddies, I swear I'll do time.

Doc, if I locate you and you are a teacher, you will be going down for child abuse.

Well, that would be a neat trick as I've never committed any act, defined by Victorian or Australian law (and unlike teachers in the UK, I don't have to worry about laws interpreted by courts outside my national border), of child abuse. Administering corporal punishment according to the standards set by the courts in case law under the conditions which courts have decided apply (and which legislation has not overruled) does not constitute child abuse.

I'm surprised at you Doc, unable to answer my question, because you seem
able to bluff, I mean answer every accusation aimed at you.

As far as I know I've answered questions put to me as best I can. If I've missed one and it matters to you to have an answer, please repeat the question.

I don't bluff. I tell the truth. It's easy to answer these questions because I'm telling the truth.

You are indeed a fake, what do you achieve from this deception?

Well, I'm not a fake - and frankly, I do find it hard to see what anybody would get out of faking this. For that matter, it's becoming increasingly hard to see what I'm getting out of being honest except a lot of headaches and abuse. I do appreciate that some people - even those who don't believe me - are acting in a reasonable fashion. Unfortunately, some seem to have left the path of reason a while ago.

Okay, we have not been able to discredit Dr D by showing any of the testable claims he has made are false so must revert to undermining his creditability in other ways without recourse to facts or reasoned argument. The main thing is to bombard the forum with lots and lots of accusations. We could suggest Dr D is responsible for the decline of Australia cricket, global warming and cancer and that he is `linked? to various catastrophes and atrocities. [`Linking` is very popular these days - you do not have to say anything about the nature of the link or who has made it.] If he asks for proof we just repeat the accusations and suggest he is a poor driver, that his feet smell, that we don?t like his choice of tie, etc. We just have to shout him down and drive him off. But what will this achieve?

I said in the 'Caning - side affects' thread that I was saying nothing further about this rift in the Forum. However since then Steve M has very gently and very obliquely pointed out in that thread that he put a great deal of effort into his foundation posting here and is perhaps entitled to a response from me since I oppose his views. You certainly did put some effort in, Steve! Even Another_Lurker seldom produces a monumental work like that these days!

As a result of the above I'm going to rescind my previous vow of silence and say why I'm where I am on the subject of Doctor Dominum.

1. Specially for Steve, who like me has a high regard for Lotta Nonsense, sadly absent from this estimable Forum since 17 September 2008. Steve, I have to point out that, contrary to your statement in the foundation post, Lotta's last pronouncement on the genuineness or otherwise of Doctor Dominum was at 18:07 on 16 september in the 'Kinky Teachers - maybe not?' thread to be found here when she said:
   
   
   • The problem I have in deciding Dominum's genuineness is that I have almost no knowledge of Australia's cultural norms.
     
     His story about his caning girls would send him straight into my 'fantasist book' if it had been set in England, but in Australia - who knows?
     
     He's very credible and, if he were genuine, it wouldn't amaze me.
   
   In a subsequent post in the same thread at 13:02 the following day she again alluded to the caning of the girls, but did not amend her opinion above. Her next, and sadly final, post was again in that thread at 20:41 that day.
   
   
2. Doctor Dominum always posts sensibly and on-topic, or at least he did until the current problems. While that has no bearing on his authenticity I think it confirms his right to post here.
   
   
3. I think the current sentiment regarding Doctor Dominum's posts was somehow triggered when the waters became muddied by allegations of bare bottom caning. As I've pointed out elsewhere in the forum, Doctor Dominum does not appear to have claimed this modus operandii (is that the correct what-not Alan?) except for a very very few instances early in his career and under pressure from 'customary usage'. Ditto the caning girls allegations which appeared at one stage.
   
   
4. I have been in various discussions with Doctor Dominum on a variety of topics in this forum. Throughout those discussions he has never given what I would regard as a suspect answer, and I freely admit in some cases I was probing for just such an answer. Further I have never seen a posting from him that caused me to think he might not be what he seems. I have some knowledge of elite schools. For my sins I went to one. Doctor Dominum's school rings fairly true to me.
   
   
5. Nothing Doctor Dominum has claimed here regarding the regime at his school appears to conflict with the law of the Australian State he says he operates in, insofar as I am able to judge that law. Corporal punishment, specifically caning, appears to be legal in private schools in that State.
   
   
6. I cannot see why the incidence of caning described by Doctor Dominum should be expected to have come to media attention and to arouse media horror. Parents would not send their sons to the school unless they approved of the punishment regime, so they are not going to complain. Boys, given a choice, often incline towards 'getting it over quickly' via corporal punishment rather than more prolonged and tedious punishment processes, so they probably are not going to complain much either. What is the media to say? Shock, horror, frequent canings at elite boys school, everybody happy! I think not, they simply wouldn't bother to comment, which is what seems to have happened for the most part.
   
   
7. I do not see anything unusual in the fact that Doctor Dominum has worked into his 70s. Teaching is one of the professions where, in the right environment (and I agree that currently British state schools are certainly not the right environment) people can both enjoy their job and perform well into their 60s and 70s. This is not unknown in private schools here in the UK, Ms Joan Thomas of Rodney school, currently featuring elsewhere in this forum, was still working when older than Doctor Dominum, and, despite her cp activities, if any, appears to have been held in some regard by her pupils.
   
   
8. I see nothing particularly unusual in Doctor Dominum's use of this and other web forums. For a detailed exposition of my position on this particular issue see my post at 03:06 on 21 January 2009 in the Australian Schools thread here. While I might think that one of the forums involved is suspect I have to agree with Doctor Dominum's statement that the web cannot simply be surrendered to the undesirable elements constituting a proportion of web users.
   
   
9. I find it very difficult to conceive that anyone would go to the trouble of constructing an imaginary edifice as complicated as that Doctor Dominum would need if he was not genuine to produce the seamless background he posts from. Have you seen those annual CP summaries? You probably haven't unless you belong to another forum, but let me assure you that to sit down and construct one from scratch would be an immense task. They are just one of the many things Doctor Dominum would need to build the world he draws on in his postings here and elsewhere if that world wasn't in fact real. Why on earth would anyone go to that amount of trouble simply to discuss school CP or school uniforms. There would be absolutely no need. A high degree of credence could easily be established without a fraction of what actually underpins Doctor Dominum's posts.
   
   
10. Finally the view that some of Doctor Dominum's statements have been strange or insensitive. The McDonalds, the Wild Fires etc. Yes, perhaps I wouldn't have put things quite the same way. But I am not a teacher. Like it or not, teachers are different. Putting it very gently they live in a far more child centered world than the rest of us by the nature of their jobs. They don't necessarily see things in quite the same perspective. My oldest friends are a married couple who both started in teaching direct from post school teacher training college and taught well into their 60s in the UK and abroad. I love them dearly, but I have to accept that in some areas I find their views perhaps a little unworldly by my standards. I find the same thing with most teachers I encounter other than casually. Doesn't seem surprising to me - after all we computer people are often thought to be a bit strange in some areas of life too. It's all that interacting with Mr Turing's 'intelligent' machines that does it!

I agree with Another_Lurker`s 10 points although I do not think the comments mentioned in his item 10 are especially strange for boarding school boys. Some will need a dad or grand dad close to hand when they are troubled.

If we allow, just for a moment, that Dr D is genuine - what a marvelous resource given the supposed focus of this forum - an articulate and experienced caning school master willing to talk. We should not drive him away.

Hi KK. I'm afraid number 10 was always going to be the tricky one. I could see no easy way to say what I thought needed saying without the risk of appearing to be offensive to teachers. It isn't meant to be offensive. Differences of experience, culture etc. do lead to difficulties in comprehension and misunderstandings.

I'll give an illustration. The teacher friends I mentioned are horrified that I've taken inexperienced people climbing and winter hillwalking without a formal outdoor qualification to my name and without a written risk assessment. In their world you have to have a formal qualification before you can do anything in the outdoors and there has to be a written risk assessment before you even bend down to tie your bootlaces. I think that's rubbish, and take great delight in pointing out that everybody I've ever taken out has come back safe and sound, whereas quite a few school parties seem to come to grief in the outdoors however well qualified their leaders are on paper and however many chapters the risk assessment had.

Simple clash of cultures - which is what I think has happened over Doctor Dominum's remarks which have offended some people.

You say:

We should not drive him away.

I very much hope that we don't, but happily if I have the measure of the man we are very unlikely to unless he wants to go.

The last thing I want is for DD to dissapear.
If real he has admitted severe child abuse.
If real he posts on sites that a reacher would avoid.
If real he will be found.
If found he will be exposed.

Doctor D the question I asked was how did Paul Ruthers discover you if you
posted under an assumed name?
I believe you posted as Paul Ruthers to give your previous
postings authenticity.

Todays kids would rebel against being caned, granted some would probably
accept it, but the vast majority wouldn't.

Although we all would want to know the thoughts of a teacher when they used
the cane, or whatever instrument they used, but what self -respecting teacher
would even speak of this, never mind post on a forum?

I haven't left the track of reason as you put it, my feet are firmly on the
ground. If other people believe you, then so be it, I don't.

It might be worth remembering that, at 1:48 am on 21 January 2009, in the thread on Australian Schools, Big Ray's Old Mum said:

Doctor Dominum is exactly who he says he is.

As this esteemed lady usually knows what she is talking about, it would be interesting to have either a confirmation of this assertion, or else a modification.

Confirmed.

this thread is just ridiculous in so many ways. really i dont know who to feel for more sorry for, doc for trying to keep up the charade or mimi for thinking hes a real child abuser ... they can both be pretty sure that if he was a 71 year old man caning hundreds of high school boys one of them would of laid him out by now.

The word that I have been writing and you have been missing is "IF".

From Me I find the ageism implicit in your post above highly offensive. Why would you suppose that Doctor Dominum could not defend himself perfectly well should one of his pupils try to assault him? I'm only four years younger than the Doctor and I'll happily tackle the average teenage male if I have to. It may come as a shock to you, but physical capability doesn't suddenly cease after age 60!

It is in any event highly unlikely that a pupil at an elite school would assault a teacher since to do so would inevitably lead to expulsion. The only circumstances under which such a thing might be a possibility are those in which an esteemed fellow contributor to this forum was involved when on his last day at school he knocked out his bullying headmaster.

Thank you Steve, are we likely to get a comment from Iron Man as well?

Not too happy with the iconography though. I know the Pope was in the Hitler Youth, but I don't think he actually took part in the Nuremberg Rallies.

A_L

I think we should be grateful the fairies found time to post at all!

The Pope & The Doc are nowhere near old enough to remember Nuremburg. The fairies were probably limited by that speech bubble being the title of a darn good Killing Joke compo.

I probably know more about it than Doc-at least because I've actually seen Leimi Reifenstahl's film of Nuremburg;and Olympischespeil.

This was back in 1967 on a French-student exchange. Don't ask what these films were doing in a fleapit Normandy seaside resort cinema, let alone as a double bill! I suppose I should be grateful the Maquise weren't waiting outide, come to think of it!

Unfortunately, they were both very good examples of propaganda and also both still riveting films. Just goes to show the power of belief!


Steve M

Hi Steve. You say:

The Pope & The Doc are nowhere near old enough to remember Nuremburg

Well, I'll give you that in Doctor Dominum's case. He was born in 1937, and as what are usually thought of as 'The' Nuremberg rallies ran from 1933 to 1938 it is unlikely that he has any recollection of them!

However, you are wrong about the Pope. He was born on 16 April 1927 and is therefore easily old enough to remember at least the later ones. He became a member of the Hitler Youth in 1941. He had no choice in the matter, from late 1939 it was compulsory for all German boys to join the organisation on attaining the age of 14.

I've actually seen Leimi Reifenstahl's film of Nuremburg;and Olympischespeil.

By the Nuremberg film I assume you mean 'Triumph of the Will'. That and Leni Riefenstahl's 'Olympia' are certainly two film greats. The former as a propaganda film, the latter as a sports documentary.

The last thing I want is for DD to dissapear.
If real he has admitted severe child abuse.

I do not believe I have.

Because you're not very clear on what you are referring to, I'm having to guess here - but I am assuming (and others seem to have made the same assumption) that you are referring to the handful of times in which I caned boys on the bare buttocks. If you're not, I'd be very surprised as I certainly consider those the most severe punishments I ever inflicted, nothing else even coming close.

Now - defining child abuse is not a simple matter. If we rely on a rough definition, then it comes down to personal opinions. There are some people who define even a single smack by a hand on the clothed bottom of a child as child abuse. I suppose they are entitled to their opinion. There are others who have tried to justify even things like beating children until they are bloody with horsewhips as being discipline not abuse. I don't think they're entitled to their opinion, though I'd be hardpressed to say why I don't. And there's a lot of people in between. I don't think there is any nice, neat, line of demarcation in absolute terms. In this domain of opinion, there's a wide range of opinions. And no nice neat answers.

If we want to go for a more formal definition, then we can look at what the law says. In Australia (and specifically in my state of Victoria) the law on corporal punishment in schools started out by derivation from British law, but over the years has changed a bit so they are not exactly comparable. What we have wound up with is law - case law, mostly - that defines what is 'reasonable chastisement' in terms of corporal punishment, with the clear implication that if a person exceeds the definition of reasonable chastisement, they have committed an act of physical abuse. Most of the case law relates to what is and isn't reasonable when administered by a parent, rather than specifically referring to a teacher. But the thing is, under Victorian law, a teacher in a private school still derives their authority and power to direct a child from the legal principle of in loco parentis. In other words, the law considers a teacher in a private school to be equivalent to a parent when exercising their authority as a teacher. The case law on corporal punishment that applies to parents, therefore also applies to teachers.

(This is not the case when it comes to teachers in government schools - back in the 1960s or 1970s - I can't remember exactly when - the courts ruled that teachers in government schools derived their powers not by delegated parental authority, but by delegation of authority from the Crown. That decision, perhaps ironically, came about because parents who opposed corporal punishment were arguing that teachers couldn't use corporal punishment on their children under in loco parentis if the parents didn't want to delegate that particular authority to them. Stating that teachers authority in government schools came from the Crown, meant that teachers were allowed to overrule parents wishes on corporal punishment. Today that same ruling is the reason that parents can't tell teachers in state schools 'I give you permission to hit my child' because the parents don't have the power to overrule the Ministerial Regulation that bans corporal punishment in state schools).

Back to private schools - the point is that what determines whether what I did as a teacher is child abuse or not is a matter of law, not individual opinion. And nothing I have 'admitted' to, constitutes child abuse under the law that was in place at the time I did it. And according to one recent court case here (the Lepore decision) it possibly still wouldn't, although personally I disagree with that if it is the case.

At the time I administered the six bare bottom canings I did administer - the late 1960s and early 1970s - it was still generally accepted by Australian courts and by independent schools in general, that a teacher acting in loco parentis in an independent school could legally administer such a punishment. The only clear law we had on corporal punishment at all was that an assault occasioning grievous bodily harm could not be justified under a reasonable chastisement defence.

What I did was not child abuse under the law of the time.

Would it be today?

Personally, I would hope that if a case of a teacher doing this today came before a court, that court would rule that such a punishment is no longer acceptable. I'm by no means sure that they would - until the Lepore decision (which is a rather convoluted decision - generally regarded as 'bad law' - concerning a boy who was sexually abused by a teacher and who bore the financial responsibility for any compensation payments) I'd have been confident that a court would rule such a punishment unacceptable, but Lepore did leave open the possibility that a teacher could still argue punishment to the bare buttocks fell within the course of their duties). But even if a court did make such a ruling today, it would not effect actions I undertook back in the 1960s and 1970s - the Hogan decision makes that clear - where a court ruled that acts of corporal punishment committed on a boy in the 1980s were acceptable in law, even though they'd no longer necessarily be considered acceptable today.

Legally I did nothing wrong. That's pretty clear and unambiguous.

Morally - that's another question entirely. I regret having handed out those punishments, certainly, and I wish they hadn't been part of what was accepted at the time, because if they hadn't been, I wouldn't have been expected to do it. But if I'd refused the boys either would have received exactly the same punishment at the hands of another master, or would have faced a punishment I believe is worse - and so would they - expulsion. If I'd decided not to hand these punishments out, it wouldn't have saved them.

It also would have stymied my own career development and that wasn't a minor matter in my eyes. Damaging my career in a fruitless symbolic gesture wouldn't have made a whole lot of sense.

I'm not claiming I was acting solely in the best interests of my students. I was thinking about my career as well. But the fact remains that even if I'd damaged my career by refusing to do something that was expected of me in that role, it wouldn't have done a thing to stop a boy being caned in that way, or facing worse punishment.

And the bottom line is that it was accepted practice at the time, and it was legal.

Doctor D the question I asked was how did Paul Ruthers discover you if you
posted under an assumed name?

And I answered you as well as I could. I can't say for certain because I'm not him, so unless he told me how he 'discovered' me, I have no real way of knowing for certain. I can speculate - and I did - and I think the most likely reason is that the pseudonym I post under here is very similar to a nickname I've had as a teacher for over thirty years and which any of my former students from the 1970s until the present day stands a very good chance of recognising.

You seem to think I should have made something up - that I should have 'bluffed' a definitive answer. Well, I'm sorry, I don't lie like that. A couple of recent posts almost seem to me to be implying I'd be more convincing if I lied (I should have lied and said an obviously real photograph of a boy was computer generated, and now I should have lied and made up a story about how somebody found me online when I don't know the answer to that question), an idea that I find somewhat confusing, I admit.

I believe you posted as Paul Ruthers to give your previous
postings authenticity.

I can't stop you believing anything you like - but I did not.

Todays kids would rebel against being caned, granted some would probably
accept it, but the vast majority wouldn't.

I'm not dealing with the vast majority of kids. I am dealing with a small minority of kids. We're a large school, but compared to the overall adolescent population of Victoria, it's a tiny number. And it's not a random sample, but a somewhat selected one. It's largely made up of boys whose parents have chosen one of the last schools that use corporal punishment, and so can presumably be assumed to be supportive of the idea themselves, and to have raised their sons in a way that is in accord with the parents beliefs and principles.

Boys at my school have a fairly straightforward choice. They can accept the way the school is run, or they can go elsewhere - either through discussions with their parents, or, in the end, through being asked to leave or actually expelled. We have had some students over the years make this choice in one way or another, but not all that many.

Although we all would want to know the thoughts of a teacher when they used
the cane, or whatever instrument they used, but what self -respecting teacher
would even speak of this, never mind post on a forum?

Let me explain, briefly, why I choose to post on this publically.

The first reason is simply that I don't believe there is anything wrong with teachers using moderate corporal punishment if they use it appropriately. I am a 'self-respecting' teacher and I believe corporal punishment can have a role to play in education. I'm not ashamed of using it, I believe that when I do so I am acting in the best interests of my students and my school in doing so, and because I'm not ashamed of it, and I believe it can be appropriate, there's absolutely no reason for me not to discuss it.

The second reason is I don't believe corporal punishment should be hidden away in the shadows. While I believe I use it appropriately and moderately, I am very well aware of the possibility that it can be used inappropriately - and sometimes has been. And I don't want to see that happen. I believe that corporal punishment is something that should be exposed to the light of day, that should be open to a reasonable degree of scrutiny, because that creates an environment where it is far more likely it will be used appropriately. I can't be entirely open because of agreements made between schools here, and the government, and because of policies developed to try and 'protect' the existence of corporal punishment, and those agreements and those policies disturb me - because they could so easily be used to create an environment where inappropriate corporal punishment is allowed to flourish. I've tried to find a way to present information publically that doesn't breach any of the conventions I have to work under. Personally, I think any school that uses corporal punishment should be required to be far more open about it than I am. But what I think isn't the only thing that determines what I do. I generally act within policy even when I don't agree with all of it. I try to find a compromise where I can, but I don't always assume I know better than everybody else, and just because something isn't done the way I'd do it, I'm automatically right and everybody else is wrong.

From Me I find the ageism implicit in your post above highly offensive. Why would you suppose that Doctor Dominum could not defend himself perfectly well should one of his pupils try to assault him? I'm only four years younger than the Doctor and I'll happily tackle the average teenage male if I have to. It may come as a shock to you, but physical capability doesn't suddenly cease after age 60!

There are some senior boys who I, most definitely, would not want to find myself in a fight with. If that somehow did happen, and they were willing to fully commit to putting me down, I think the odds would be decidedly in their favour. But they'd have to be prepared to make that full commitment with no half measures. My doctor says I'm as fit as most twenty years younger than me, and fitter than many thirty years younger. I was also at the tail end of national service so I did learn how to handle myself (and indeed, did, briefly, serve overseas before being invalided home after an accident - many of the boys are convinced I was wounded).

Of the boys who truly are capable of beating me in personal combat, relatively few of them are serious discipline problems by that age. And if they were the type who were ever likely to assault a teacher, they probably wouldn't be with us by that stage. But if they were, I don't think I'd try and cane one of them. I'm not going to teach a boy a lesson about behaving himself if I end up on the ground with a broken jaw, and I'm only going to cane a senior boy if there's a real need to try and teach a decent lesson.

It is in any event highly unlikely that a pupil at an elite school would assault a teacher since to do so would inevitably lead to expulsion. The only circumstances under which such a thing might be a possibility are those in which an esteemed fellow contributor to this forum was involved when on his last day at school he knocked out his bullying headmaster.

I have had a number of boys square up to me over the years, and even dealt with a couple of half hearted assaults - but very few. Largely because if a boy is agitated enough to be reaching that stage, it's not a good idea to cane him, and I won't. Either there's some issue going on that's making him unusually angry, or there's a good chance he seriously thinks there's a miscarriage of justice going on. In either case, a better outcome is going to be achieved through some other method of dealing with the problem.

Assaulting a teacher could get a boy expelled, but we do everything we can to avoid that in all circumstances. At least I do - and if I'm the assaulted party, I could fairly easily avoid that dire circumstance. Harder in the case of another staff member if they want the boy expelled.

A_L

Apologies re the Pope;I'd forgotten you don't tend to get the number 1 position in the Vatican if that bus pass isn't long since in your wallet!

Sorry I forgot Iron Man in my reply. A bit busy this week, as Sarah's off to Hospital on Monday for her final operation.

Iron Man won't be commenting. Doc's scanned in some educational books, I see. I'm sure if Doc was a fictional comic-book hero like Iron Man, we'd have seen his adventures on here, as well as heard about them.

Iron Man's also changed the identity of the wearer of his protective skin at least four times in 40 years, and not once has that been via an E-bay auction, either. Not even Doc's chemistry lessons will have managed to replicate that bio-nuclear feat! ):



Steve M

Doc, you are very, very, ill.
The sad thing is that you cannot come to terms with it and seek to justify your perversions.
If you beat an obviuosly disturbed boy 12 times on his bare bottom untill he was in a very bad state, then you have comitted child abuse.
Fist fights etc, you are off with the faries.

The sad thing is that you cannot come to terms with it and seek to justify your perversions.
If you beat an obviuosly disturbed boy 12 times on his bare bottom untill he was in a very bad state, then you have comitted child abuse.

Have I been wasting all this time trying to have a serious discussion with somebody who doesn't read what they are posting about?

I have never, not once in my entire life, ever caned a boy 12 times on the bare bottom.

If I've been wasting this forum's time arguing with an ill-informed person who seems to have somehow convinced himself of things that never happened, I apologise for wasting everybody's time.

Must have been clothed then!
You wrote it on this forum and on your schoolCP yahoo group.
You were abusive and you know it because you constantly say you acted incorrectly on occasions.
Only a fake would be so daft, a real teacher would not be so silly.
Still finding it hard to locate you, seems Melbourne schools are like the Mafia.
Truth will out.

this thread just keeps getting better. we have an imaginary child crusader going after an imaginary child abuser, and some old men talking about how theyd do in combat with teenage boys. as im pretty sure the only guy here who can bench 200 and has spanked a young lady recently ... shes 24 years old and its pretty light spanking before you get worried mimi ... i gotta say your a pretty amusing bunch.

Must have been clothed then!

No. Let me make this absolutely clear. I have never inflicted a twelve stroke caning on anybody, either clothed, or unclothed, or in any other way, shape, or form.

The most strokes I have ever inflicted is nine on the bare bottom, which I have done only once, more than forty years ago, and which I think started to come close to being abusive as defined by the law at that time, but didn't actually cross that line. Because I was not comfortable with even going close to that line I never did it again. I have inflicted eight across a boys trousers on a small number of occasions (I would say with confidence less a dozen times, but I can't give an exact number for that) all of which were at least thirty five years ago and which were imposed because it was the set penalty for senior students who had committed a particular serious offence. On no other occasions have I ever exceeded six strokes. The 'rules' on corporal punishment at my school set no maximum number of strokes, but convention said that only six should be given under normal circumstances and twelve should be considered the abolute maximum. I observed that convention but still never actually gave twelve because nine was bad enough that I thought twelve would be abusive.

You wrote it on this forum and on your schoolCP yahoo group.

No, I didn't - because it didn't happen.

You were abusive and you know it because you constantly say you acted incorrectly on occasions.

I don't believe I've stated that I've acted incorrectly. There are things I've done that I regret but that is not the same thing. Nor is either of those things the same as abuse.

An example. I regret it when I discover years after the fact that I caned a boy who was innocent. But at the time, I investigated what had happened and was convinced of his guilt by the evidence I had available to me and I imposed a penalty that was reasonable for that offence, so I do not believe I acted incorrectly or abusively. I made a mistake and I regret that, but saying I regret it isn't the same as saying anything else.

I thought we established the name of Dr. Death's school and his identity years ago on this forum. I don't think his actual name was posted but since it could only be one school in Victoria and taking into account his age, that narrows it down some.

I forget the guys name who confirmed all of this but he is the Historian who also went to one of those private schools in Victoria.

The historian wrote under the name of Dean. Examples of his highly-valued work are currently on Page 29.

The name of the school at which Dr. Dominum works has not been revealed on this Forum, nor will it ever be.

i still cant understand what real "assistant headmaster" would go at such lengths to defend himself on a site like this. probably only one with the same fantasy life as the rest of us.

BOB T

In the event of Doc's school actually existing, no one will post the name of it on here.

Just an admission that he is what he claims to be.


Steve M

Steve; Talk to Dean. He probably still lurks around here. Send him an email.

um if dean still lurks around here why doesnt he respond himself? i coulda been fooled by docs messages if they were all from way long ago but he did us all a favor by pushing the limits a bit too far. if dean has any lights on up stairs im sure he can figure that out.

I do still lurk around here but not on an everyday basis. I don't post very often because I'm interested in historical research into corporal punishment and most of the discussions here aren't really of much value in that regard. Some of the Bacon's material has been, but I don't have anything useful to contribute on that so I stayed silent.


And I dread saying it, but for the last two weeks I have also been caught up in the Victorian bushfires. I live in the fire affected area and I'm a CFA volunteer and we have been very busy. We still are.

For a bit of personal history the place where I received my only caning as a schoolboy was destroyed in the bushfires.

It seems that some people here want me to shed some light on Doctor Dominum. That puts me in a difficult position. My work puts me in a privileged position when it comes to information about Victoria's independent schools and if I use that information in a way that the schools don't like, it's much less likely that I'll continue to have such access. Exposing the identity of a senior staff member at such a school who wants to remain anonymous would not be a good idea.

I will say that I do know of at least one teacher who 'fits the description' of Doctor Dominum. I do know that the school associated with that teacher still retains the use of corporal punishment. I find the number of canings reported by Doctor Dominum surprising, but I have no evidence that the number couldn't be that high.

All I can really say with certainty is I know of nothing that says he's definitely a fake, and if he's not, I'm 99% sure I know who he is.

Dean,

This is a great disappointment. Some believe that you are Dr D while others believe he is a reincarnation of Genghis, or someone of similar ilk. Then again there are some who don`t believe that you, Dr D or Mimi exist. It is all so confusing.

I think I still exist therefore I am existing!
Even though a harmless post seems to no longer exist therefore it ain't?

Dean; I'm sorry to hear your alma mater burned in the fires. I know you have fond memories of your time there.

Thanks.

It wasn't the whole school. That's fairly safe near the middle of Melbourne. It was the school's camp - or as they now call it, the 'Outdoor Education Centre'. It was located only five kilometres or so from Marysville, one of the hardest hit towns.

Losing the whole school would have been far, far worse, but I do have fond memories of the camp as well, and it's a shame to see it gone, though thankfully the resident staff got out safely.