Caning pupils 'can be effective behaviour control'
Behaviour among children has got worse since the cane was abolished, according to parents.
By Graeme Paton, Education Editor
26 Feb 2009
Telegraph (UK)

Government research showed some mothers and fathers believed corporal punishment was an "effective method of control" when they were at school.

They said the decision to outlaw physical chastisement contributed to a decline in discipline.

The comments - in a study backed by the Department for Children, Schools and Families - come just months after a fifth of teachers called for the cane to be reintroduced to restore order in the classroom.

This week, a report by Ofsted suggested traditional discipline methods such as suspending hundreds of troublemakers at a time and banning children with shaven heads and designer trainers was a good deterrent.

Corporal punishment, including the use of the cane and ruler, was abolished in state schools in 1987 and 1998 in the fee-paying sector.

In the latest study, the Department for Children, Schools and Families held in-depth interviews with 48 adults to gauge their perception of behaviour among young people.

When asked to describe what they felt was behind a decline in discipline, they made a series of observations.

This included the "increasing demands on teachers - paper work, planning etc - leaving them less effective to teach and discipline effectively".

The group, which included 32 parents, also cited the "suitability of some teachers to the profession", suggesting that some lacked an ability to "instil respect and good behaviour amongst teenage pupils".

They added that "the removal of corporal punishment in schools, which many felt had been an effective method of control in their day", also affected discipline standards.

Margaret Morrissey, from the campaign group Parents Outloud, said: "When it was used as a threat, rather than being used to actually hit a child, corporal punishment was often an effective deterrent. It was certainly abused in some schools and it could become something of a badge of honour for those that were hit, but the threat could be effective.

"I am just not convinced that in the present climate there is a possibility it can come back. Can you imagine the number of compensation claims it would lead to?

"I really do believe that the problem for the deteriorating behaviour is the political correctness of the last 10 years that has told children to stand up and complain the moment someone tries to tell them off."

In the study, parents also blamed the fact that "children and young people [were] becoming more vocal and demanding and at the same time less afraid of authority".

Increasing pressure on children to be academically successful was also cited.

A survey of more than 6,000 teachers last year found more than a fifth believed the cane should be brought back.

One supply teacher told researchers: "Children's behaviour is now absolutely outrageous in the majority of schools. I am a supply teacher, so I see very many schools and there are no sanctions. There are too many anger management people and their ilk who give children the idea that it is their right to flounce out of lessons for time out because they have problems with their temper. They should be caned instead."

But John Dunford, of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: "Thankfully, corporal punishment is no longer on the agenda, except in the most uncivilised countries. I am sure that this barbaric punishment has disappeared forever."

You beat me to it on that one Doctor Dominum. I didn't have time to post a link to it yesterday. The first part of the quote from Margaret Morrissey of 'Parents Outloud' is, I think, particularly relevant:

"When it was used as a threat, rather than being used to actually hit a child, corporal punishment was often an effective deterrent."

That was certainly what kept me on the straight and narrow throughout my school career.

However, the catch lies in the second part of the quote:

"It was certainly abused in some schools and it could become something of a badge of honour for those that were hit, but the threat could be effective."

For the threat to be effective the real thing had to be used. When used on me relatively mildly very early in my school career it convinced me to avoid it at all costs in future, which I pretty much did. However that effect on me depended on the constant reminder of seeing it used on fellow pupils. At that time (late 1940s and 1950s) school corporal punishment was largely unregulated and was certainly sometimes abused. My own schools were not, I think, particularly bad in that respect, but some people on this estimable Forum certainly suffered extremely harsh or even abusive school punishment regimes.

I am still happy to stand up and be counted on the side of those who say that school CP was a more effective sanction than anything now available in UK schools. I am also convinced that overall it was less damaging to individual pupils and overall standards than sanctions like suspension and exclusion. However I now think that its use should have required, and in the unlikely event of its reintroduction in those areas that have abolished it would require, a very comprehensive regulatory framework, rigidly enforced.

Oh for Gods sake it was abolished because pubescent youths were being turned on by it!
The side effect was to prevent perverted teachers from getting self gratification from doing it.
Beating children has nothing to do with discipline.
Teachers teach to educate not to abuse young people.

Mimi, I'll defer to your greater experience of abusive schools as regards the reasons for abolition. I will say though that I've encountered people whose attitude to receiving school CP was:

• fear
• outrage
• shame
• determination to avoid any more of it

and all combinations thereof.

However, I've only come across one person, pubescent youth or otherwise, whose claimed reaction was being 'turned on by it'. That's our friend Slippa Boy in the 'Reactions to the Slipper' thread and by his own admission factors other than the actual punishment may have been involved.

So how does one explain the amount of fetish interest amongst those of the generation that received CP if they were not interested in it ?
Why have I met so many who received it who have gone on to include it in their sexual predilictions in later life?

Hi Mimi, you pose an interesting question. I only wish that I knew the answer!

As I've recounted here on various occasions I used to consider that my own interest in the subject arose from seeing others subjected to school CP rather than receiving it myself. I'm not even sure of this now. I've seen it suggested by people better qualified than me that the roots of fetishes can go way back into infancy.

Two things I am fairly certain of:

1. My only real memory of school CP applied to me left me feeling very sorry for myself and determined to avoid it in the future if possible.
   
2. Lots of people who received school CP display no indications whatsoever of any fetishistic interest in it.

What these two things add up to in terms of my own or anyone else's interest in the subject I really don't know.

It is almost impossible to work out why some people enjoy a CP fetish into adulthood, and most don't, whereas both have received CP.

I have found ,though that many people, men and women, will happily and often proudly relate their punishments at school even if no longer wishing to receive it or dish it out! Of course, CP being a sowewhat taboo subject many will hide this fetish.It is quite likely that I have spoken to people about corporal punishments at school without either of us realizing that we both still had a desire for it.

I know I felt quite excited the second time I was slippered, as I knew it didn't hurt much but produced a nice tingling. However a different teacher used to slipper very hard indeed and I always dreaded getting it from him and I never did.

At grammar school I did enjoy the slipper, but only from a certain female teacher. I absolutely dreaded getting the cane, and only got it once, on the hand and never felt any desire for a repeat dose.

It probably depends how severe the punishments are, a caning on the hand is a severe deterrent.

One thing is certain is that everyone posting on this site has an interest in it one way or another, wether fact or fiction based.

Mimi, speaking strictly for myself I am certainly not going to deny that I have an interest in school CP. Why would I be here if I didn't?

Mimi:

So how does one explain the amount of fetish interest amongst those of the generation that received CP if they were not interested in it ? Why have I met so many who received it who have gone on to include it in their sexual predilictions in later life?

I don't think that the fetish interest is exclusive to those of our age -- that is (for new readers) those of us who went to school when CP was common. What would be interesting, though probably impossible to measure, is whether the proportion having this interest diminished as CP in schools became less common and was then abolished, or whether the proportion now is much the same as it always has been.

The point is why should education be hijacked by fetish merchants to cater for their predilictions?
My ex Tecaher friend twlls me that she went into teaching to educate, not to beat children.
It is a fact that most beatings at school lead to perversion developing in later life. Particularly if related to the opposite sex and at puberty.
There is no excuse for a so called profession to allow sadists to infiltrate their ranks.

Wonder how many of the 20% who want it back in the original survey are nonces or paedos or sadists?

Suspect the vast majority of those are just the useless type of teacher. Bit like the percentage of prison guards who turn a blind eye to dope in the nick, as it keeps them quiet!

Keep this where it belongs-a distant and unpleasant memory.


Steve M

I was a regular high school substitute teacher in a private school where CP was forbidden. I taught highly motivated honor students, who behaved better than I did when I was their age. With 2,000 students, the same could not be said. The dean of discipline juggled after school detentions to convenience legitimate conflicts and half the detentions were for not showing up for detentions! Understandably, the Dean of Discipline, a kindred spirit, told me on one occasion he wished he lived in the South, I assume it wasn't because the weather was warmer. Girls racked up detentions because of dress code violations and tardiness and guys racked them up for acting out in more aggressive ways. Adolescent rebellion manifests itself in different ways and can be dealt with physically or not. What works better is the issue. Teachers who paddle or teachers who cane are portrayed as monsters and too few are willing to walk a mile in their moccasins. Cultures matter and the way to maintain order does as well. In American culture paddling both genders makes sense and in Malaysia caning both genders is an issue. If you havent read these two previously linked OpEd pieces about the paddle and the cane, it might be worth reading, not to change your mind about whether its right or wrong, which Im sure many have dug their heels in already, but to see the teachers in a kinder light. On a lighter note, Ive never been paddled or caned but from the looks of it, I would be like that 16 year old girl who would prefer to clean toilets but I might take my chances with the swats! Seriously, theyre both painful, as theyre meant to sting, otherwise why use it? Some teachers believe corporal punishment works as do some districts. Doesnt what happens in the classroom matter? Why not talk about its effectiveness? I taught physics and spent more time in the labs than studying English, as if you couldn't tell!

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/2/14/focus/20249911&sec=focus

http://teacherswhopaddle.wordpress.com/2008/08/05/here-we-areand-why-we-are-here/

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The second link April 3, 2008 attests to corporal punishment effectiveness and the first link February 5, 2009 discusses the discipline matrix used to achieve punctuality from Arkansas teachers. Sometimes we don't give schools teachers enough credit, there are not may other jobs where outsiders come in and tell them what to do. Lessons they are asked to teach involve actions and consequences that may serve these students in good stead and society as well. Critics, who cry about you're teaching kid might makes right, are remarkably quiet about the workplace where these students are preparing to be gainfully employed. True, you don't hit adults, but where does the expression a slap on the hand come from at work? At work adults suffer even more severe consequences determined by their employer. Maybe the world shouldn't be that way but schools prepare students for life as it is. Being tardy at school is taking money from the taxpayer and learning nothing in return. Shouldn't the taxpayers (i.e. the voters) of Arkansas decide whether corporal punishment should be legal and the citizens of Malaysia as well? I think not.

http://teachers.net/states/ar/topic643/2.05.09.11.55.26.html

http://teachers.net/states/ar/topic542/4.03.08.19.11.35.html

Much as I'd liked to've spanked a few more young girls in the workplace than I did, even I don't think striking kids is preparing them for the workplace, possibly not even in Nutterland ie California & The Bible Belt.

Let's not kid ourselves-these people will use any excuse to cover up their own inadequacies, sexual or otherwise. This latest one is pure and utter rubbish-ever heard of flexi-time for a start?

Having said which, it's not ALL fun in the workplace over here, as this young girl discovered:--




Had I been this modern-day Josiah Gradgrind, I would have taken her into my office & smacked her bottom soundly for not plugging the name of my wonderful firm on Facebook.

And then told her a suitable plug etc on her next entry about the wonderfully thrilling job she'd be doing for me next week would earn her a £10 a week rise!

But then I'm a hypocritical old Hector!

Steve M

Teachers who administer corporal punishment are not looking for an excuse to cover up their own inadequacies, sexual or otherwise and if they are its only by exception. Money backed ban advocates have used the same arguments in the courtroom to no avail. My analogy may limp but your argument may be lame? In the Bible belt or California, not surprisingly, the same laws apply to sexual harassment in the workplace. The voters of California and the Bible belt differ about schools but they are allowed to have their own Governor. It has something to do with the Constitution, please read the Supreme Court thread. And Malaysia has laws too. I understand somewhat the shame/honor code that makes them feel punishing a youngster in front of an assembly is a good idea, but it would not be allowed in any public school. We dont think that way and you dont think children should be hit. Corporal punishment is a wedge issue but civilized people can be civil. The States like Malaysia have pluralistic values and to ignore them or aborgate their laws lessens the rights of their sovereignties. Civilly put in a nutshell, neither California nor the Southern States are nutty. If you think differently, change the Constitution. Good luck.

Another point is that CP is the biggest sexual deviation there is.
To have a system that allows adults to realise their fantasies with children is not acceptable.
I once thought that CP was a good method of discipline if used reasonably.
From this forum and my own observations I have surmised that there were many teachers who exercised their perversion in schools.

Sorry, didn't mean to ignore the taxpayer argument, just forgot to mention it as I had to faff about uploading with that article on Photobucket!

Sobering though that if Lord North & George III had given the taxpayers a voice in 1775, you might still be a British Colony!!

The problem with that is how do you exclude taxpayers with no children, or children all left home from putting their 10 cents worth in? Should you exclude them, even?

May not be such a bad idea-there's a few 14-16 year old girls I'd happily watch being properly spanked, not to mention getting the old webcam out & flogging the outtakes online!

That's the problem-let the taxpayer in & they'll want serialisation rights! Seriously, there's more pervs and paedos pro rata out there than in the teaching profession-because at least some of those have been discovered!


Steve M

The ones who claim sexual gratification from men paddling girls, like the Jeff Charles Theory http://www.nopaddle.com/frames.asp?ch=4&se=27 or the appeal that Scott Beach made to the Chief Justice John Roberts, appealing to his Roman Catholicism in a September 1, 2008 petition for redress, shows how irrationally accusative they are. They point more fingers to themselves than they point to the teachers. Juxtapose those opinions with the Op Ed piece linked above from here and Malaysia and you can begin to see what teachers are up against. The petition by itself is linked below. http://honestmoneyreport.com/forum/index.php?action=printpage;topic=11123.0

Now lets talk facts and not fiction. The majority of paddling incidences involve boys not girls (maybe they misbehave less or dont need to be reminded as often) and the majority of girls are paddled by woman or men with a women witness. The handbooks are written by people who like you are safeguarding themselves against allegations. Most teachers and principals are parents and I assume they wouldn't do to their students what they wouldn't do to their own.

Corporal punishment is allowed in some Florida counties and this is from the 2008 department of education: With the decline in use of corporal punishment, Florida has seen increases in alternative forms of discipline, such as in-school and out-of-school suspensions. (The number of expulsions has remained fairly constant). Out-of-school suspensions occurred more often with black students than with other races. In-school suspensions occurred with similar frequency among white and black students, and white students received the majority of corporal punishments and expulsions.

http://www.fldoe.org/eias/eiaspubs/pdf/discipline.pdf

The total number of disciplinary responses, where CP is permitted, is less than where banned. The data suggests that the urban poor (judging by the location of the counties and racial makeup) are spared CP but are spending less time in the classroom.

I am back to posting due to a favorable change of circumstances in my employment (flex-time), hopefully this change will be viewed the same by members of this esteem Forum. I often wondered why the Western Hemisphere (Trinidad and Tobago and Guyana) and a few isolated areas that have bucked the trend in resisting the meddling of international do-gooders against school corporal punishment and have their continuing the practice has more to do with the African or the British influence or about the same? Their parliaments and ministries of education spend a lot of time engaging in debates. Countries like Malaysia also engage in serious debates unlike many other nations that simply capitulated to outside pressure but I'm consiedering Afro-Bristish roots, if there is such a thing. IMHO the principle of subsidiarity was thrown by the wayside and not for the better. In a recent post I asked which European country would have rejected the strongest against the abolishing of CP by international law. I also wonder which countries if they had their druthers wiuld reinstitute it.

http://www.trinidadexpress.com/index.pl/article_news?id=161342622

http://www.crin.org/violence/search/closeup.asp?infoID=11818

If someone is against the physical abuse of children then the term " Do gooder " used as a kind of insult is hardlt apt.
Its because some people who were in charge of minors committed horific crimes that " human rights " became needed.
I have seen the results at school of so called reasonable chastisement ie " caning " it is not acceptable.
Judging by pictures of paddling injuries in the states the same is true there.

Dear Mimi: Unfortunately, you're right, there have been abuses that have led to bruises that make for sensational headlines more so in the past than today. However, some of the pictures of recent vintage are bogus (e.g. below) and are used by do gooders or those who know better what is for everybodys good than anyone else and are the ones who always think theyre smartest one in every meeting and only bad people could think otherwise.

Childrens protective service becomes involved where there is deep tissue bruising caused at home or in school. A picture of this Texas teenage girl would have been in that category. You be the judge if this is adult fantasy or nonfiction?

http://nospankingzone.org/_wsn/page2.html denotes the following: "Paddled Texas High school girl, 2005. Horribly bruised buttocks."

Here is a sane and sensible safeguard in place in Georgia repeated almost everywhere that parctices paddling in the States. Of course there will be discoloration of the bottom amd of course there will be pain, it wouldn't be called punishment if they weren't but excessive and unduly severe would be the kind of punishment that would cause deep tissue bruising that would lead to a legal remedy even the deep south.

"It is anticipated that corporal punishment will produce pain and the potential for bruising, but as long as the student experiences no more than the short-term discomfort to be expected from the administration of corporal punishment, the evidence demands the conclusion as a matter of law that the punishment administered was neither excessive nor unduly severe."

http://www.odis.dhr.state.ga.us/3000_fam/3030_cps/Manuals/Chapter6/AppendixF.doc

I think it is quite obvious to all and sundry that the infamous doctor Dominium has had one amber transfusion too many.

Admittedly our ocean liners down under have proved themselves excellent soldiers and have stood side by side with Britain in nearly every war ever fought in the past 100 years. However this does not give our so called "Doctor" impunity to peddle this type of codswallop.

Caning of girls is unacceptable and any one who advocates same is on the same level as certain forms of life that we are all very well aware of. It is time this relic from our convict past has a serious reality check and changes his thinking on this mater. Any chastisement of cheeky trout of the female persuasion should be left to their female counterparts. No implements are required. End of story.

What on earth are you talking about?

The only thing I have said in this entire thread is a direct quote from a newspaper article four months ago.

I haven't said anything myself in this thread at all, so how am I 'peddling' anything 'codwallop' or not?

As it happens, I am, for the most part, largely opposed to the corporal punishment of girls, and I happen to believe that, ideally, male teachers should not be allowed to administer it to girls.

I am really quite baffled as to why you seem to believe I hold any other view.

Can anyone give a valid reason why girls should be treated differently to boys?
If anyone thinks that pupils being punished by members of the opposite sex is wrong then they are admitting that there is a sexual reason for this.
Consider that some in some instances the teacher may be kicking with the other foot and the sexual overtone is just as likely.
Personally as a "normal" sized adult, when I see a child I fail to see that striking such a comparatively small person is desirable. Its bullying.
There is no justification, those in authourity that use their position to subjugate children are just plain wrong and unable to manage in a civilised way.

I must apologise to Dr. Dominium for my last posting. I misunderstood his views. I must admit to enjoying a wee snifter of port after my evening meal and consequently was not really paying attention.

It seems as if we are both on the same page when it comes to our total opposition to extreme forms of corporal punishment being applied to females.

I know I joke around quite a bit about naughty girls being cheeky trout but in reality the overwhelming majority of girls and young woman are extremely respectful and well behaved. I realise that they are not all perfect but any minor lapses of behavior can be sorted out without resorting to implements of any kind.

Also I hope the esteemed Doctor realises that I have the utmost respect for our Aussie allies whose courage and fighting ability are legendary. Australia has always stood side to side with Britain in nearly every major conflict in recent modern history. So I salute our proud Aussie mates. Thank you for your time.

HRH

Can anyone give a valid reason why girls should be treated differently to boys?

Yes, I can.

There's a considerable and growing body of research - medical and psychological - that indicates boys and girls have profound differences in the way they learn, the way they react to certain stimuli, and the way they respond to different methods of education. There are similarities as well but there are a lot of areas of difference.

A few examples - for anybody who really wants to look into this, I would strongly suggest they get hold of Dr Leonard Sax's recent book 'Why Gender Matters'. He explores the research in far more detail than is possible here.

Male brains and female brains differ structurally. We've known this since at least Landsell's work in 1964, but more recent research is telling us more and more about this. McClone (1980) providing the first convincing evidence that women use a wider range of areas of their brain in terms of language than men do (this is why female stroke victims generally suffer less language impairment than male). Arnold and Burgoyne (2004) have shown that male and female brain cells are inherently different - confirmed by Vawter later that year.

These are real differences, we can actually see with microscopes and chemical analysis. We're not talking about social differences here, we're talking about anatomical difference.

Boys and girls see colour differently - the deep structure of the eye is different. They hear differently - different frequency ranges are prominent for each. Treating them as if they are not different, makes very little sense - because they react differently.

It's of relevance in a wide range of areas.

Including corporal punishment. There's significant evidence that boys and girls react differently to corporal punishment. Deater-Deckard and Dodge (1997). Externalising Behaviour Problems and Discipline Revisited: Nonlinear Effects and Variation by Culture, Context, and Gender. Psychological Inquiry. 8, p161-175. is one example of the research that's been done into this area.

In general, corporal punishment has a significant probability of working on boys with a low risk of negative side effects. It has a much lower probability of working on girls with a much higher risk of negative side effects.

When it comes to corporal punishment

If anyone thinks that pupils being punished by members of the opposite sex is wrong then they are admitting that there is a sexual reason for this.

I believe there is enough of a risk in such cases that the risk should be avoided if possible. This does not mean I think it's a high risk - but if you can do something in a way which only imposes risk in 1% of cases, it's better to do it that way than to allow a method that imposes risk in 5% of cases.

Consider that some in some instances the teacher may be kicking with the other foot and the sexual overtone is just as likely.

Yes, but the odds are much lower - and generally speaking it's likely to be easier to get laws and regulations that restrict the use of corporal punishment on the basis of gender that it is to get such laws and regulations that restrict its use on the basis of sexuality. It also involves less potential violation of privacy and is simpler to enforce.

If we are going to worry on this basis, we should worry first about issues such as who is supervising children in the showers after PE, who is supervising them on school camps, etc - schools already typically default to the 'teachers are straight' idea, if we're going to worry about that, we need to worry about it on a lot of other levels besides the issue of corporal punishment.

Personally as a "normal" sized adult, when I see a child I fail to see that striking such a comparatively small person is desirable. Its bullying.

No, it's not.

Bullying has a lot of potential definitions, but not of them are that simplistic. Probably the most current definition in current use in schools is the Olweus definition.

"Repeated negative, ill-intentioned behavior by one or more persons directed against a person who has difficulty defending himself or herself. Bullying occurs without any apparent provocation on the part of the person who is exposed."

Corporal punishment is not bullying as long as it is not ill-intentioned, and as long as there is some genuine link between it and the behaviour of the person exposed to it.

There is no justification, those in authourity that use their position to subjugate children are just plain wrong and unable to manage in a civilised way.

That's your opinion and you can keep it. I disagree.

I've seen it work with many boys to improve their behaviour, and to give them an improved chance in life. And while I agree, in general terms, it's better to find a 'civilised way' of doing this if possible, unfortunately that is not always possible - and very often when corporal punishment is abandoned, it's replaced with methods that are worse and far more likely to cause harm.

Without doubt corporal punishment practices can be construed in a sexualized manner. However, the assumption that male teachers somehow are deriving venereal pleasure by striking a child or adolescent by an instrument other than the hand is a bit presumptuous. Safeguards in the States does not relate to the witnessing of the punishment of a female by a male but the infliction of the punishment which indicates more a concern with comparative size than any perceived sexual element. If the target of CP becomes a concern of buttocks versus hands for gender considerations then the policies adopted by some countries can alleviate them. Sadistic motives would more likely involve the exploitation of children than sexual ones and there the safeguards have become wisely more vigilant. Bullying isnt a matter of size when it comes to corporal punishment because it is not a matter of a teacher trying to impose his or her will upon a student but trying to establish justice and order by conformity to rules. In any case rule breaking and unpleasant sanctions go hand in hand but never hand on bottom. The bruising picture can be sexual exploitation as it was IMHO of the horrific bruises shown in my previous post of a Texas teen in 2005. Hard to believe that those bruises could occur with a few swats over a fully clothed bottom isnt it? That being, said you cant make an omelet without breaking eggs and there has to be passing mark to leave a mark. That being said, psychologically and emotionally as well as for the size it is wiser to have the punishment administered by the same gender and that is why it seems it is being enacted in more and more student handbooks.

I have great respect for people who can engage in civil debate but do not suffer fools gladly. We all agree that offenses merit sanctions so school discipline must be sen in a wider context of detention/suspension and corporal punishment. Here is a blog on detention and corporal punishment that demonstrate civility and nuance. Ironically, it's called teaching battleground.

http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/2009/03/01/students-and-detentions/

http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/corporal-punishment/

I must apologise to Dr. Dominium for my last posting. I misunderstood his views. I must admit to enjoying a wee snifter of port after my evening meal and consequently was not really paying attention.

That's all right - apology accepted. Anybody can misread or misinterpret something.

It seems as if we are both on the same page when it comes to our total opposition to extreme forms of corporal punishment being applied to females.

I know I joke around quite a bit about naughty girls being cheeky trout but in reality the overwhelming majority of girls and young woman are extremely respectful and well behaved. I realise that they are not all perfect but any minor lapses of behavior can be sorted out without resorting to implements of any kind.

I'm not sure I'm convinced this will always be the case - there might be very rare exceptions - but I am fairly convinced that corporal punishment should be on the order of a last resort when dealing with girls - only used in cases where better alternatives are not working or are not available. Most schools I am aware of in this country where corporal punishment was used on girls, have tended to treat it as the last option before expulsion, or at least suspension - and I can't object to it in that role, given how negatively I view expulsion. Just about anything is better than that (I do think suspension has a role to play in some cases, but only when used very sparingly - if used too often, it has the effect of denying education as a punishment and as education is a fundamental right - at least according to my personal value system - that's not a good thing at all).

There's also the factor that there are methods of discipline in common use in schools that work extremely well with many girls that don't work very well at all with boys. Inductive discipline is its technical name and it's a form that's become ever more popular in schools in recent decades. It works extremely well with girls of all ages, but barely works at all with younger boys, and even with older boys is very hit and miss (and for some behaviours is actually more likely to reinforce them and encourage them than fix them). Disciplinary processes in many schools now tend to revolve around what works for girls, and not for boys - like so many other things in schools. Even mainstream education is now starting to realise that mainstream co-educational schools have been turned into rather anti-boy environments over the last few years - and discipline is one of the areas where this effect is most noticeable.

Also I hope the esteemed Doctor realises that I have the utmost respect for our Aussie allies whose courage and fighting ability are legendary. Australia has always stood side to side with Britain in nearly every major conflict in recent modern history. So I salute our proud Aussie mates. Thank you for your time.

I served myself in Borneo as a much younger man. My performance was certainly legendary, although for entirely the wrong reason (invalided home after falling out of a tree trying to retrieve a football!).