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

How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 23 2011 at 10:10 PM
 

 
I am intrigued by the number of accounts that I have heard from various friends, relatives and acquaintances, of their experiences at school, being punished on the nearly or completely bare bottom.

I quite easily believe that this was a very common thing in Victorian and Edwardian times, and quite possibly up until the WW2.
There is too much evidence in literature and the anecdotes of people,predominatly male, who attended school in these times.

I did not believe that it would have been a very regular or common activity in relatively modern times, at least in schools.
But the number of accounts I have heard over the years, as I said, makes me wonder.

In government run state schools,the accounts generally occur in infants or primary school, and rarely was the bottom bared completely, except for one instance from a small rural school.

Private schools, in particular boys only primary schools,appear to have the majority of accounts of pants down bare bottom smackings,mostly performed by female teachers.
I have not heard any tales of girls receiving this punishment,but that may be merely a reluctance on their part to describe such things.

I do know that my boy cousins living in the UK, were spanked and slippered on the bare bottom at their prep school, circa 1960s.
This was traditional apparently, and my Uncle was well aware of it, as he attended the same school as a boy.
My cousins used to mention these punishments in letters to me, usually in a humourous way.

A very good friend of my older brother, who boarded at a very distinguished Marist Brothers college in Sydney, described one of the brothers as making the boys take down their trousers before caning them.
Apparently this teacher would cheerfully inform the boy,that he was going to take some of the skin off his bottom, before laying on the cane.

I know several other chaps who attended various boarding schools,who mentioned the habits of some of the teachers, some of which appear to be quite bizarre,including one who took it upon himself,to sooth the boys' bare bottoms with lanolin after a caning.

My own personal experience is of a partially bared bottom in primary school, where our female teachers, never the males, would pull our little shorts and underpants up our behinds to bare our cheeks to smack.

At my secondary school, the prefects would slipper boys in the prefects room on the bare bottom, to 'liven them up'.
This was more in the mannner of 'hazing',which I think is the American term,than actually official punishment.
Generally it was applied to younger boys who slacked off at games.

It would be interesting if other contributors to the forum have heard of,or have personal experiences, of this.

In closing, I should mention my surprise,that in listening to these accounts, I have not detected any particular abhorrence or resentment from the recipients.
On the contrary, most are related in a spirit of jocularity.

 
 Respond to this message   
AuthorReply

Bare bottoms

January 24 2011, 6:55 AM 

In Spain, where the CP was not as ritualistic as in UK was not until the early 70's may receive a spanking on the bare bottom, just depending on the school and the teacher, was a well-entrenched in some school principals and parents at home.
here were two types of schools, state-run public where it was generally very rare that this could happen. In these, the teachers themselves were responsible for administering discipline by slapping the face or beaten in the palm of the hand with a ruler, used to be pretty tough. To visit the director had to be a very serious crime.
The other schools, run by the Catholic Church were more refined in CP, nearest UK style. In them, teachers also administered in the classroom or hallway discipline, also with slaps in the face or wooden ruler on the palm of the hands or buttocks, as an immediate way to take control of students .
But if this was not effective, then visited the school principal where he received the belt, sometimes on bare bottom.
If your father discovered that the school had got the belt on the rear naked at home had the second dose in the same way, so it was a very reportable. Neither school in my long life, first as a student and then as a worker at the school, of any abuse. For adults, on the bare butt punishment was a way to make it more severe and had no sexual connotation. They had known no other way to do it, they themselves learned from their own experience.

 
 
OZGeorge

Spain.

January 24 2011, 9:09 AM 

Slapping children across the face sounds like a pretty drastic and nasty punishment to me, but of course, different cultures have different attitudes to things.

Certainly I would have been most greatly offended by anybody slapping my face, which has a connotation of a deadly insult to Anglo-Saxons.

I can certainly relate to the Father spanking his child again at home, if a punishment at school comes to his attention.

This certainly happened to myself and my siblings on a number of occasions.

I had never really considered Spain as a country upholding CP, but I guess that is just ignorance on my part.

Thank you Veronica for your interesting post.

 
 

Bare bottom spankings at primary school

January 24 2011, 9:41 AM 

I started school in 1967 and until we went to comprehensive school bare bottom spankings were fairly common at my primary and middle school. I myself got spanked this way, it was always with the hand. Some teachers would use the slipper but that was always over our shorts. I witnessed my first bare bottom spanking on only my second day, and I got one a little later. Also previous posters are correct in saying that it was common for parents to spank use again at home of writing got one at school. We had one teacher for two years and she could not be bothered with pulling up our shorts to spank us show would quickly pull them down. Some days I got spanked so hard that my bottom was absolutely bright red and burning, and once at home I got another one straight away.

 
 
Matthew

Common !

January 24 2011, 10:14 AM 

I was at a boys prep school in the 1960s - and then went on to a boys grammer school.

At the prep school we were regularly spanked for being naughty and for poor work - Classroom spankings were over shorts, but if one was sent to the head teacher then one could be certain that ones shorts and pants were lowered.

Most other teachers also spanked bare bottoms if provoked - but it was always done in private at the end of lessons (or as a result of an instruction to return to see me during break time).

At grammer school the cane was used by the head teacher - I never had it : but in the junior years form masters regularly brought kids back at break time for a detention / spanking / slippering. I recall being spanked by our english teacher with three others, we all witnessed each others punishment and embarrasment at being told to drop trousers and pants for our spanking.

No episode struck me as abusive - it was just the norm.

A propper school spanking left one with a red backside for two to three hours and by the time one went home most if not all of the redness had gone. The aforementioned english teacher was a particular expert ; he gave about 10-20 slow relatively hard smacks alternating sides and then a further 20 - 30 much faster in groups of two to three on the same spot ... having experienced and seen the effect on others, you felt a slow and increasing burning ... and to look at the entire bottom was red (but there were not discrete hand or finger marks) and there was never any aftermath of bruising. My experience for my self from having seen others was at the end of a spanking one just wanted to leap up and rub the sting away (and as 11-12 year old we did this just on the edge of tears and withought a thought to what else was on display as you rubbed the burning area better .... i guess modesty came a bit later in those days !)


 
 

StevefromSE5

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 24 2011, 3:43 PM 

Hi OzGeorge

Apart from one or two fevered imaginations on here, it DIDN'T happen in 99.9999% of state schools beyond infants level, and only in a few at that level, either.

In all 3 instances I've encountered, the teacher doing it was swiftly retired or sacked.

Why-because parents complained, about the obvious potential for child molestation, for a start.

Steve

 
 

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 24 2011, 6:33 PM 

Now the polemics start. maybe more people would post here if they didnt feel threatened by the group control freaks or dismissed as liars.

 
 
mark

offensive drivel steve

January 24 2011, 6:35 PM 

goodbye

 
 
OZGeorge

Thank you.

January 24 2011, 10:19 PM 

Thank you to all of those folks who have responded to this question.

It was of a general nature, and simply because, as I say, I have encountered quite a number of relatives, friends and acquaintances, who have mentioned this over the years.

I cannot, of course,bear witness to the veracity of their accounts,and for all I know, many may be embellishments,or simply untrue.

Having said that, I see no reason why the vast majority of them should have dissembled, as they appeared to treat these ancedotes in the manner of amusing memories,rather than some dark,guilty secret that they are ashamed of.

Equally,I am happy to hear from other contributors, who are willing to share their experiences.

If they indeed have 'fevered imaginations', as Steve has suggested,then that is something that they will have to deal with themselves.

Personally, I have found nothing in the posts that I have read so far, which I could dismiss as fantasy, with no liklihood of having happened.

It is usually relatively easy when reading some posts, to spot 'fevered fantasy',as it is generally somewhat far-fetched.

Obviously, I would prefer contributors to write the 'truth,the whole truth, and nothing but the truth!',but I am not conducting a Royal Commission.

Steve has stated that bare bottom smackings did not occur in 99.99% of government run state schools,and he may well be correct.

Certainly I can recall only one account of a pants-down spanking in a state school, and this was in a small,one teacher school in a rural area during the late 1950s.

But unless Steve attended 99.99% of state schools in the whole period after the second World War, I do not see how he can confidently make his claim.

I attended a government run state infants and primary school,and we most certainly had our bottoms all but bared for smackings, right up until the 7th grade, when I had my first male teacher.

Little girls also were spanked with panties pulled up their bottoms until the corporal punishment of girls was discontinued by the timeI was finishing 4th grade.

Certainly no teachers at our school were admonished,disciplined or sacked for this practice, which it would appear was considered quite normal,fit and proper,and no parent I ever heard of complained of it.

My own parents spanked my siblings and myself on our bare bottoms at home, and I know that they had no issue whatsoever with the manner we were punished at school.

In fact, I believe that they thought that the teachers were too soft on us.

Parents at that time actually backed teachers up, and if I got spanked,my parents would tell me that I deserved it.

Not that I was in a hurry to tell them anyway, due to the risk of a parental spanking on top of the one at school.

If Steve wishes to disbelieve this,then that is certainly his priviledge.

I am not about to go frantically rummaging through old school records and files,and try to dig up some of my old teachers to try to confirm their actions.
(Actually, most would have to be dug up now, with a shovel!--Sorry! Bad joke!)

I encourage people to continue posting their views and experiences on this thread, as I for one will most certainly enjoy reading them.

 
 

StevefromSE5

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 24 2011, 10:45 PM 

GEORGE

I, like you, am intrigued by others' experiences. This goes for what they or I have heard 2nd or 3rd hand, too.

Unfortunately, it doesn't extend to total fantasies!

Things were different in at least some aspects of Aus, I've no reason to doubt that. But I'd prefer you are given an accurate picture of how things were, simply out of common courtesy.

I certainly can't speak about prep schools or private ones they fed with any authority. But I can assure you IF the sort of twaddle others are peddling had happened in the state sector, the first person to get wind of it would have been the Head, and I can assure you their first line of defence from enraged parents would have been protect their own backside and get rid of the pervert teacher.

And why else would any teacher do it in private & not in front of the class? They wouldn't have had a leg to stand on once one kid complained to their parents!

Mind you, sounds like YOU didn't have a leg to stand on with them thigh-smackers, either happy.gif That's the worst I've heard from Aus, apart from nuns & the cane handles of feather dusters;good job the two never got together-would be as bad as Jehovah's double glazing!!


Steve

 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 24 2011, 11:52 PM 

Hi Steve. I'm not going to burn any candles for Mark, he would obviously have some difficulty coping with the rough and tumble of this estimable Forum. I am however just a teeny touch concerned at your post to which he seems to have taken exception.

I'll happily agree with you that in, we'll say the second half of the 20th century, corporal punishments in State Secondary Schools in the UK on the nearly or completely bare bottom (OZGeorge's terms of reference) would be very rare.

But your statement that:

it DIDN'T happen in 99.9999% of state schools beyond infants level, and only in a few at that level, either.

Sorry, but the first part of that can be disproved straight away. Your percentage implies a possibility of it happening in one school in a million. There are a great deal fewer than one million State Secondary Schools in the UK, and yet we know that at Helston Grammar School in 1964 two senior girls were beaten with the back of a hairbrush, effectively on the bare bottom, by the Headmaster and a Senior Mistress. Agreed the staff concerned were prosecuted, but the punishment happened, and in a state school.

There are extensive posts here, to which you and I were substantial contributors, concerning your researches on Bacons School, where again girls appear to have been punished effectively on the bare bottom, this time by caning. In that case although the Headmaster was retired, ostensibly on health grounds, no one was prosecuted.

I think we can be reasonably certain that Helston Grammar and Bacons were not alone. And if it happened to girls it almost certainly happened to boys somewhere. So I really don't think your 99·9999% is reasonable. And if you wonder why I've got that argument off pat, it's because I had to use an almost identical one with our mutual friend Lotta Nonsense a long time ago when she too got a little carried away with her percentages. happy.gif

Turning to State pre-secondary schools, and note that Mark was talking about pre-secondary schools, I have absolutely no doubt that it happened rather more than at secondary level. Yes it might be a few cases relative to the number of schools, but it would still be a significant number. You yourself posted one case from your own experience here. I'm sure there were lots of others.

And now private schools, where punishment on the bare was always probably more common than in state schools:

From an impeccable source, three cases of bare bottom punishments in Australian private schools are quoted by Doctor Dominum in his splendid account of some of his own school experiences here.

A sadly missed and I believe reliable contributor Severnboy gave the only account I've ever seen of co-ed bare bottom caning, at an English Prep School in the 1950s here. He expands on the incident in subsequent posts in the thread, which is to be found here

And finally a second hand, but I believe true tale from me. When I started at secondary school in 1954 the Form Master, recently featured in the 'Spot the Another_Lurker' competition photograph, happy.gif wielded a size 12 leather soled sandal for disciplinary purposes. Happily I never encountered it, but many of my form mates did. Despite the reluctance of 12 year old boys to betray any weakness in front of their contemporaries, some tears were not unusual. It was a very severe punishment.

One boy however was completely immune to the pain, or at least that's how it appeared. We both lived north of the city, travelled on the same buses, and became friends. Prior to starting at the secondary school, while his parents were abroad for a period, he'd been at a small nearby boarding Prep School (not the Prep school associated with our current school) which our bus went past.

His explanation of his immunity to the sandal was that he'd regularly had six on the bare with the cane at the Prep school and after that the sandal didn't hurt much! I have to say though that he was a pretty tough character. I was quite a bit bigger than him but I certainly wouldn't have risked a fight! The Prep school concerned is long closed, but its name lives on in a quite different type of school.

 
 

StevefromSE5

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 25 2011, 11:03 AM 

A_L

Yes, statistically, I might have been guilty of a wee exaggeration!

However, I didn't want OzGeorge being given the impression by the usual standard of contributions to Silk Shorts that the casual slippering or smacking of bared bums by ordinary teachers was going on throughout the state system, because it plainly wasn't.

Head teachers could indeed have done it, caning included, with impunity, but even those that did would still have not taken kindly to other teachers muscling in on the pants-lowering scene.

Statistically, yes, it must have happened in the state system to a very few, but the chances of two of those unfortunates regaling their experiences on George's thread so quickly in the approved homoerotic Silk Shorts manner struck me as a wee bit too much of a coincidence. Especially, of course, with the current troll-fest we have been forced to endure!



Steve

 
 
prof.n

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 25 2011, 1:05 PM 

Hi Steve,

Just a bit of perspective on the 'private sector'. Now I can't speak for the Slades of this world, but as far as run of the mill public schools were concerned, if ours was anything to judge by, bare bottomed caning were abolished in the fifties. In my school, according to the current school historian the regulations were amended with the appointment of the liberal headmaster in the early 60's : however the punishment had last been used - once - in the fifties, and by report no more than a handful of times in the decade previously. It was was reserved in our case for heinous offenses , normally involving something that might pass as either strongly anti social or even in those days 'criminal' and perverted. ( single sex boarding school - doesn't take much imagination ).

I'm pretty sure most of the HMC schools would be similar, although I stand to be corrected by anyone who had a different experience.

I now have a sort of rule of thumb in my head ,a ready reckoner, assuming we can rely on the general thrust of the postings here, and that is Australia seems on the whole to be about 40/45 years behind us in their approach to corporal punishment in those schools that still practice it. What is reported here as going on there , seems to me to fit into independent schools in the mid 60' to early 70's here. For some reason which we can speculate about, the reform movement of the 70's and early 80's here sailed straight past poor old Australian students. This seems to reflect a mix of cultural differences, geo-political differences ( Vietnam), inherent social conservatism . and also this apparent unwillingness to confront school authorities, which Doc puts down as selflessness , and I'm afraid I read as a strange passivity

Heres a golden oldie with graphics from 'Watchman', the cult film ,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8UNvO4QDx8&feature=related

Quite appropriate!

 
 

Another_Lurker

Surely some mistake!

January 25 2011, 8:44 PM 

Hi Prof.n. You said above:

For some reason which we can speculate about, the reform movement of the 70's and early 80's here sailed straight past poor old Australian students. This seems to reflect a mix of cultural differences, geo-political differences ( Vietnam), inherent social conservatism . and also this apparent unwillingness to confront school authorities, which Doc puts down as selflessness , and I'm afraid I read as a strange passivity.

Now I can live with you praising the school councils and student power movements of the 1960s and the 'reform movement' of the 1970s and early 1980s, which you think were highly desirable and I think helped to bring education here to the point where now it is effectively unfit for purpose.

I can accommodate (just about) the fact that for you as a teenager the receipt of corporal punishment in the form of a caning was instrumental in establishing your rightful place in the school's hierarchy and was a good thing, but when dealing any other teenagers, male or female, the use of the cane is fraught with dangers too hideous to even contemplate such an act.

For all these I can bite my tongue and hold my peace. But passive Australians! No, I'm sorry, that's not just stretching credulity, it's kicking it right out of the ground! Have you ever met any Australians? happy.gifwink.gifhappy.gif

 
 

StevefromSE5

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 25 2011, 8:54 PM 

A_L

Most of a party of 17 Aussies have recently seemed to be adopting Mahatma Gandhi's passive resistance approach to punishment physical or mental.

Or didn't you follow the cricket?! happy.gifhappy.gif

Interesting one, that. I think it does vary from state to state out there. Perhaps, you know, it also varied by county out here, too.

Have to wonder now. I bet there were some conservative mainly rural LEA's(or their precursors)which might just have been as fossilized in their reaction to the 20th Century as parts of Aus were.

Well, there's a new thread for whoever wants to start it!


Steve

 
 
Willy

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 25 2011, 9:34 PM 

Mark said :

"Now the polemics start. maybe more people would post here if they didnt feel threatened by the group control freaks or dismissed as liars."

I agree with you, Mark. This small group, the usual two or three people, seem to have appointed themselves as judges of others' posts and classifying those they don't like as liars and other offensive names and bullying them out of the forum.
I have already complained about this to the Administrators of this forum , but obviously no steps have been taken to ban these forum bullies. They obviously want to reserve this forum just for themselves by imposing themselves on others, with the result, as you say, that many are being put off from posting on this forum.
I should think that the language they are using is also against the Nework 54 rules.


 
 
Willy

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 25 2011, 9:35 PM 

Mark said :

"Now the polemics start. maybe more people would post here if they didnt feel threatened by the group control freaks or dismissed as liars."

I agree with you, Mark. This small group, the usual two or three people, seem to have appointed themselves as judges of others' posts and classifying those they don't like as liars and other offensive names and bullying them out of the forum.
I have already complained about this to the Administrators of this forum , but obviously no steps have been taken to ban these forum bullies. They obviously want to reserve this forum just for themselves by imposing themselves on others, with the result, as you say, that many are being put off from posting on this forum.
I should think that the language they are using is also against the Nework 54 rules.


 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 25 2011, 9:39 PM 

Hi Steve. In response to my expressing incredulity at Prof.n's concept of passive Australians you said:

A_L

Most of a party of 17 Aussies have recently seemed to be adopting Mahatma Gandhi's passive resistance approach to punishment physical or mental.

Or didn't you follow the cricket?! happy.gifhappy.gif

Well no, I don't actually follow cricket. But it is forcibly brought to my attention in my near daily enforced exposure to an hour or so of TV news. We may have been triumphant in the rather dreary 5 day game series, wink.gif but am I not correct in saying that in the much more dynamic one day game series our Australian cousins are, to put it kindly, proving that they are far from passive! Or have I misunderstood something? happy.gif

Your speculation regarding LEAs is an interesting one. Deep in rural Borsetshire, could they still be caning and slippering away, oblivious to the fact that we're in the 21st century now and school CP has been banned for many years. Maybe even with a bit of 'nearly or completely bare bottom' punishment thrown in for good measure? See, I do sometimes try to post on topic! happy.gif

No, sadly I fear not. I do know of one establishment not a thousand miles from me where such activities and more besides, even ****** ***** *** ********, are an everyday occurrence, but it's what is euphemistically known as an 'adult' school! sad.gif

 
 

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 25 2011, 10:04 PM 

'I did not believe that it would have been a very regular or common activity in relatively modern times, at least in schools.'

It wasn't common in schools, certainly. But it certainly was at home, in fact it was very much the norm.

One of my primary school teachers lived a few doors down from us, and was a friend of the family. Though she never spanked me, I know that she did threaten to take our trousers down and smack our bottoms - which I believe she did to a couple of boys in my class (talking late 70s, here). However, it was never bare.

One thing I will say, though, is she looked after my brother, myself and a few other local kids during the summer holidays, and tanned a couple of kids' bare backsides mover the years!

 
 

StevefromSE5

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 25 2011, 10:06 PM 

A_L

Sorry, but as I was brought up in the era of 3-day & 5-day matches only, the Mickey Mouse 1-day cricket hasn't been as avidly followed by me.

Sufficient to say, the inter-form cricket we played at MGS was all over-limited, so I reasoned, if I can play it, then Internationals in it aren't that much cop.

Incidentally, in 2W v 2L, sometime in the summer of 1965, yours truly broke windows at school with 2 successive hits. The first was a lucky bounce off the grass & into a large low pane.

The second was a huge six, through long-on(or cow corner to the cynics),right through the highest pane on the 2nd storey Geography room. The bowler, incidentally, became an ordained priest according to FR, though I don't think my mistreatment of his bowling had anything to do with that career choice, though God may have called him away from bowling for reasons we know not!!

You never know about Borsetshire;I think there were a few people who believed the Feudal Herald & Reactionary Times that used to feature in the Telegraph's Peterborough column in the 1970'/1980's was for real.

Yes, I used to read that & the FT-mainly for the sport, as the FT Monday football report was always from our old mate TE Bailey, yes, Trevor himself.

GEORGE

If you haven't already been introduced to it, some of us do have an alarming habit of wandering off post, so my apologies I never encountered your thigh-slapping schoolmarms, otherwise I might have had more concentration drummed into me!!


Steve

 
 
OZGeorge

Going back.

January 25 2011, 10:25 PM 

It is very hard at this remove,in the year 2011, to attempt to give a balanced and comprehensive view of social attitudes that existed in Australia 30 or 40 years ago.

It would take a book, and even that would probably not be definitive.

I can only comment here,on my own life experiences, those related to me by others and those that I have read about.
Necessarily, this may be a lengthy post,but please bear with me.

The good Prof. has proffered the view that Australia was 40-45 years behind the UK in as far as attitudes to CP go.
This may well be true. I am not in a position to judge.

Australia is a large country, with states and territories,and methods and attitudes may have differed to a degree in each.

The state in which I grew up, Queensland, was dubbed by the other states, until recently,as the 'deep north', an indication of its supposed conservatism and red-neck population.

Queensland was most certainly conservative, imbued with a respect for God and the Queen, and suspicious, if not downright hostile, toward change or reform, and for the most part, standing tall for a strong work ethic and support for the 'little man'.

Personal wealth and status was not admired for its own sake,and inherited wealth and status not at all, unless you were a member of the Royal Family, who were revered.

My Father and Mother, and those of my relatives and friends, had not so long ago, been embroiled in the Second World War.
Courage, fortitude and self-sacrifice were admired qualities,and parents no doubt,whether consciously or not,tried to instil these values into their off-spring.

Children were cherished of course, and materially we were probably better off than our parents had been, but it was a golden rule of parenting at that time, that kids must not be coddled and wrapped in cotton wool.

They had to learn to stand on their own two feet,and take the good with the bad, and in particular,be responsible for their own actions, and take the consequences for bad behaviour.

Parents spanked, and they spanked to deliver a sound lesson.
I have no doubt that it pained them to have to do so,but they saw it as their duty,and duty was seen as sacrosanct.
I do not think that in their view the punishments they gave us were severe or too harsh.
In 2011 of course, they would be regarded so.
They certainly hurt, but they were supposed to.

Children expected to be spanked for misbehaving.
It was all that we knew, and we had no other experience to measure the situation with.

Our teachers were of the same essential mould, and our parents trusted and supported our teachers.

Teachers were entitled to smack, and so they smacked.
I cannot think of a single teacher in our primary school who didn't.
Some 'scotty' teachers, who the kids prayed not to get, spanked a lot, most moderately and some hardly at all.

At that time, I did not know that any other way of being taught existed.
I did not resent the spankings I received.
I did resent that the girls did not get them,as I saw that as grossly unfair.

But we were not teased by the girls, and all the boys were spanked, and even having out shorts pulled up our bottoms, so that part of our bum cheeks were exposed, did not particularly bother me, because I was used to it,and to me, it was not the same thing as a bare bottom.
And in reality,about all you could see of our bums, was what you would see if you had a speedo wedgie at the beach.
It was no big deal,and at that age I wasn't that self-conscious anyway!

My Mum and Dad, and as far as I am aware, other parents, had no problem with this.
There were not queues of outraged parents on the headmaster's doorstep demanding a cessation of this practice.
Certainly the headmaster must have been well aware of it.
At that time, there were no gaggles of child rights activists,on the make journos and slick lawyers,on the lookout for band-wagons to jump on.
Anyway, it was pretty innocuous really!

On the other hand, if my pants had been pulled DOWN, either in private or in class, I WOULD have been frantic with embarrassment.
I more than likely would have indignantly told my Mother.
I have been trying to nut out what she would have done about it.
Would she have complained or not?

I believe that if done in private, she probably would not have.
If in class, I think she would have spoken to the teacher about it,but I doubt if it would have gone further than that.
If I had attended an all boys school,and it was done in the classroom,then I do not think she would have interfered.

I do not think that we kids were smacked harshly or excessivelyat school.
They were more like admonishments really.
Although, some teachers definately were too smack happy,and should quite possibly have been reined in.

We kids sort of saw it as just how the dice fell, if we got a 'scotty' spanky teacher.
The kids I played with in the neighbourhood, all told similar tales of punishments at their schools.
It was fairly general from school to school, and ours was nothing out of the ordinary.
If the Catholic school kids were to be believed, they got it worse than us.

I am sorry to have rambled on for so long,but I thought it would be important for people to know where I am coming from, as regards the attitudes and values of the times I am speaking about in the anecdotes that I have mentioned.

On the plus side, it must be said, I had an extraordinarliy free and happy childhood, as did most other kids of the time.
We were not held on the leash by parents in fear of paedophiles,but wandered, biked,explored and swam,(and sometimes got into mischief), all over the place, as long as we were home for mealtimes, or when the sun was going down.
We had no computer and video games to hypnotize us,but made our own fun and read voraciously.
There are always swings and roundabouts, aren't there?


It was a far different world to now.
Maybe Australia was not as advanced in social reforms as other countries.
It's certainly made up for it now with a vengeance, more's the pity I sometimes think!


 
 

StevefromSE5

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 25 2011, 10:43 PM 

GEORGE

Thanks for that. Far from rambling on, you've just illustrated how good this forum can be, because you, Prof, A_L & I are all very different from one another in most ways, but we can all sit at our keyboards and converse as if we were all buddies from years ago.

And, on a personal note, your last post illustrates just how well brought-up you were and your impeccable manners, too.


Steve

 
 
OZGeorge

My thanks.

January 25 2011, 11:09 PM 

Thank you Steve.

It is pleasant to be involved with a forum with such a lot of very friendly and intelligent people contributing.

I have no doubt that our opinions will sometimes differ,however, I hope that we can all agree to disagree on some points, without growling at each other.

I did say in my last message that I did not think that we were punished at school harshly or excessively.

Perhaps I should amend that to 'by the ladies'.

My experiences with my first male teacher in the 7th grade, forever coloured my views of teachers of my own sex in a dark shade I'm afraid.

He was simply a bad-tempered,indeed I believe, mentally unstable beast.

He beat us boys with a dowell-stick, without let or hindrance, and although he bared no bottoms, I believe that he derived a perverted gratifacation from whacking us on our behinds.

He was a teacher who was complained about by a parent to my certain knowledge, but he was still teaching at the school some 10 years after I had left.

Fortunately for the little lads, by then CP at the school had been discontinued.

I bet he used to gnash his teeth privately about that.

Thank you for your compliment regarding my manners.

My dear Mother would have been so pleased, as she despaired of me and my manners at times.

 
 

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 26 2011, 12:34 AM 

Mark said :

"Now the polemics start. maybe more people would post here if they didnt feel threatened by the group control freaks or dismissed as liars."

I agree with you, Mark. This small group, the usual two or three people, seem to have appointed themselves as judges of others' posts and classifying those they don't like as liars and other offensive names and bullying them out of the forum.
I have already complained about this to the Administrators of this forum , but obviously no steps have been taken to ban these forum bullies. They obviously want to reserve this forum just for themselves by imposing themselves on others, with the result, as you say, that many are being put off from posting on this forum.
I should think that the language they are using is also against the Network 54 rules.

 
 
prof.n

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 26 2011, 1:58 AM 

Hi Another Lurker,

Oh dear oh dear really you need to sort out your analysis of what you THINK my positions are...Let me address your points one at a time :

I can accommodate (just about) the fact that for you as a teenager the receipt of corporal punishment in the form of a caning was instrumental in establishing your rightful place in the school's hierarchy and was a good thing, but when dealing any other teenagers, male or female, the use of the cane is fraught with dangers too hideous to even contemplate such an act.


Perhaps the problem is that those Warr type headmasters taught you to to be so frightened you write before putting on your thinking hat ! happy.gif

Firstly, my caning. Yes it did have positive social effects in the school, because the school I went to HMC like yours, was tradition rich. One of those 'traditions' was that a real man got caned , and those that didn't were wimps. Our school prided itself and drove home the message morning, noon and night ' Queen and country, leadership, and, the leaders amongst us were born to rule. We had the keys to the kingdom.

Couple of little problems. The schools idea of leadership started with the OTC and ended with the first XV. Much to my approval the current head boy runs the social service group, and doesn't play rugby. My day ? He'd have been a wimp and never been considered for Prefect. Yes , I was caned and it did me no harm , some say my behaviour improved. As Ive said before if it did it was because I respected the teacher, not because of the caning. Yes I was upset she needed to do it to me, but had it been certain other members of staff I guess my reaction would have been rage and indignation.

The fact was that in that environment to be a leader you had to appear tough, and caning helped. I don't know a boy who was a prefect in my day who hadn't been caned, I know a lot of very good lads that hadn't and who were seen as flotsam , never became a sub prefect let alone a full one. I was the only one not in the rugby or cricket team , and one of only two not in the OTC.

As you know Jackie made the comment about my caning ' All I did was help a cat cut his claws and take his rightful place in the pride'. It's like so many things she 'threw me in at the deep end ...repeatedly....until I swam .

Why? Not because she was nasty or enjoyed the power, but because she knew what you had to do to win in that environment, and winning was important to her,( when I came second in class , long before she taught in the school her comment was well done, but there is only one winner, and you CAN do it) . You had to lead. You had to stand your ground, and that included being 'blooded' not by dead fox, but with a caning. Worked for me but not for a large number. Thats why I despised that regime. It may have worked for me , but at the cost of the sacrifice of those who were quiet, weak and alienated. But that was a the British Public School.

I became a successful person. Yes, a natural leader, well not very natural , but hoy housed , yes!I'm now one of the schools success stories, one of the old boys they want to welcome back. But am I a nicer , a 'better' person? I can't answer that affirmatively. I know how to stand my ground, I know how to win, I've faced adversity and come through it, true. It makes me what the school wanted me to be , but a better person? More successful, more effective.,more dynamic yes .......but better?

When I was prefect I helped as many as I could, as chair of council I had the guts to stand up to our Head, a man who frightened some of his own staff.......

In the 1970's we didnt have the advantage of all the psychological studies of school cp that are available now. Some schools like ours realized that some boys ought not to be caned and ran no cane lists , but were 'feeling their way' and didn't always choose rightly. Nevertheless we got a no cane agreement in the sixth form arguing on what information WAS available then.

Now we know a lot more. that it is more dangerous as Doc keeps telling us to cane girls , than boys. But there are a sub set of boys who shouldnt be caned. We also know that it is far more dangerous to cane late adolescents than those between say 11-15 ( using US age groupings),. Now Doc spends a lot of time quoting at Jenny the statistics on girls versus boys, but he studiously ignores the data from the very same sets of surveys , and continues to cane older students. And my current bête noire Mrs BB's sixth form canings .these are immensely dangerous on paper because they are girls in late adolescence. Now a teacher has a primary duty to do no harm......so surely you shouldn't 'pick and choose ' which bits of which studies you accept and reject, or you might as well not do it by evidence not by gut or water divining.

And before you say so no I don't place anywhere near the store on statistical demonstration as Doc s does, he's the self confessed scientific psychologist ..an empiricist ......but I do count very seriously the disturbing reports of psycho analysis which attach to these type of cases.

The thing is this it is a lottery. You were fortunate and were not caned , and were not it seems in a school so 'macho'. But it could have been the making......or breaking of you . Who knows? What I do know for a fact is had you been caned in the sixth there was , even as a young man, a much greater chance of harm than say in the fourth form. And that is based on solid evidence. So to cane you in the sixth knowing that might be a risk, with a girl the figures are so high as to be reckless endangerment.

Now But passive Australians! No, I'm sorry, that's not just stretching credulity, it's kicking it right out of the ground! Have you ever met any Australians?

Well isn't it odd to see them meekly accepting corporal punishment at 17 ? happy.gif Would you ? Perhaps so ,sad.gif


Yes I have met some , including as it happens a couple of lads from Xavier when they were on their round the world jaunt before university a while ago at a concert at which I was playing ( still do very occasionally not so well these days) .

I must admit the comment was tongue in cheek

You see I hold to most of the things I said about Aussies, but it isn't me who sees them as passive in school , its Doc and Mrs. BB. The Aussies I know are as media savvy as anybody, use twitter and facebook , post silly things on youtube, and are as political as anyone. But these are the same kids who get beaten like lambs at the slaughter, then tell no one about for fear of being ridiculed, yet prefer being beaten to doing lines or detentions...........and no one in Melbourne is bothered. Their parents all agree, and the school manages to be a total in situation to the extent of stopping any discussion of these things, even boasting about 'muck up day' outside their carefully selected school friends.......

The truth is I give credence to what people say unless it is completely absurd. This isn't . but it is strange. Certainly even academics at Melbourne University and La Trobe seem genuinely nonplussed at the ideas. Doc will say they are just incredibly ill informed.....and that maybe ....but if it is these schools , who supply presumably students there, must have the most incredible loyalty scheme, well beyond the pudding club or Porterhouse Blue. What that means is they are something like a Jurassic Park.

Look at the outcry in Alabama, a far more conservative church fearing environment than Melbourne, at the prom paddling .Same goes for the press in Alabama they carried it : in Melbourne ,Doc reminds us the press didnt pick up on the fact that in the 'Age' I think it was on '06 revealed that at least one school used cp , though admittedly not with the frequency or intensity we see reported here.

Yet in other respects Melbourne is a normal city, even down to the ladies of the night , and some gentlemen too advertising the over 18 version of cp on google!
 
Ive asked and will continue to ask questions to elucidate how such an anachronism can exist alongside a perfectly normal modern metropolitan society. You see we know its true that you can legally cane, just as you can paddle in Alabama, but the reaction to those girls' paddling in the States was phenomenal , it went 'viral'. In Melbourne no one notices, and the same was true of Redlands, which astounded Steve and I. Then again doc implies these school with good connections, have almost 'handshake' agreements to keep below the radar and get no state interference.

Doc explains this that the sixth formers accept what happens at school without question, that this is 'their duty'.To question it would be selfish. He also thinks he has a very unusual social group attending these schools.But they care about other things...well if do they mix with their peers , when supporting climate change or poverty lobbies whatever, and never ever mention their school and discipline? Maybe the answer, but I still find the level of corporate think unusual, in the period when most teenagers are questioning and developing their sense of personal worth, which means , particularly for girls , the sanctity of , and self determination for their body.

I just don't know a single sixth former at any type of school here that would accept that ideology . Do you ?


Just for fun : escape from Melbourne? It will make sense to fans of 'the Prisoner'. happy.gif


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptJJAPL5vGA&feature=related

 
 

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 26 2011, 2:24 AM 




Steve, Another Lurker, OzGeorge. ,

Oh mea culpa , meas maxima culpa.......After all that expensive HMC education, including two canings ( for the price of one ?).... I still failed to see the dreaded 'firstly' when proof reading. Mind you I do write considerably more than Sally .....but still, what a horrendous waste of money ....Hey! I wonder if there is a money back guarantee, after all I never took the green shield stamps ?

And here is the REAL prisoner, even with his Australian blazer in the village......now I wonder...........?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuzIOQIE9lg&NR=1

 
 

Doctor Dominum

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 26 2011, 9:26 AM 

Today is a public holiday in Australia and I was hoping I could actually relax today. C'est la vie.

Oh dear oh dear really you need to sort out your analysis of what you THINK my positions are...

I could say the same about you at the moment. There's quite a lot you've written here about what I supposedly believe that simply isn't true.

Now we know a lot more. that it is more dangerous as Doc keeps telling us to cane girls , than boys. But there are a sub set of boys who shouldnt be caned. We also know that it is far more dangerous to cane late adolescents than those between say 11-15 ( using US age groupings),. Now Doc spends a lot of time quoting at Jenny the statistics on girls versus boys, but he studiously ignores the data from the very same sets of surveys , and continues to cane older students.

No, I most certainly do not.

First of all, I'm not entirely what studies you are talking about - I've assumed you are presenting data from them accurately, so I haven't bothered going into detail checking it and questioning it. I might have to now - could you please cite these studies so I can get them but I have not seen this data that you claim shows that it is as dangerous to cane late adolescents as it is girls. I am not ignoring any data I am familiar - but it is possible that there is data out there that I am not fully aware of.

I've spent quite a lot more time looking at the issue of how sex might have an impact in these cases as opposed to age, for a number of reasons, so even if I've seen a study it it looked at age and sex, I'd have spent more time looking at the sex issue than the age issue.

Please cite these studies and I'll check them out - probably check them out again, because I'd be surprised if there are studies out there I've never even looked at. But for the life of me, I can't think of any data I have seen that supports the position you think I should be taking. I don't at this point know if that's because I've missed something, or because there are reasons why that data didn't make that impression on me.

And my current bête noire Mrs BB's sixth form canings .these are immensely dangerous on paper because they are girls in late adolescence. Now a teacher has a primary duty to do no harm......so surely you shouldn't 'pick and choose ' which bits of which studies you accept and reject, or you might as well not do it by evidence not by gut or water divining.

I certainly do not pick and choose which bit of studies I accept. But as I have said before, I use studies as a guide to general tendencies. I do not assume that these general tendencies automatically overrule what is actually happening in any individual school or any individual situation.

I have very limited experience of using corporal punishment with girls - far less experience than I have of using corporal punishment with older boys. If the approach I was taking with older boys was significantly problematic, I would have expected to see real signs of that over the years, simply because of the weight of numbers. I have not, This leads me to think that even if the type of studies you are talking about are full of valid generalities, there is some reason why they do not apply in our school environment - and I think of a number of good reasons why that may be so, so it doesn't surprise me, and so I'll go with actual specific experiences of real students in a real environment over generalities, especially generalities from studies undertaken in another country with rather different educational conditions.

However, when it comes to girls, my own personal experiences are much more limited. I have only caned three girls in a school environment and while none of them seemed to develop problems from it, that doesn't tell me a lot - a sample size of three is pretty useless in that regard. So I pay a lot more attention to generalised data in that case. I give it much more weight in forming my opinions. Not total weight - because I do have a bit more to go on than just those three canings - observation of certain other school environments. But I still have nowhere near as much personal experience, and also the observations I have made lend some credence to what the general data says.

You see I hold to most of the things I said about Aussies, but it isn't me who sees them as passive in school , its Doc and Mrs. BB.

No, it most certainly is not - well, I can only speak for myself, but I doubt my colleague would endorse that idea either.

You seem to have developed some very odd ideas about our students. They are not passive. They speak up if they believe there is a reason to do so. But they do it in a way that they think is going to achieve results. A way that does achieve results.

Doc explains this that the sixth formers accept what happens at school without question, that this is 'their duty'.

I have not said that, and it certainly is not true. They question things, all the bloody time, actually, when they think there's a reason to. When they disagree with something. What you seem to be assuming is that because you disagree with something, large numbers of them must agree with you. Our policies are overwhelmingly supported by our students - yes, they've questioned them - and decided they agree. Not universally - but those who don't agree still tend to realise that in an environment where they are the minority, they can't really expect dramatic change and they don't normally try and force it.

To question it would be selfish.

No, to spend large amounts of time and energy addressing the issue when most of your contemporaries disagree with you and don't want change rather than directing those energies towards bigger issues that everybody wants changed is what is seen as selfish. I want something - nine out of ten of my friends don't, but I'm going to fight for it anyway, because I'm more important than them.... that's where you get issues.

He also thinks he has a very unusual social group attending these schools.But they care about other things...well if do they mix with their peers , when supporting climate change or poverty lobbies whatever, and never ever mention their school and discipline?

First of all, there's a lot less "mixing with peers" than you might expect. A lot less than I actually think is healthy. Our students often do wind up being quite insular because of the fact that they are either living near the schools, in which case their friends tend to be those attending similar schools - or if they live further away, so much of their time is spent travelling to and from school, they have realtively little contact with kids from their own neighbourhoods. Prejudice also plays a role here - and no so much ours. The number of kids from state school environments who don't want to mix with private school kids is quite dramatic.

Also - state school kids at climate change lobbies? or poverty lobbies? Go to any youth political lobby in Melbourne, and I'd expect 60% of the kids there to be from independent schools, 20% from the Catholic schools, 10% from about a dozen state schools which stand out, and maybe 10% from all other state schools. And do you think those state school kids - the few who have managed to develop decent levels of social and political awareness, despite their school environment are really all that interested in hearing about how "My school is different from your school." It'd be seen as boasting.

I just don't know a single sixth former at any type of school here that would accept that ideology . Do you ?

My impression is that British schools are now full of students who won't accept anything they don't like - and that's not a good thing. And it's not something we want to emulate.

 
 
Miss Jean Brodie

A sinner repents

January 26 2011, 12:29 PM 

From prof.n: Oh mea culpa , meas maxima culpa.......After all that expensive HMC education, including two canings ( for the price of one ?).... I still failed to see the dreaded 'firstly' when proof reading. Mind you I do write considerably more than Sally

A fine man! There should be more like him!

JB1


1. Also known as AT .....


 
 
clancy

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 26 2011, 1:01 PM 

Í'm not sure if our distinguished Doctor understands the philosophical issues that Prof. Nev is raising. Doctor, please address the kernel of the philosophical questions Prof.N has raised several times (EG: Focault, ) rather than fly off into generalities which is really just mental laziness.. For example, you claim that (...Professor Nev) seem(s) to have developed some very odd ideas about our students..." A very neat trick in debating is to turn the argument on to your antagonist which frees you from addressing, specifically, their arguments. He is addressing the unconscious effects upon children who are bought up from within a particular culture with its particular discourse. It involces some engagement with postmodern philosphy, those of an empirical bent may struggle to understand these

 
 
Clancy

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 26 2011, 1:18 PM 

I have a great deal of coursework to prepare for this semester so my time is extremely limited but I can't help but briefly comment upon other nuggets of Dead White Man's wisdom in Doctor Dominum's postings. For instance, he says that:
''Our policies are overwhelmingly supported by our students - yes, they've questioned them - and decided they agree'...
That is because they are too frightened NOT too agree? The students who refuse to accept, unlike in the British schools you would rather not ''emulate'(there is an internal contradiction there somewhere) are either , apparently if what you say is accurate in the current mileu, beaten like the good old days or asked to leave.
As an educationalist I find some of these stories rather disconcerting. Having said that, I not heard any evidence from my colleagues nor from students who are from elite schools, that corporal punishment actually occurs in these schools and when in classes the issue of school discipline has arisen and students from for example, Brighton Grammar or Tintern Grammar have not mentioned it.

 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 26 2011, 2:51 PM 

Oh dear! In commenting humorously on Prof.n's reference to the passivity of Australian students it was not my intention to cause so much extra work for two of the big beasts1 of this estimable Forum. But what a fascinating exchange!

I've already nailed my colours to the mast on this issue so I'm merely going to comment briefly in response to each protagonist. Somewhat off topic in each case I'm afraid, so my apologies to OZGeorge as the originator of this excellent thread, and to anyone who thinks topicality more important than content.

Hi Prof.n. You said to me:

You were fortunate and were not caned , and were not it seems in a school so 'macho'. But it could have been the making......or breaking of you . Who knows?

To misquote Mae West, fortune had nothing to do with it! As I've recounted elsewhere here I formed a strong aversion to school CP at an early age and made darn sure I didn't get any thereafter. Proof IMHO that CP works - or at least it did on me! It is true to say that at my secondary school only the Headmaster and the prefects caned, though other Masters used a variety of lesser CP sanctions. It was perhaps less macho than your establishment, but caning there certainly was.

You asked, with reference to Australian sixth formers:

Well isn't it odd to see them meekly accepting corporal punishment at 17? happy.gif Would you ? Perhaps so, sad.gif

The only time I might possibly have been caned at anywhere near age 17 was when I decided to stop working and made a complete mess of my mock A-levels. The resulting interview with the Headmaster is recounted here. Would I have taken a caning meekly if the Headmaster had decided that was the appropriate sanction? This was prior to the destruction and disintegration of authority and stability in the later 1960s, and the National decline consequent thereon was still to come. I respected the Headmaster's authority. I wanted to take my A-levels. So on both those grounds the answer to your question would have been "yes".

And finally, you worry me by frequently referencing use of Facebook and Twitter as indicative of the attainment of maturity, as in:

The Aussies I know are as media savvy as anybody, use twitter and facebook , post silly things on youtube, and are as political as anyone.

Sorry if this offends, but use of Facebook and Twitter merely indicates an excessive readiness to conform to peer pressure AND a total (and unjustifiable) ignorance of the many ways in which big business and law enforcement agencies are using and will use the data so innocently handed to them on a plate. Just two recent examples from the many available:
  • Facebook hands over private details of users to companies who pay to develop applications to mine its data.

  • US Law Enforcement Agencies use Twitter to identify and trace associates of Julian Assange (of WikiLeaks fame).

Doctor Dominum, you say above:

My impression is that British schools are now full of students who won't accept anything they don't like - and that's not a good thing. And it's not something we want to emulate.

A masterly and very accurate summary of the situation!

Note 1:  For the benefit of Willy, happy.gif 'big beasts' is not an insulting or derogatory term but an informal usage indicating persons of influence or power, a status which as Honorary Life Members and major contributors Prof.n and Doctor Dominum certainly enjoy within this estimable Forum!



 
 
prof.n

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 26 2011, 4:17 PM 


Hi Another Lurker,

Don't worry no another diatribe, just a factual point .happy.gifhappy.gifhappy.gif

Facebook and Twitter etc., I don't see them as signs of maturity, and I share many o your misgivings about them . However, it is the way that young people communicate, as well as by text ...in any school wait till the end bell and see how quickly the mobiles come out. My point is youth culture is a viral environment today.

now you CAN opt out.Very few do, but , for example quite a few do in the religious townships ( one horse towns) in West Texas. Even there the subject goes underground. I know one daughter of a friend of mine who herself has several friends in these townships, who evade the parental monitoring by hook or by crook. ( and I understand face a 'trip to the woodshed' if caught - we are talking Deuteronomy followers here ).

What is very very unusual, is for there to be a cohesive group of young people, who strategically avoid contact with those 'outside' their group, share the norms and values of their teachers ,and parents, don't rebel , and don't ever talk about their schooling openly. I know when I was at school, or today when in research projects we put volunteers together from different schools, or even in the teaching cafe, comparative regimes and discipline are an immediate topic.of curiosity.

What is even more surprising is that this issue doesn't arise as Clancy inferred in university . I've never encountered myself students who haven't talked freely about school discipline in that context, so if it doesn't happen here there is something that definitely is highly unusual, and well worth investigating from a research angle ..As Bob t has said before ....anyone for Kool -aid?

 
 
willyeckaslike

How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 26 2011, 5:26 PM 

OZ George January 25 2011, 11:09 PM

I agree with your opinions on the subject of school corporal punishment. that is how I saw it as well.

If you misbehaved at school, you got your bottom whacked, and then, the lesson, and life as well, just carried on.

I did not know I needed a masters degree in psychology to be able to understand what and why it had happened.

I found common sense to be sufficient to get the message across, and how to avoid it in the future.

I do NOT agree with the public school type of floggings, that is pure abuse. In the majority of cases the slipper seems to be enough to keep order in the classroom and school in general. If the cane is used because the slipper is not allowed, that does not mean or need that a full grown man has to put all his strength and shoulder behind it for six of the best.

I do agree there are some that administer punishment, that think there is only one way to do it, and that is as hard as possible, simply because they have the right to do it.

Jenny has made the point before, that the cane is a step up from the slipper. BUT that is not to say that the cane is always worse than the slipper, a hard slippering can be worse than a lighter caning. If common sense were to be used by those administering corporal punishment, instead of the "rules say I can, so I will" attitude, maybe corporal punishment would not have got such a bad reputation. Because "six of the best" is permitted, that does not mean it has to be used every time.


















 
 
prof.n

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 26 2011, 11:29 PM 

Doc , I'll deal first with the sources issue.


First of all, I'm not entirely what studies you are talking about - I've assumed you are presenting data from them accurately, so I haven't bothered going into detail checking it and questioning it. I might have to now - could you please cite these studies so I can get them but I have not seen this data that you claim shows that it is as dangerous to cane late adolescents as it is girls. I am not ignoring any data I am familiar - but it is possible that there is data out there that I am not fully aware of.

I've spent quite a lot more time looking at the issue of how sex might have an impact in these cases as opposed to age, for a number of reasons, so even if I've seen a study it it looked at age and sex, I'd have spent more time looking at the sex issue than the age issue.

Please cite these studies and I'll check them out - probably check them out again, because I'd be surprised if there are studies out there I've never even looked at. But for the life of me, I can't think of any data I have seen that supports the position you think I should be taking. I don't at this point know if that's because I've missed something, or because there are reasons why that data didn't make that impression on me.


I'm quite happy to direct you to the data, on the gender/agenda thread,when you indicate which of the research sources you already work with and which you are unfamiliar. I don't want to hijack this site.

In general terms the data emanates from fives centers in United States ; Temple University : West Virginia college: the University of North Texas, UTA and Mississippi college ( Ol'Miss). You will certainly be aware of the Temple data 1980-1995 as this is one of the foremost research centers into childhood development in the US , if not internationally.It is , of course where the later Prof. Hyman led the research teams until his untimely death in 2005. I'd say in addition to Hymasn ,Russell's analysis of the '88/89 OPR data is important as a base line , as is Lambert et al research on the physical and psychological abuse count in schools together with Lambert's stress response scale (1990) . This is probably the richest archive in the United States, and also is important because of its careful analysis of underreporting on ~OCR data. 70%or more I would guesstimate of all US research in the area comes i suspect out of Temple and its associates/affiliates of the Hyman practice. The other archives are those I have had access to as result of my general research work with the exception of West Virginia college who appeared to work alongside Hyman

Perhaps you'll be kind enough to identify the sourcing of your material as then we will have transparency on both sides. I have assumed you were using the same or similar data , either from temple or UCLA/West Coast as most of this work is carried out in the US , outside of the South .I'd also be interested to know where you situate yourself in the intellectual debate , if you want to turn this into a academic exercise . ~That then saves so much tedious repetition if we understand our respective starting points.

You mention the empirical data , but of course in addition I roam much more widely into qualitative areas,and to be those arguments are of prime import, also those of 'raconteurs' including psycho analysis. My qualitative arguments can mainly be traced to Foucault ; discipline and Punish : Knowledge/Power : The order of things : the History of Sexuality : The Archeology of Knowledge : Madness and civilization : and the various discussions with the Tel Quel and Quel corps groups /collectives.

Lacan is more difficult to list . Obviously in English the main works is Wilden's translation 'The language of self' although the initial article which interested me was in NLR 51 back in 1968.Ecrits I suppose is seminal A lot of this work was extended and revised by the 'Critique of anthropology ' Group during their existence, and I did contribute to that group at one point in the early 80's. Many if Lacan's followers published in 'lkes temps moderne' , much of which was translated by the NLR and/or Socialist Register. Lacan : My Teaching, and especially his work on female sexuality The other important influences are Hindess and Hirst methodologically , and the Willers to the chagrin of Alan turing! Obviously Derrida for his influence on language and Sartre for the 'Critique de la raison dialectique' which has a very reasonable translation by NLR books in the late 70's.

Remeber I work from the qualitative and use empircal data illustratively, so ?I have no interest in the dissection of empiricim whioch I believe leads to statsistical comments and adds little to knowledge of the human condition.

Without digressing too far KK made a point to which I shall reply later about the dominance of the group in education in 1910. tThis is a very erudite comment. I believe that education seriously went astray when it rejected the needs of the individual and subordinated them to the needs of the class. this is where , in my opinion ,from where the malaise of education springs forth today.

Well thats a start! I'll leave this as a stand alone post.





 
 
OZGeorge

Common Sense

January 26 2011, 11:30 PM 

Thank you very much for your response Willy.

I certainly agree with you that common sense and wise judgement is important in the application of ANY punishment, and not only corporal punishment.

It is academic now anyway really, as CP has disappeared from most first world schools, and unless some moral and social revolution occurs, it is distinctly unlikely that it will ever return, more's the pity in some ways.

Human beings approach wrongdoing, I am quite certain, generally by the means of a weighing-up calculation,which children are as apt to do as adults,on the likelihood of being caught.

Do you get a little lead-footed on the accelerator, when you believe that the possiblility of being caught in a speed trap or by a stray patrol vehicle appear much slimmer than usual?
Or do you obey the speed limit scrupuously at all times just in case?

In my experiences at school, if a wrongdoing, such as not finishing your homework on time, is almost certain to be discovered,and a spanking very likely as a result, then generally it was not worth risking non-compliance.

On the other hand, if the discovery was not so certain, and you are feeling lucky,-punk- then you may kick over the traces even at the risk of punishment, if the wrong-doing seems attractive enough.

I think that this is called human nature.

We now come to the vexed question of penalties and effectiveness of same.

As a primary schoolboy, if I had wanted to go out of bounds for instance, and the punishment for that was a detention, or possibly a written imposition or the like, I no doubt would have made the venture, as the punishment, if I was discovered, was not particularly onerous.

On the other hand,if the penalty was to be a sound spanking from my teacher, I would perhaps have been more likely to hesitate, but if the result of my misbehaviour was to be six of the best from the headmaster, I would most definately have thought long and hard before risking it.
To begin with anyway-more of this later.

The excitement from my adventure out of bounds, may not equal the pain of a spanking, or worse a caning.

I did not actually receive a caning from the headmaster of my primary school until the sixth grade, and before that, I had feared it mightily.

So simply the threat of the cane was enough to keep me in line.

It was unfortunate that I found that getting the cane on the hands did not really hurt very much at all, and so from then on, I was somewhat bolder than I had been, as the seriousness of a hand caning did not weigh so heavily in my calculations as it had before.

I believe that if the cane had been applied as it traditionally was, on the seat of the pants, it would definately have made an awful lot of difference in my cogitations,because that HURTS, and it does not have to laid on particularly harshly to send the appropriate message for small boys.

The pain produced by the dowell-rod applied to my bottom by my 7th grade teacher,was infinately worse than that produced by the cane on my finger-tips.

By contrast,the cane applied to my 12 year old backside by my secondary school headmaster, was a million light years worse than the dowell-rod.

It was fearsome.

Going by the feed-back I have had from this forum, and from looking over the anecdotes on the Corpun site, it would appear that the canings my high school head gave, were particularly severe.

He was a massive, muscular and extremely powerful ex-rugby fullback,and he applied the cane with every ounce of his formiddible strength.

I had welts and extensive bruising on my bottom for well over 3 weeks before they began to fade, and it was uncomfortable to sit for nearly a week.

People may comment that such a punishment to a young boy is foul abuse and utterly injustified, particualrly viewed from a 21st century perspective,but in the end, I disagree.

I myself, do not believe that my headmaster was a cruel and sadistic brute.
I do not for one moment believe that he liked what he had to do.

On the contrary, he was a quite jovial and kindly man.I think that he did what he did to send a message,and it worked.

The head's cane was legendary at our school.It was not used frequently, and only for very bad offences.

The head's habit of bringing the agonised and sobbing boy back to the classroom after the caning,his distress obvious to all,sent shivers of apprehension and awe through all the lads who witnessed it.

The toughest and most daring tear-ways in the school definately though twice, even three times, before risking the head's cane.

I think that such a system works well with sometimes arrogant and over-weening teenage boys.
A penalty must have weight and substance in the calcualtions of boys who may want to push the limits.

It is the old adage, that human beings wish to increase pleasure and avoid pain.

It certainly worked with me, as I never again did ANYTHING that would open me to the risk of another head's caning, although I had plenty of strappings from the housemaster for petty crimes.

That is why I think that corporal punishment is far more effective than other punishments.

The fear of,and the great desire to avoid pain is primal.

Would boys attending schools now be more likely to fear a suspension, which,let's face it, in many cases is more of a reward than a punishment, or one of my old headmaster's canings?

Need I say more?
Thank you for bearing with me on this rather long-winded post!



 
 
prof.n

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 27 2011, 2:45 AM 

Hi doc, and as to the other parts of your comments :


No, it most certainly is not - well, I can only speak for myself, but I doubt my colleague would endorse that idea either.

You seem to have developed some very odd ideas about our students. They are not passive. They speak up if they believe there is a reason to do so. But they do it in a way that they think is going to achieve results. A way that does achieve results.


Well, that's equally true of our students , and certainly was in my day. When we decided democratically amongst ourselves on something we pushed it until we achieved success. That seems like developed politics to me.The difference is not in whether the students obtain results but what they see as their interests.

Doc explains this that the sixth formers accept what happens at school without question, that this is 'their duty'.

I have not said that, and it certainly is not true. They question things, all the bloody time, actually, when they think there's a reason to. When they disagree with something. What you seem to be assuming is that because you disagree with something, large numbers of them must agree with you. Our policies are overwhelmingly supported by our students - yes, they've questioned them - and decided they agree. Not universally - but those who don't agree still tend to realise that in an environment where they are the minority, they can't really expect dramatic change and they don't normally try and force it.


I'm just not sure what you mean here. Look everyone has something they will question.....Personally I probably would have questioned 31 out of the 32 School rules given the I just don't know a single sixth former at any type of school here that would accept that ideology . Do you ?

My impression is that British schools are now full of students who won't accept anything they don't like - and that's not a good thing. And it's not something we want to emulate.

  chance, but in reality we only perused those which had a substantial support, and on those we nearly always got our way , or at least a satisfactory agreement...the people united....!

Are you saying that only minorities and small ones at that ever question your rules, and because they therefore are small in number they acquiesce because of a majority view? Or are the majority apathetic? Do they make their own minds up or do you 'supervise' the consultation. , you see what Im getting at in trades union jargon postal ballot or mass meeting?

To question it would be selfish.

No, to spend large amounts of time and energy addressing the issue when most of your contemporaries disagree with you and don't want change rather than directing those energies towards bigger issues that everybody wants changed is what is seen as selfish. I want something - nine out of ten of my friends don't, but I'm going to fight for it anyway, because I'm more important than them.... that's where you get issues.

So the interesting question is why did our students want change and yours don't ? Yours seem quite happy to remain in their suspended state of childhood, being beaten for their mistakes, where their contemporaries in the other elite schools, such as Clancy refers to ,or even the state sector get on equally well in a more adult environment .

I just don't know a single sixth former at any type of school here that would accept that ideology . Do you ?

My impression is that British schools are now full of students who won't accept anything they don't like - and that's not a good thing. And it's not something we want to emulate.

I guess this is the 'contraction ' Clancy highlights. You see our students complain when they as a body don't agree with something : you claim tours do exactly the same. The difference you claim is that yours are perfectly satisfied, so that's fine. Don't criticise ours : they are only taking advantage of what you say yours already share- the ability to make change if they democratically decide they don't agree with some element of the school .It'd just they don't rather they support the status quo agree with their parents and school and leave it 'to them' even when it means getting a beating at an age when no one else in Melbourne education does. .

Its just yours just He also thinks he has a very unusual social group attending these schools.But they care about other things...well if do they mix with their peers , when supporting climate change or poverty lobbies whatever, and never ever mention their school and discipline?

First of all, there's a lot less "mixing with peers" than you might expect. A lot less than I actually think is healthy. Our students often do wind up being quite insular because of the fact that they are either living near the schools, in which case their friends tend to be those attending similar schools - or if they live further away, so much of their time is spent travelling to and from school, they have relatively little contact with kids from their own neighbourhoods. Prejudice also plays a role here - and no so much ours. The number of kids from state school environments who don't want to mix with private school kids is quite dramatic.

Also - state school kids at climate change lobbies? or poverty lobbies? Go to any youth political lobby in Melbourne, and I'd expect 60% of the kids there to be from independent schools, 20% from the Catholic schools, 10% from about a dozen state schools which stand out, and maybe 10% from all other state schools. And do you think those state school kids - the few who have managed to develop decent levels of social and political awareness, despite their school environment are really all that interested in hearing about how "My school is different from your school." It'd be seen as boasting.


In England on any protest the numbers are pretty even from either sector. There is not a lot , certainly not a sixth form , unwillingness to mix between the sectors , and of course once you get to University even more so.
 
Clancy doesnt seem to think there is much cp around. Neither does the Independent school advisory service . They say , corporal punishment , even where it was allowed by state law was ' highly unlikely to ever feature in the discipline of older adolescents' . On line advice refers one to a statement by their members about sanctions which operated in the schools, detentions etc,about which parents should be aware : no mention of corporal punishment.
All their member schools have signed that statement.

The HMC in Britain continued to indicate some member schools used cp right up to final abolition, so again this is a difference , where this issue seems firmly under the lid.
I can understand your school 'circling the wagons ' as more and more of the elite schools rule out corporal punishment .I looked at a few on line prospectuses today , from Firbank to Xavier , all stress the modern forms of discipline and list their sanctions clearly. So this is clearly a minority 'hold out', for want of a better word.

What I dont understand is however , with the wagons circled , why the students are not outside spitting in , instead of inside spitting out. And if they are so proud of their schools and 'tradition' why don't they shout it from the rooftops once they've left school instead of keeping it as the Rock open 'Tommy' said , as a dirty little secret?

 
 
Jenny

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 27 2011, 2:45 AM 

Hi Another_Lurker

The only time I might possibly have been caned at anywhere near age 17 was when I decided to stop working and made a complete mess of my mock A-levels. The resulting interview with the Headmaster is recounted here. Would I have taken a caning meekly if the Headmaster had decided that was the appropriate sanction? This was prior to the destruction and disintegration of authority and stability in the later 1960s, and the National decline consequent thereon was still to come. I respected the Headmaster's authority. I wanted to take my A-levels. So on both those grounds the answer to your question would have been "yes".

In that situation, I would have accepted a caning too but I suspect it would have affected us very differently - not because we're different sexes but because we're different people.

Your one experience of CP at an early age caused you to form a strong aversion to it. If you had subsequently been successful in avoiding it until one fateful day, when you were 17, your luck finally ran out, it's highly likely that being caned would have caused long term negative effects.

I, on the other hand, had considerably less success than you in avoiding it. You refrained from activities you might have wanted to engage in because of the "price" you might have to pay. In my case, if avoiding it meant missing out on doing something I wanted to do, I was willing to take my chances.

We're different people with, or shaped by, different experiences. If I had been caned at 17, I doubt it would have had much of an adverse effect at all. I might have felt a bit "put out" but that would be true regardless of the punishment. As I've said, on the few occasions I got lines or detention, I simply didn't do them - knowing I'd get the slipper instead. In VIth form, it's more likely I would have been asked to leave if I failed to do them so I would have felt pressured to comply - possibly at the expense of my studies. I would have really resented punishments like that.


 
 

Doctor Dominum

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 27 2011, 5:30 AM 

I have a great deal of coursework to prepare for this semester so my time is extremely limited but I can't help but briefly comment upon other nuggets of Dead White Man's wisdom in Doctor Dominum's postings.

I find it somewhat ironic to be accused of 'nuggets of Dead White Man's wisdom' by somebody who seems to base their opinions on people like Derrida, Foucault, and Lacan.

deadwhitemen.png

For instance, he says that:
''Our policies are overwhelmingly supported by our students - yes, they've questioned them - and decided they agree'...
That is because they are too frightened NOT too agree?


A valid question - the answer is no.

The students who refuse to accept, unlike in the British schools you would rather not ''emulate'(there is an internal contradiction there somewhere) are either , apparently if what you say is accurate in the current mileu, beaten like the good old days or asked to leave.

Not so. There are a number of other options besides those ones. Including the most obvious one - they behave themselves.

As an educationalist I find some of these stories rather disconcerting. Having said that, I not heard any evidence from my colleagues nor from students who are from elite schools, that corporal punishment actually occurs in these schools and when in classes the issue of school discipline has arisen and students from for example, Brighton Grammar or Tintern Grammar have not mentioned it.

I wonder how easy it would be for a student from an elite school to mention what happens in one of your classes, anything about their school that didn't fit modern PC thinking and get a fair, balanced and reasonable discussion, rather than a diatribe.

 
 
American Way

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 27 2011, 5:38 AM 

Please don't take this as a hostile or contentious posting Jenny It's your aversion to detention and lines to the point you almost force them up the ante to a caning may not be all that typical. That's not to say you're weird. Physical punishment was considered a last resort so I presumed it would be in the majority of cases more dreaded so more a deterrent than lines or detentions. The only choice you had when the option was not expulsion was to further defy authority. Can you do a paradigm shift and apply something similar to what's going on contemporaneously in your own life now or in the not too distant past where you chose a sanction considered more dreaded by most for an infraction and worked it out so you got the severe sanction in others eyes. An obvious example would be to be docked a days pay or be assigned a boring task by your boss as if you could have one. happy.gif

Have you you more to say about prof n posts on older recipient of CP? At 17 would you have felt violated if a man caned or would that be totally irrelevant? I think in the sixties when the nun principal gave the stick to boys in front of the class the embarrassment of getting it in front of a mixed gender class would have more of a deleterious impact than just the boys. How would getting cane in front of a mixed gender class as oppose to all girls make you feel? We didn't think of nuns as having any gender. happy.gif Some were monsters and some were not. sad.gif

While I'm walking on thin ice, given my differences over treatment of females, let me dance on it and ask a few personal questions. It seems as if you were a high spirited and rebellious as a youngster so would you say the strictness of the school you went ameliorated those tendencies. Had you gone to a school that banned the cane what would that have done to you? Would you have been expelled after the mandatory schooling age? Did CP help reform you, so to speak, or did it make you sneaky or a little bit of both? wink.gif

Being sadistic by nature I would spare you the paddle and put you into T-R. Maybe it would have to be padded. happy.gif

 
 
clancy

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 27 2011, 11:49 AM 

Dear Oh dear '"Doctor",
You have had your feathers ruffled, haven't you? You clearly have no capacity to engage with these great thinkers, you and mrs Beale Buss(? strange name) feel threatened by them so you seek to dismiss them. Ever care to compare citations with yours and their names on them? Feel free to share your own, I am sure your and mrs beebuses influence on educational/psychological Philosophical theories have been profound...I am obviously talking to a great mind hmmm?
Unfortunately for you these philosophers/historians cannot be dismissed because their influence is already felt in educational theory. I am afraid considering your supposed credentials, with a background in psychology it's a big F a FAIL -for you and for mrs bigbus or whatever her name is. Bend over and take it like a good 19th century British schoolboy, you know, stiff upper lip what? Maybe he can read Kipling while he is getting his cheeks sprayed.
In any case my young Master's student comes from one of the elite independent schools down here, Brighton grammar I think- and he is going to trawl through your postings and put them up on the brighton grammar facebook page, just for laughs since Professor Neville tells me that you posted supposed caning records from some school you taught at?
In any case,, thankyou, you have given the entire faculty something to laugh at, today your name at the very least and intellectual seriousness.

 
 
Research Assistant 2

clancy: FYI

January 27 2011, 11:59 AM 


 
 
The Apache Kid

Up or down? It makes all the difference

January 27 2011, 12:23 PM 

The difference between a trousers up and a trousers down caning is that while the former might leave you with a slight limp and an occassional twitch,the latter will have you walking into walls for a fortnight and reciting the full works of Shakespear backwards and all it takes to effect this,is the removal of just two insubstantial layers of clothing-your trousers and underpants:absolutely unbelievable.A senior school cane even administered with moderate force will more than be felt through thick flannel trousers,atwo pairs of underpants and,if you can get away with it,an exercise book!So,just immagine a well spaced and well intended volcanic six powering into your bare backside on a cold Monday morning just after assembly.Does'nt BARE thinking about,does it? Contrary to what all the fantasists would have you believe,bare bottom caning was unheard of in latter day schools and though it may have lingered awhile in places like Eaton and Harrow along with a few of the lesser private schools,it went out with the Victorians,the undisputed masters of both domestic and corporal discipline.Bare bottom discipline to day is,for the most part,confined within the home as a means of punishing wayward children or,to put it more commonly,an over the knee bare bottom spanking.Even here a distinct comparison can be made between bare or unbared discipline where a child will laugh a trousered spanking off yet on the other hand will scream,kick and squirm all the way through a spanking where his/her parent has bared the bottom in order that the spanking can be more than well and truly felt.One time the most severe canings were those metered out in corrective institutions such as approved schools and reformatories for example where a boy could recieve up to a dozen very hard and extremely painful strokes of the senior cane over a 'clothed bottom'' as the rules stipulated.However,and I'm more than certain of this,had there been no such ruling these canings would have been most vigorously administered over the bared bottom-no doubt whatsoever.So yes,I would most definintely say, that there's an extremely painful differance between a bare bottom caning than one where your headmaster has kindly allowed you to hold on to your pants and before I wrap this little saga up I have a question for you.What would you rather of had at school if given the choice.Six with your trousers up,or three with them down? good luck!

 
 

The Worst of all Bad Habits

January 27 2011, 6:52 PM 

Only suitable for minors?:

Schoolchildrens' "spanking" related injuries (WARNING - These images may be deeply disturbing to some viewers. Do not open this page if children are present).
http://www.nospank.net/injuredkids.pdf




Recommended by professionals:

Plain Talk About Spanking
by Jordan Riak
http://www.nospank.net/pt2010.pdf

The Sexual Dangers of Spanking Children
by Tom Johnson
http://nospank.net/sdsc2.pdf

NO VITAL ORGANS THERE, So They Say
by Lesli Taylor MD and Adah Maurer PhD
http://nospank.net/taylor.htm



Most current research:

Spanking Kids Increases Risk of Sexual Problems
http://www.unh.edu/news/cj_nr/2008/feb/lw28spanking.cfm

Use of Spanking for 3-Year-Old Children and Associated Intimate Partner Aggression or Violence
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/126/3/415

Spanking Can Make Children More Aggressive Later
http://tulane.edu/news/releases/pr_03122010.cfm

Spanking Children Can Lower IQ
http://www.unh.edu/news/cj_nr/2009/sept/lw25straus.cfm


In 31 nations, child corporal punishment is prohibited by law (with more in process). In fact, the US was the only UN member that did not ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The US also has the highest incarceration rate in the world.

The US states with the highest crime rates and the poorest academic performance are also the ones with the highest rates of child corporal punishment.

There is simply no evidence to suggest that child bottom-battering instills virtue.


Edit: audio removed.


    
This message has been edited by larry1951 on Jan 30, 2011 9:13 AM


 
 
Jenny

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 27 2011, 9:39 PM 

Hi American Way

Please don't take this as a hostile or contentious posting Jenny It's your aversion to detention and lines to the point you almost force them up the ante to a caning may not be all that typical.

It's a matter of perception. I, or rather "we" because I wasn't the only one, didn't up the ante to a caning. The usual punishment for not doing lines or detention was a slippering. Dr Dominum has said that, when CP is not available for girls, they receive an equivalent punishment instead. If a detention (30 or 60 minutes after school) is equivalent to three with the slipper, then three with the slipper is equivalent to a detention. Therefore, if I failed to attend detention and got three with the slipper instead (which was usual), I simply received an equivalent punishment. It came down to a simple trade off. Like you, teachers might have considered the slipper a more severe punishment than a detention so, from their perspective, they had increased our punishment but not from our perspective. As I showed here, there is more to comparing punishments than just the method. Would you rather have the cane or lines? If you had been given 5000 lines write and you knew that, if you didn't do them, you would get one stroke of the cane instead, would you do them?

That's not to say you're weird. Physical punishment was considered a last resort so I presumed it would be in the majority of cases more dreaded so more a deterrent than lines or detentions. The only choice you had when the option was not expulsion was to further defy authority.

I've being described as an "unusual girl" with a "typical woman's view" - I'd say that's pretty weird. wink.gif When I was at school, classroom slipperings were not seen as a last resort. They were quick and simple punishments for fairly minor misbehaviour. Usually a warning or two (or three) would be given first but, if we persisted, then it would be the slipper. I saw the slipper as a punishment for misbehaviour - lines and detentions were just the teacher being spiteful by depriving me of my free time. If I misbehaved in class and got the slipper for it, that was fair enough. I'd been punished and the slate was wiped clean - no hard feelings. Having to sit in detention or write lines would have caused resentment to build up so, although I might have tried to avoid such punishment again, I'd probably have become very unco-operative.

More serious misbehaviour meant a visit to the head. and, quite likely, the cane. Even then it wasn't a last resort when everything else had failed, it was seen as an appropriate punishment for the offence.

Can you do a paradigm shift and apply something similar to what's going on contemporaneously in your own life now or in the not too distant past where you chose a sanction considered more dreaded by most for an infraction and worked it out so you got the severe sanction in others eyes. An obvious example would be to be docked a days pay or be assigned a boring task by your boss as if you could have one. happy.gif

I'm not sure I've ever chosen a sanction more dreaded by most. Would you rather spend an hour sitting quietly in a classroom, getting bored out of your mind, or have three or four whacks with a slipper? That's essentially what my options were. Another example was the practice that some of us adopted of "forgetting" our PE kit to avoid games in cold weather. The "penalty" was the slipper and spending the lesson sitting in a warm changing room. The "penalty" for remembering our PE kit was having to spend an hour or so on a freezing cold sports field, dressed only in gym knickers, gym skirt and T-shirt.

As for being docked a day's pay or assigned a boring task, I can't really answer that. Some of my work is quite boring but it has to be done.

Have you you more to say about prof n posts on older recipient of CP? At 17 would you have felt violated if a man caned or would that be totally irrelevant?

I doubt I'd have felt violated, it's more likely I'd have felt ashamed of myself for being caught misbehaving. I agree that there is much more of a risk using CP with late adolescents. Some of that risk is due to the reasons Prof N gives but I'm sure some of it comes from conditioned expectations. Just as a lot of girls were conditioned to believe they were exempt for punishment, those who have left compulsory hold similar beliefs. As CP has been absent from UK state schools for over twenty years, both sexes have been conditioned with the same expectations. If the cane were re-introduced, I would expect to see similar levels of negative effects in both boys and girls subjected to it.

How would getting cane in front of a mixed gender class as oppose to all girls make you feel?

Sore. wink.gif I got the slipper in front of a mixed sex (and mixed gender) class several times and I got the cane with fellow miscreants of both sexes too. I didn't notice any significant difference. I think it would have been embarrassing to get it in front of a mixed sex class if only girls had been liable to CP.

It seems as if you were a high spirited and rebellious as a youngster so would you say the strictness of the school you went ameliorated those tendencies. Had you gone to a school that banned the cane what would that have done to you? Would you have been expelled after the mandatory schooling age? Did CP help reform you, so to speak, or did it make you sneaky or a little bit of both? wink.gif

I wouldn't say my school was particularly strict. Most of the rules were quite reasonable (they possibly all were, I just didn't think so at the time wink.gif ). I'm still high spirited and rebellious but I was taught where to draw the line. As I said in my reply to Dr Dominum (here), I would probably have fared reasonably well in a school with no CP at all, but not is a school with CP for boys only. I would have seen that as abusive and I very much doubt I could have spent five years in an abusive environment without suffering some negative effects.

I wouldn't say CP "reformed" me. Discipline and being treated fairly probably had the greatest effect. I don't think I'm sneaky, I certainly don't intend to be.

Being sadistic by nature I would spare you the paddle and put you into T-R. Maybe it would have to be padded. happy.gif

That would be exactly the right approach - if you wanted to turn me into an out of control hooligan. happy.gif

 
 
OZGeorge

Views.

January 27 2011, 9:43 PM 

I would like to thank MMead for his/her contribution.

The pros and cons of corporal punishment are indeed a contentious subject, and going by the number of anti-spanking web sites on the net, and the proliferation of various parenting forums which generally advocate the cessation of any form of spanking, then your views are quite obviously in the ascendant.

Corporal punishment is now all but banned in most schools in first world countries.

I understand that the paddle is still in use in some areas of the United States, and the pictures which you have posted of bruised bottoms, are no doubt considered as self evident and shocking evidence of the brutality of corporal punishment, as viewed from the perspective of the 'liberal' and 'enlightened' 21st Century.

These paddlings however,so I understand, are NOT delivered on the bare bottom, but over trousers.

The young persons in the photographs, have courageously pulled down their pants, to show off their punished bottoms, for special interest groups and the media, to further the agenda of the anti-corporal punishment lobby.

Whether such bruising is acceptable in the new millenium,will no doubt be argued back and forth by interested parties,and self-seeking talk-show anchors, whilst bringing smiles to the visages of network advertising executives,as ratings rise and revenue increases.

I have no doubt that you will be following these polemics with rapt attention.

The question which I posed when I began this particular thread was:How common was bare bottom corporal punishment in school enviroments post World War Two?

I would be delighted to be advised of any information that you may be in possession of, which would help to enlighten me on this particular question.

If you wish to debate the relative moral, ethical and sociological issues of corporal punishment on this forum,I am sure that if you began your own thread on this subject,many sharper,intellectually able and erudite minds than my own, would be itching to cross swords with you.

 
 

Re: Common Sense

January 27 2011, 10:14 PM 

Hi OZGeorge

Human beings approach wrongdoing, I am quite certain, generally by the means of a weighing-up calculation,which children are as apt to do as adults,on the likelihood of being caught.

The calculation is simply probability of being caught multiplied by the likely penalty. Is the product greater or less that the pleasure derived from breaking the rule?

If the probability = 1 (not doing homework) then it's a matter of whether doing what you wanted to do being worth more than the inevitable punishment. For example, if it came to a choice of doing homework or going to a rock concert of my favourite band, I'd go to the concert - even I knew I get the cane for not doing my homework.

I believe that if the cane had been applied as it traditionally was, on the seat of the pants, it would definately have made an awful lot of difference in my cogitations,because that HURTS, and it does not have to laid on particularly harshly to send the appropriate message for small boys.

Interesting. The found the one caning I had on my hand far more painful than any of those (except possibly my last "six of the VERY best") I had across my bum. My main fear when I was waiting to see the headmistress the first time I was caught smoking (my second caning) was that I was going to get it across my hand again. It was almost a relief when I was told to bend over. Could this be a "sex/gender difference" perhaps? happy.gif



 
 
OZGeorge

Just thinking.

January 27 2011, 10:58 PM 

This may interest Steve and Jenny in particular.

I was chatting away to my cousin Bernie, an inhabitant of Kingston in Surrey, the other evening,and mentioned the subject of this thread to him.

I was trying to get his ideas on the question,as poor old Bernie, or young Bernie in those days, got spanked and slippered on the bare bottom,as did his younger brother Cam, at their prep school back in the 60s.
More of that later.

He mentioned to me an account he remembered reading in a book, which he thinks was produced by the teacher's group against CP in British schools, called STOPP.

He says he is not sure if he still has it,but he recalled the bones of the story.

He thinks the incident took place some time in the 1970s,and involved a school in Yorkshire, which he is sure was not a private school.

A gym master slippered a class of about 20 or so boys, in the prescence of a female teacher who the boys apparently had been disrespectful to.

The boys were made to line up in their gym kit of vests and shorts,and one by one,front up to the seated master, pull down their shorts, bend over his knee and take a number of shots with the slipper on their bare bottoms.

The female teacher was sitting opposite the master,and each boy was made to apologise to her,either before or after the slippering, Bernie is not sure.

I have not yet had a chance to explore the STOPP web site, if it is in fact still extant, but I will certainly do so, to see if I can find more details.

The book must still be about somewhere I presume, and perhaps one of our merry gang on this forum may have a copy.
Bernie is going to see if he can find it,but knowing the usual state of his study, I have my doubts.

Bernie then told me that at his prep school,by far the greatest number of spankings that he received in front of the class, were from the female teachers, who at that time, actually made up more of the staff than the gentlemen.

He thinks that this was a definate policy of the school at that time,as the headmasters' wife was not only a teacher,but also to a great extent,the chief administrator.
Her husband apparently,was a chap who let his wife have her head.

It was she who had the cane discontinued, which the school prospectus so proudly stated, and was instrumental in 'feminising' the school to some extent, in that more female staff were taken on,and a more 'motherly' atmosphere was mandated.

This apparently went down very well with the more modern mothers,who were more tenderly concerned for their little boys,than their pre-war counterparts.

The embedded tradition of the school was to punish bare bottom,and it seems strange that this modernising lady campaigner did not discontinue this along with the cane.

Bernie tells me that this never even looked like happening when he and his brother attended.
He tells me, that the male teachers were reluctant to punish boys bare bottom in front of the class, and most often didn't.
If males were punishing bare bottom, it was generally in private.

The women on the other hand,invariably spanked bare bottom,more often in front of the other boys than privately.

Now here is a contentious point that he brings up, which I myself have often thought about.

He is of the opinion that a good proportion of the female teachers enjoyed baring the boys' bottoms and spanking them.

This, he says, was sensed, rather than something contemplated intellectually.

He just 'knew' it.

Bernie thinks that in such a vulnerable position, a child is exceptionally sensitive to the actions,words,gestures and all the nuances of the adult person who is, in essence,in control of his destiny.

I asked my Iris, my good lady wife, of her opinion.

She replied that it was possible, but that it was not probably a sexual reaction.

She says that she adored our litle childrens' bottoms,and that most mothers,and indeed women do, and probably for a biological reason.

Childrens' bottoms may be designed by nature to be appealing to women,as otherwise, the necessary functions of caring for children,such as nappy changing, toileting and other activities, which would be distasteful in relation to adults, are not so in little children.

This appeal may translate into the function of smacking a little childs' bottom, but it is a subliminal thing.

I have not really thought that one through yet,but comments are welcome.

I hope that this has given our redoubtable fellow posters some fuel for thought, and perhaps some ammunition for debate.

 
 

StevefromSE5

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 27 2011, 11:16 PM 

GEORGE

Since I "became of age", as it were, there's only ONE thing I've wanted to do with a shapely female bum.

And that isn't paint it, even though I've sold over 20 canvasses on eBay!!!

I wonder if "red-blooded" females have the same urges with boy's bums. That's not to say they'd go to the same lengths men would to indulge it even if 'twere so.

Although it's now going back upwards of 50 years, I'll try raking the memory banks tonight & report back. I remember a few kids at primary got smacked bare at home & I'm pretty sure in nearly every one of those cases, it was MUM doing the spanking without fail.

The question is how many of those kids were boys or girls & did their sisters/brothers get the same. I need to sleep on it & will drop the answer on tomorrow.

You're spot on-it IS intriguing!


Steve

 
 
OZGeorge

A little bit more.

January 28 2011, 9:25 AM 

Steve,I hope that your memory banks are in good working order!

It would be interesting to hear about your experiences and those of your friends.

I think that you are quite right that it was Mums who usually did the bulk of the spankings domestically.

When I was a little boy, Mums usually did not work, but stayed home to look after the kids.
The demise of this situation in more recent times,I regret very much.

Dads handed out the big spankings,of the nature of "Wait until your Father gets home!"
It was an early bath, on with your jarmys,and the awful wait in your bedroom, your ears on high pitch radar,awaiting the tell-tale sounds of Dad's arrival home, and the inevitable heavy, purposeful footsteps heading for your room.

Gad! I recall that even now with a thrill of fear and foreboding!

I had a reply to my email to my 'little' cousin Cam, asking him for his recollections of bare bottom punishments at the prep school he and his brother attended.

I won't try to post the whole thing, but will just give some edited excerpts from it that are relevant.

On the subject of the school spankings themselves,he writes:

"I knew that I would be whacked at school from listening to Pozzo and my Father talk, so I was not unprepared for it."

"It was just something that you had to put up with at school,like the lack of privacy and the lukewarm showers and the horrible,lumpy porridge we had served up to us each morning."

"The important thing was to be as stoic as possible, and just to take it without blubbing,or crying out. It was not considered the done thing to make a song and dance about it, and the staff expected this attitude,just as much as the boys did."

On the subject of whether he felt,as his brother has stated that he did,that the female teachers enjoyed baring his bottom and spanking him,he relates:

"It is simply conjecture,but it wouldn't surprise me,especially (Name of headmistress),who it seemed to me,and many of the other fellows,took a delight in the rituals of smacking us. As you know we used to whisper and giggle about it,when visiting beds in dorm after lights out."

"I have never been concerned about it. I had not even thought about it until now. I am not troubled about whether they did or they didn't.I don't see that it matters."

This rather good line to finish off with:

"If a lady was to confide to me now,that she would take great pleasure from smacking my arse, I would feel most mightily chuffed! I did not know when I was so well off then, did I?"

(Pozzo is his brother Bernie by the way.)

I have thought a little further about what Iris had to say about nature and childrens' bottoms.

I admit that I thought our kids' bottoms were very cute, when they were little, and that I did not find nappy changes and toileting particularly onerous, but that was our children.

I do not know if I would feel the same about other kids,much as I think kids are lovely.

I need some more time with this, and perhaps some more time to discuss it with Iris.

I may even ask her to contribute if she is interested.
It is her idea after all!



 
 
The Apache Kid

In my day?to damn common and to damn hard!

January 28 2011, 5:09 PM 

How common was bare bttom discipline? Well essentialy this all depends on what era are you thinking about.Also,whether or not you are reffering to caning or spanking and in what envoirement-home,school or institution.If you are looking at the Victorian era-and most people do when discussing serious discipline in iether the home-horredous spankings and canings-or the school-even much more severe and also embracing brutal birching-you need to look no further for your answer;it was bare bottom discipline or nothing.While CP has been around for centuries the world kind of reached a stalemate and the severity of correctional discipline levelled off for a while-then along came the Victorian who upped stakes,took down pants and turned a good hard dose of school and home discipline into a fine art.In their time they shredded and pulverized more bare bottoms than any other era that came before them or after.But,and be that as it may,bare bottom discipline is still more than alive to-day albeit for the most part restricted to the home aand no less than in America where it still has a healthy-if indeed you can call a soundly spanked bottom healthy!-following;it was,after all,the American mums and dads who raised the standards of spanking in the golden years of sore bottoms at bedtime way back in the 50s.But,a good bare bottom spanking was'nt exclusive to our cousins on the other side of the pond-oh no,it was equaly as well and alive down my street with my mother,my bottom and her hand making the major contribution!Sadly,and I only say this for reasons of perversion(!),all bare bottom discipline in the UK is now outlawed which is a good thing really otherwise we would'nt have all these yobs tarrorising the elderly and turning our city centers into a war zone every friday night.Right,I'm back off my high horse now!Where a spanking was-well pretty ineffective if given over a trousered bottom-a caning in the far extreme will cleave through several layers of clothing with devestating results leaving you with a painful and lasting experience and six given across the bare bottom is roughly the equivelent of being hit by a truck.While the average school boy could whithstand a headmasters six bent across his desk applied even when extreme force I would doubt very much that he could 'hold' for a bare bottom six whithout having to be held down.Yet school boys at Eaton and Harrow for example,took bare bottom caning as the norm,and can you possibly,possibly immagine how on Gods earth any lad of say 15/17 yrs old stood his ground as his headmaster layed on a viciously hard and crippling TWELVE stroke caning-but they did and from there they went on to build an Empire,and,all thanks to good old fashioned bare bottom discipline.

 
 

Another_Lurker

A plea to The Apache Kid

January 28 2011, 9:05 PM 

Hi The Apache Kid. You seem to be posting in lots of threads and I'm sure you are posting some very interesting material. I wish I could read it, I really do!

Sadly though, after years of exposure to this estimable Forum my brain simply switches off when exposed to an unbroken block of text extending for line after line after line. Despite my best efforts it auto-skips to the next post or thread.

Do you think you could perhaps try hitting the Enter key a couple of times at natural breaks in your post? I really would appreciate it very much indeed!



 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 28 2011, 10:36 PM 

Hi Jenny. A long time ago (one can't afford to take a day off now in this estimable Forum happy.gif) you said:

If you had subsequently been successful in avoiding it until one fateful day, when you were 17, your luck finally ran out, it's highly likely that being caned would have caused long term negative effects.

Hmm, I'm not so sure I entirely agree on that! The 17 year old Another_Lurker was a very different animal to the little lad who got his leg smacked in Infant School. He was a lot bigger, a lot harder, and he was cycling a couple of hundred miles every week so the portion of his anatomy where the cane would have impacted was pretty tough! I think he'd probably have survived the experience! happy.gif

And you also said:

You refrained from activities you might have wanted to engage in because of the "price" you might have to pay

Well, no I didn't, at least not in the latter years at secondary school. I was still careful but I did pretty much what I wanted to do. I think a combination of having been very good in the first couple of years and always performing very well academically effectively made me invisible where transgressions were concerned. That was probably why nobody noticed I'd stopped working around the time of the mock A-levels.

Somebody must have fingered me for something though, because I did get one detention, although I can't recall who from or what for. I also got in the Prefects' book once for running in a quad where you were supposed to walk. Only lines though, not beats. But on the whole I bore a charmed life, especially when dodging PT and cross-country runs. Not so my unfortunate younger brother! He was told more than once that sadly he was never going to be the man (or rather boy) his brother had been. He still holds it against me! happy.gifwink.gifhappy.gif



 
 
Belgian Detective

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 28 2011, 11:12 PM 

Monsieur_Lurker,

Thank you for writing the following message.

"Hi The Apache Kid. You seem to be posting in lots of threads and I'm sure you are posting some very interesting material. I wish I could read it, I really do!"

When English is not your first language it is quite difficult to read some things that are written to this forum. I also find the Apache Kid uses words and phrases I would not expect from a person who tells us his age is more than seventy years. It is most confusing.

 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 29 2011, 1:31 AM 

Hi Belgian Detective. You said:

When English is not your first language it is quite difficult to read some things that are written to this forum.

It is quite difficult, if not totally impossible, to read some things that are written to this estimable Forum even when English is your first language and you've generally been regarded as reasonably adept in it. Mind you, they were mainly originally written by long deceased Frenchmen and possibly they lose something in translation!

And you also said:

I also find the Apache Kid uses words and phrases I would not expect from a person who tells us his age is more than seventy years. It is most confusing.

You might well say that, but as so far I haven't been able to read a word he's written I couldn't possibly comment! happy.gif

 
 
Jenny

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 29 2011, 1:58 AM 

Hi Another_Lurker


Some of these threads are moving very fast. happy.gif

Hmm, I'm not so sure I entirely agree on that! The 17 year old Another_Lurker was a very different animal to the little lad who got his leg smacked in Infant School. He was a lot bigger, a lot harder, and he was cycling a couple of hundred miles every week so the portion of his anatomy where the cane would have impacted was pretty tough! I think he'd probably have survived the experience! happy.gif

I was thinking of the overall effect. No doubt you were bigger and tougher than when you were in Infant School but you'd also developed a strong aversion to CP. Having spent over ten years successfully avoiding it, being caned at seventeen would have been something of a shock. I agree you would probably have survived it but I think it would have had quite an effect on you. It wouldn't have been as much of a shock for me because I had been less successful than you in avoiding it. I was fairly used to breaking the rules and occasionally being caught. When I was caught, I expected to be punished and I wasn't often disappointed. (I'm not sure that's the correct word to use there. wink.gif ) You had been a lot more careful, either obeying the rules or taking very effective steps to avoid being found out. Just being caught would have meant your strategy had failed so that would be a blow in itself.

Well, no I didn't, at least not in the latter years at secondary school. I was still careful but I did pretty much what I wanted to do.

You were lucky if most of the things you wanted to do were allowed. Most of the things I wanted to do were against the rules - but I did them anyway. wink.gif

I think a combination of having been very good in the first couple of years and always performing very well academically effectively made me invisible where transgressions were concerned. That was probably why nobody noticed I'd stopped working around the time of the mock A-levels.

That sounds like a variation of the "Sugar and Spice" factor.

"Being good" isn't a subject I've ever had much success with and my headmistress knew better than to believe girls are well behaved.

Somebody must have fingered me for something though, because I did get one detention, although I can't recall who from or what for. I also got in the Prefects' book once for running in a quad where you were supposed to walk. Only lines though, not beats.

So you weren't the perfect little angel after all. wink.gif

But on the whole I bore a charmed life, especially when dodging PT and cross-country runs.

I didn't mind athletics in Summer. In Winter, the cold weather played havoc with my memory and frequently caused me to "forget" my PE kit so I had to spend the lesson sitting in a nice warm changing room - usually after being slippered. The cold weather seemed to affect quite a few of my friends in the same way. wink.gif Cross-country runs weren't too bad, if I forgot to "forget" my kit, because we could usually disappear somewhere for a smoke. happy.gif




 
 
KK

A translation of what Apache wrote

January 29 2011, 1:59 AM 


How common was bare bottom discipline?

Well, essentially this all depends on what era are you thinking about. Also, whether or not you are referring to caning or spanking, and in what environment - home, school or institution.

If you are looking at the Victorian era - and most people do when discussing serious discipline in either the home (horrendous spankings and canings) or the school (even much more severe, and also embracing brutal birching) you need to look no further for your answer. It was bare bottom discipline, or nothing.

While CP has been around for centuries, the World kind of reached a stalemate, and the severity of correctional discipline levelled off for a while. Then along came the Victorian who upped stakes, took down pants and turned a good hard dose of school and home discipline into a fine art. In their time, they shredded and pulverized more bare bottoms than any other era that came before them or after.

But, and be that as it may, bare bottom discipline is still more than alive today, albeit for the most part restricted to the home and no less than in America where it still has a healthy (if indeed you can call a soundly spanked bottom healthy!) following. It was, after all, the American mums and dads who raised the standards of spanking in the golden years of sore bottoms at bedtime way back in the 50s.

But, a good bare bottom spanking wasnt exclusive to our cousins on the other side of the pond - oh no. It was equally as well and alive down my street with my mother, my bottom and her hand making the major contribution! Sadly, and I only say this for reasons of perversion(!), all bare bottom discipline in the UK is now outlawed which is a good thing really otherwise we wouldnt have all these yobs terrorising the elderly and turning our city centres into a war zone every Friday night.

Right, I'm back off my high horse now! Where a spanking was well, pretty ineffective if given over a trousered bottom a caning in the far extreme will cleave through several layers of clothing with devastating results leaving you with a painful and lasting experience.

Six given across the bare bottom is roughly the equivalent of being hit by a truck. While the average school boy could withstand a headmasters six bent across his desk applied even when extreme force I would doubt very much that he could 'hold' for a bare bottom six without having to be held down. Yet, school boys at Eton and Harrow for example, took bare bottom caning as the norm.

Can you possibly, possibly imagine how on Gods earth any lad of say 15/17 yrs old stood his ground as his headmaster laid on a viciously hard and crippling TWELVE stroke caning - but they did and from there they went on to build an Empire, and, all thanks to good old fashioned bare bottom discipline.

 
 
OZGeorge

Just depends.

January 29 2011, 10:42 PM 

ANOTHER LURKER opined that getting the cane as a 17 year old would have been quite bearable, and not likely to affect him too much, due to his 'buns of steel' from riding his bicycle miles and miles.

Well yes! And no!
I rather think that it would depend a great deal on who it was doing the caning.
Certainly an older boy would be better able to tolerate pain than a much younger child, as he has more life experience to draw upon,and subsequently will have evolved some processes of pain management.

A rock hard bottom is not necessarily a specific against the pain inflicted by corporal punishmnent.

The buttocks consist chiefly of the dermis,subcutaneous fat,connective tissue and skeletal muscle.
The buttocks are well innervated and plentifully supplied with nociceptors,(pain receptors),and the transmission channels are as open as anywhere else on the body.

It is also well documented that emotional factors,such as anxiety and fear, can increase the perception of pain,particularly if the person feels that he has no control over the painful situation.

The more the focus of attention on the anticipation of pain,the more intense will be the experience.
All of these factors will be present when a person is to be caned.

Also, if the perception of the person is that the caning is likely to be severe, this will also increase the factors mentioned.

I can only speak from my own life experience,to give a view on the caning of an older boy.

At my school, headmasters'canings were an infrequent event, but they were harsh.
Caning in the senior school was quite rare.
Senior boys were expected to have attained some maturity.

I recall only one caning in senior school, when I was in grade 11.
There were two boys involved.

They were in my class, but in a different house and were boarders.
I did not pal with them.
They were quite good boxers and they threw their weight around a bit too much for my liking, especially with kids in the junior school.
They were considered 'bloods',as they excelled at running and athletic events.

So they were not weeds or wimps, and would have been no strangers to physical pain and endurance as boxers.

Anyway,they got caught out,basically demanding money with menaces from junior boys in their boarding house, and the prefects got onto it, and it went to the head.

We thought that they may be expelled,but apparently parents were communicated with, and it was decided that they would be severely caned by the headmaster for their sins.

This was no joke, and even though I thought their actions were beyond contempt, I could still feel sorry for them, because I had been there, so to speak.

They were called up before the school assmembly one morning, chewed out publicly by the head,and sent off to his office.
They looked pretty hang-dog as they went I can assure you.

When the head, his cane in hand, returned them to our classroom later, it was truly a pitiful sight.

These strapping boys were a mess, bravely trying to hold back, but not quite succeeding.
Tears were all too obvious,and from the way that they held themselves, you could see that their bottoms must have been absolutlely killing them with pain.
It was pathetic to see one of them had a snotty nose,and was too much in anguish to even notice.

How they managed to sit at their desks eventually, I do not know.
They sat with their heads cradled in their arms, either from pain or shame or both.
Our teacher ignored them, which was a wise move.

So if the 17 year old Another Lurker had fronted up for a little tete-a-tete with my big,muscular ex-rugby fullback headmaster,I have a feeling that he may not have fared quite so well as he thinks.
LOL.

Somebody else asked somewhere here, whether we would rather have had 4 cuts on the clothed bottom or two on the bare bottom, I think in relationthat the bare bottom would be worse.
Frankly,from my headmaster,I'd have taken the two cuts bare.
I cannot see how they could have been any worse than over two thin layers of cloth stretched tight across your bum.
My heads cane was devastating,and although clothes may give one a psychological comfort of some protection,in reality it provided little or none.




 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 30 2011, 1:13 AM 

Hi Jenny. With reference to my saying that in the latter years at secondary school I did pretty much what I wanted to do, you said above:

You were lucky if most of the things you wanted to do were allowed.

That's not what I said. wink.gif See my remark with reference to early good behaviour and academic performance rendering me invisible where transgressions were concerned. Not that I needed the benefit of invisibility very often of course - except for the PT and cross country runs! happy.gif



Hi Belgian Detective. You said above:

I also find the Apache Kid uses words and phrases I would not expect from a person who tells us his age is more than seventy years. It is most confusing.

I declined to comment in my original response, since I had not succeeded in reading any of the Apache Kid's posts. Now however I have to agree with you. 'YEAH RIGHT' is indeed quite unusual usage for a seventy year old. And sadly he doesn't seem to be heeding my little hint re paragraphing despite KK's effort illustrating how much more readable this would make the posts. sad.gif



Hi OZGeorge. You said above:

So if the 17 year old Another Lurker had fronted up for a little tete-a-tete with my big,muscular ex-rugby fullback headmaster,I have a feeling that he may not have fared quite so well as he thinks. LOL.

I don't normally respond to people who use the atrocious LOL. ROFL is the form used by persons of taste and discrimination! happy.gif However I'll make an exception in your case.

The relationship between Another_Lurker and school canes has exercised several contributors to this estimable Forum. KK had an entire thread on it here. I would point out that the only claim I made for Another_Lurker's probable reaction to the cane in the post you comment on was:

I think he'd probably have survived the experience!

Unless therefore you are claiming that your big,muscular ex-rugby fullback Headmaster regularly killed people by caning them there would seem to be no valid basis for your comment. wink.gif

 
 
prof.n

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 30 2011, 2:01 AM 


Hi Another Lurker,

I think he'd probably have survived the experience!

I think that's a pretty safe bet. !

I've told this one many times before I'm sure, but, just to rattle purists of the genre ............

Before my fist caning , I was quite scared. The acting deputy head who was about to administer it was known as a hard caner ( No she didn't play rugby or golf, just squash, dodge ball and tennis). I have said elsewhere I knew her well outside school , as she was my girlfriends mother,( probably a better reason than ever to be fearful!). Sensing my disquiet sad.gif as she got ready sad.gifsad.gif she turned to me , and I suppose to lift the atmosphere said,

'Don't look so worried, I haven't killed anybody ..........yet.'

Surprisingly , even I survived, so I guess, Another Lurker, you are on pretty safe ground with that statement:)


 
 
OZGeorge

ROFL?????

January 30 2011, 8:36 AM 

A-L,I have no doubt that if you had met my estimable headmaster,for a little session of CP, you would definately have survived the experience.

No,he didn't kill anybody!

At least I don't think he did!

I think that riding hundreds of miles on your bike that week, sitting on your 'buns of steel', would perhaps have had to be postponed... perhaps the week after too!!!!

What in the name of all the gods is ROFL?????

LOL!

 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: ROFL?????

January 30 2011, 11:22 AM 

Hi OZGeorge. You asked:

What in the name of all the gods is ROFL?????

This instructional diagram, taken from Demotivator's Blog, a well known source of technical advice on acronyms and other matters, may be of assistance to you.

Note that both LOL and ROFL will help to make you an all-round good egg and aid longevity, but ROFL is superior because it will also keep you fit and enable you to enjoy those added years! wink.gif

You also said:

I think that riding hundreds of miles on your bike that week, sitting on your 'buns of steel', would perhaps have had to be postponed... perhaps the week after too!!!!

The problem wouldn't have been the next two weeks' training, it would have been how to cycle the 7 miles home that afternoon! Still, our Honorary Life Member Halfpenny managed it after one of her canings so I'm sure I'd have found a way. It was only a razor thin racing saddle1 anyway, more a pivot point than a seat! happy.gif

BTW, that's your second exceptional response despite your use of LOL. You only get three! happy.gif

Note 1:  In checking my links prior to posting I note that Demotivator has just added new instructional material, and one item on the current front page of the blog is highly relevant to this discussion (direct link here). happy.gifwink.gifhappy.gif

 
 
The Apache Kid

Can you read this ?

January 30 2011, 2:28 PM 

Mr Lurker-jan 28 20011. Hi,The Apache Kid here.I do appologize for my 'unbroken ramblings'but I have to point out that this is my first computer and I spent the whole of the first week just trying to switch it on;also I'm pushing the wrong side of 80 where what I really need is a care nurse,a bath chair and have my food fed through a straw.I do know what you mean by one continual solid block of text but I did try on one occassion to break it up into paragraphs and in doing so I managed,quite magnificently I might add, to wipe the an hours work off the screen in seconds and had not the computer been chained down it would have gone out of the window!So,once again my appologies and do try and read what I have 'wroted',you might find it interesting because there's vary little mention of 'throbbing bottoms,marathon hairbrushings and canings 20yr old nylon clad blonds applying soothing lotions wholesale and least of all' fearsome birch weilding matrons!My very best regards,The Apache Kid.

 
 
The Apache Kid

Dig this daddyo!

January 30 2011, 3:07 PM 

Hi Mr Lurker and Mr Belgium Detective.Actualy I'm on the wrong side of 80 BUT,that doesn't mean to say I'm not 'with it' modern phrase wise,no whatamean man,like? You see,and though this may sound a little strange to you,through the natural processes of nature-you know,gettin'laid like,I do happen to have grandchildren and between them they've quite managed to turn their doddering ol'granddad into a streetwise ol'kat,know whattamin'.All they have to do now in order to complete the process is to show me how to use this 'well wicked' computer!Best regards.The Apache Kid,warts an' all!

 
 
prof.n

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 30 2011, 7:06 PM 


Hi Apache kid,

As someone who believes computers should ease our lives, not us devote ourselves selflessly to them , let me try and help.

To paragraph just press the return key....the big fat one with the bent arrow , towards I assume the right hand side of your main key block, and (PROVIDED YOUR MOUSE ISN'T POINTING AT SOMETHING CLEVER), you should make a paragraph. But let me offer one piece of friendly advice. Some of the less laid back on this forum don't like too much white space either, so I suggest not more than two lines spacing (TWO presses of the return key)

Copyright 'totally inclusive computer skills from press the on switch to how to lose your entire data in one simple lesson' ( only kidding )

Nev.


 
 
hcj

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

January 30 2011, 7:25 PM 

Apache Kid wrote: Hi Mr Lurker and Mr Belgium Detective.Actualy I'm on the wrong side of 80 BUT,that doesn't mean to say I'm not 'with it' modern phrase wise,no whatamean man,like? You see,and though this may sound a little strange to you,through the natural processes of nature-you know,gettin'laid like,I do happen to have grandchildren and between them they've quite managed to turn their doddering ol'granddad into a streetwise ol'kat,know whattamin'.

I suspect, then, that your grandchildren are hiding behing the sofa and wearing paper bags over their heads in embarrassment.

 
 
The Apache Kid

Computers and coa coa

January 30 2011, 8:05 PM 

PROF.N. Hi Thanks for your kindly advice,the World could do with more like you.Anyway I can't find a bent arrow anywhere but I havne'nt given up yet-I'll try again later when I've had my coa coa!---Hi HCJ,just love those initials,sounds like a wall street big shot!Anyway thanks for the comments but if I catch my grandkids anywhere near my computer they'll be wearing more than paper bags over their heads-think plaster casts!Just joking,love 'em to bits.

 
 
The Apache Kid

Seek and ye will find

January 30 2011, 8:29 PM 

PROF.N.!!! I've found it!! One bent arrow!!But why does it say ENTER,enter what? PROF you've started something,let's both back out while we can! I owe you my friend,The Apache Kid,complete with bent arrow.

 
 
KK

Keyboard

January 30 2011, 8:48 PM 

[linked image]

The bent arrow key may be called "Enter" rather than "Return".

Press it once to finish the paragraph.

Press it again to leave a blank line to space paragraphs.

 
 
The Apache Kid

How on earth do you do it?!!

January 30 2011, 9:26 PM 

KK,what can I say? You went to all that trouble-and don't tell me it was'nt-just to show lil' ol' cocoa drinker me how to do paragraphes so here goes.

WOW!! Just check out The Apache Kid now!next stop-my own forum! Whoa,some other time maybe.Right now lets just settle for paragraphs if only just to keep my Lurker friend happy.

One final thing.How on this Gods earth did you manage to post a PHOTOGRAPH of a key board!!you guys never cease to amaze me.But,can you recite the FULL lyrics of 'NELLIE DEAN'? No? niether can I but I do play a mean rock guitar!

Hey [check out the paragraph shift]anyway thanks a group you guys,easier to make someones day than to ruin it eh?

 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: Computers and coa coa

January 30 2011, 9:57 PM 

Hi Apache Kid. I am making determined efforts to peruse your posts, though the implementation of the advice both Prof.n and I have given you regarding the 'Enter' key would greatly assist my full appreciation! happy.gif

Over 80! Hmm, and here's me a mere youth of 68! We did have a substantial contributor and Honorary Life Member, a wartime Headmaster who entertained us until well into his 90s but sadly he has not posted for some time. I was most impressed that despite his age he was able to follow my instructions on how to download and view some tricky to access videos someone had referenced.

A little group of us here pride ourselves on being able to solve most computer problems that contributors encounter, as witness the advice from Prof.n and KK above. If you do have any problems please don't hesitate to ask.

You mention losing posts. I'm afraid that this is a continual problem with Network54. The only certain way to insure against it is to prepare your posts in a text processing program (but preferably NOT Microsoft Word), saving your work regularly and then copy and paste the result into the posting window when it is complete. If you'd like to try this we'd need to know what operating system you use (Windows version, MAC OS, Linux etc.) to provide instructions.

Meantime if you use Windows (and I think Linux1) the magic Ctrl-z, posted by one of our Senior Computer Advisers, Mr Alan Turing, will sometimes restore disappearing text in unintended editing contingencies. As easy as 1, 2, 3! Try it if all seems lost:
  1. Hold down the Ctrl key (bottom left of keyboard).

  2. Tap the z key briefly once.

  3. Release the Ctrl key.
Note 1:  Is that correct please Jenny?



 
 
The Apache Kid

Thanks guys but one confusion at a time ok!

January 30 2011, 10:20 PM 

Mr Lurker-I didn't know you were 68,you write much younger!I have to take my hat off to you Sir,you certainly know your computers and the first time I saw one of my posts come up on the screen I fell out of my chair and considered my self an expert but after reading your kind,but no less imformed instructions,I now consider myself a raw beginner-
BUT I CAN PARAGRAPH NOW,YIPEE! Anyway,thanks again far all your help and concern and I do hope that you get around to reading my posts.Sincerest regards,The Apache Kid-HEY!You guys are 5 star!

 
 
Jenny

Re: Computers and coa coa

January 30 2011, 10:23 PM 

Hi Another_Lurker and The Apache Kid

Meantime if you use Windows (and I think Linux1) the magic Ctrl-z, posted by one of our Senior Computer Advisers, Mr Alan Turing, will sometimes restore disappearing text in unintended editing contingencies. As easy as 1, 2, 3! Try it if all seems lost:

1. Hold down the Ctrl key (bottom left of keyboard).

2. Tap the z key briefly once.

3. Release the Ctrl key.

Note 1: Is that correct please Jenny?

It works with Firefox (the web browser) on Linux. I usually use the "Undo" and "Redo" options on Firefox's "Edit" menu. Ctrl+z (lower case 'z') is the same as "Undo" and Ctrl+Shift+Z is the same as "Redo".


 
 
The Apache Kid

A freind in need.....

January 31 2011, 2:56 AM 

Hi,the lovely Jenny and my new found friend Mr Lurker.
Just check this out.I've actualy made a PARAGRAPH!! Not bad for an 80+yre old what! could'nt have done it without you guys though-I owe ya.Ilooked through all your instructions and to me they look like the co-ordinates of flight path to the moon! But thanks anyway.Oh,and to show you how much I appreciate your help,I got up in the middle of the night to post this! Time for another paragraph change methinks.
Did you see that? there's no end to my new found talent! Hey,enough already otherwise I'll be paragraphing all night.My sincerest regards to you both-was you that posted the key board picture was'nt it? All the best,The Apache Kid****kisses for Jenny.

 
 
Ketta

Paragraph

January 31 2011, 9:12 AM 

Apache Kid


Methinks you forgot something ?

"I see no paragraphs"

Your not going to be one of those difficult learners are you happy.gif There are consequences






 
 
The Apache Kid

Methinks I'll try again

January 31 2011, 10:10 AM 

Ketta,I'm trying I'm trying!

Howes about that then? By the way,about these 'consequences'-tell me more,I could be interetsd.You do take Visa,don't you?! All the best,The Apache Kid.

PS.Is it extra for going bare?

 
 

STOPP and bare bottom discipline

January 31 2011, 3:39 PM 

In a posting on January 27 2011 OzGeorge refers an incident described in a book produced by a group of UK teachers against CP. If I remember correctly the group was called "Society of Teachers Opposed to Physical Punishment" (STOPP) and the book was called "A Last Resort?"

I no longer have a copy of the book but I do remember that the incident took place in a grammar school in Yorkshire; however I don't think there was a female teacher present during the punishment.

I have found this excerpt in an old file on my PC but I can't promise that it's an exact copy of the original:

A student physical education teacher had complained to the regular
master of the "lack of cooperation" from a class of 23 fifteen year
old boys. At the start of their gym lesson two days later, the boys,
who were already bare to their waists, were ordered to take off their
gym shorts and do a touch-toe trunk-bend, to receive two strokes on
the backside with a leather slipper. Although the boys were
not ordered to queue naked for their whacking, some boys took
off their shorts at the start and remained naked until the finish of
the punishment. One of the boys was reported as saying "You felt you
were a fool, and that the other lads were fools too. Away from the gym
you would have thought you would have done something about a
situation like that, but instead there you were standing with nowt
on, looking at the other lads who were the same, and you felt you were
all just a bunch of kids and you couldn't do anything about the
situation".


I remember a couple of other things from the book. The boy who described the incident added quite openly that the complaint from the student teacher was justified. And it seems that none of the boys' parents made a formal complaint to the school, though one parent who mentioned the incident later to the headmaster in an informal setting was told that it wouldn't happen again.

Paul

 
 
OZGeorge

Another county heard from.

January 31 2011, 11:28 PM 

First of all, I would like to thank Paul very much for his contribution,regarding the extract from the STOPP publication.

It is not quite the same as my Cousin's description,but as he has misplaced his copy of the book, it is likely that the two versions meet in the middle somewhere.

I think that it does tend to highlight the fact,that such punishments, although no doubt relatively uncommon, nevertheless, were certainly not unknown in Britain,even in the latter part of the last century.

One of Apache Kids' postings a while back,tended to suggest that the United States may be a fertile area for hunting in relation to bare bottom punishment in schools.

After all,a tradition of bare bottom punishment domestically, was practically a hallmark of descriptions of American childhood in literature and other media, up until the late 1950s anyway.
I therefore asked a pal of mine in the United States, with whom I correspond, his opinion of this phenomenom.
His reply to me was interesting.
He asked that I view a movie entitled 'Joe the King',concentrating on the first part showing the hero as a small boy at school,and after that, to contact him again.

I watched this movie as bidden. The scene involved the little boy playing the young Joe, having his pants pulled down in front of a mixed classroom of kids, and spanked across his female teacher's knee on his bare bottom.
(I have posted this in more detail on another thread.)

I then contacted my friend once again, and he said that I had now witnessed a dramitised, yet still fairly authentic flashback,of what actually happened in some elementary schools across the United States up until the 1960s at least.

His elementary school, in what he describes as 'Small Town USA', in the rural mid-west in the 1950s,was similar, he believes,to many others outside the big cities.

His town was very insular, with little in the way of mobility in or out, people tending to be born and to die there.
Family units were large and close, and everybody knew everybody else.
The teachers at the elementary school tended to stay a long time, and many of the parents of my friend's generation had been taught by them.
The headmistress, or principal,he described as having been there 'forever'.

There was a very deep religiousness and conservatism within the area,with many families of German, Austrian and Swedish heritage,and bare bottom discipline in the home was pretty much universal,being looked upon as the traditional,natural and most effective method of punishing disobediant children.

My friend believes that this acceptance of bare bottom punishment translated to the school,and had the unspoken,but firm support of parents.

My friend explained that both girls and boys who were sent to the school principal's office, were spanked on the bare bottom,either with her heavy hand, or a paddle shaped like a sort of outsize soup spoon.

Some teachers were also prone to spank bare bottom in the classroom,but in privacy,and only as an alternative to sending the child to the principal.
(My friend says that personally, he could see no real difference, as the principal spanked no harder or longer than the teachers did.)

Although girls could be spanked,they rarely were, and most girly sins were dealt with by other methods.
(No doubt in principle,similar to Dr. D's inductive methods.)
Boys were by far the most likely to suffer spanking,and for lesser sins than the girls.(Sorry Jenny.)

Returning to the "Joe the King" scene, my correspondant described for me an episode like that which he had witnessed in the fifth grade.

Three boys had apparently been caught trying to lift some girls' skirts up, and wedgie their panties during the lunch recess.
He does not know if the girls were willing participants.
At any rate, they were caught at it by a teacher,and subsequently sent to the principal's office.

They were not in class after the break,but were marched in by the principal some ten minutes or so later,looking very frightened and hang-dog.
The principal harrangued them in front of the class,excoriating them for their heinous,fiendish,filthy sins.

She then told the boys, that since they were so keen on seeing girls bare bottoms,the girls would be given an equal opportunity to see theirs.
She took the class teachers chair to the front,sat down on it, and ordered the boys to line up beside her.

She then ordered them to pull down their pants,which they did,reluctantly but inexorably.
Their shirt tails covered them for the most part,but all the same, to have to take one's pants down in front of the class, especially girls,was humiliating enough on its own.

The principal took them one by one across her knee,lifted their shirt tails up their backs,and spanked them long and ferociously on their bare bottoms.
She made each boy, after his spanking,stand with his back to the class, and would not let them pull their pants back up until told to do so by her.

The boys were all crying and sobbing at the end,more from the indignity than the spanking,my friend believes.
They were once again scolded for their dirtiness and held up to scorn, before being allowed to pull their pants back up,and return to their desks.

My friend says that the girls were all laughing and twittering and obviously enjoying themselves during this, but the boys in the class, were generally solemn.
He himself, he relates, sat through it with a cold feeling of numbness and fear.

All the rest of his time at the elementary school was coloured by the trepidation that the same may happen to him.
In other words, a bare bottom spanking at home, or in privacy at school, was accepted and unremarkable,but to have it administered in front of witnesses,and in front of girls,was not,and frightened him terribly.
My correspondent adds that his parents went to the same school,and both told him he was very lucky, as such scenes in class happened frequently in their day.
He wonders now, if such punishment, or even its threat, may have been many times more effective than just a spanking, and maybe that is why teachers had been so keen to use it in those days.

When I inquired of him, if he thought that the teachers had enjoyed spanking the kids, in class,or otherwise,he replied that he thought that they had certainly enjoyed the power that they exercised over the children.
Interestingly,as other people have stated to me,he only ever recalled it being applied by women,never men.
(Again-sorry Jenny. I am only repeating what I am told.)

This is only one account by one person,and I do not want to try to extrapolate from this one incident, a suggestion that such punishment was in general use.

However,by viewing the movie 'Joe the King',and recalling that it was based on an auto-biographical work, leads one to suspect that it was at least not too uncommon,as the teacher concerned must be presumed to have spanked more children bare bottom in front of the class,than just the unfortunate Joe.

It is at least indicative that in the USA,it was perhaps more common in the public school system than elsewhere.

 
 

Another county heard from.

February 1 2011, 2:00 AM 

Hi OZGeorge

Although girls could be spanked,they rarely were, and most girly sins were dealt with by other methods.
(No doubt in principle,similar to Dr. D's inductive methods.)
Boys were by far the most likely to suffer spanking,and for lesser sins than the girls.(Sorry Jenny.)


.......

When I inquired of him, if he thought that the teachers had enjoyed spanking the kids, in class,or otherwise,he replied that he thought that they had certainly enjoyed the power that they exercised over the children.
Interestingly,as other people have stated to me,he only ever recalled it being applied by women,never men.
(Again-sorry Jenny. I am only repeating what I am told.)

I don't know what you're apologizing to me for. Your friend's stories support what I've said in various posts here. See the The Pleasure of Pain thread for example.

That's also one of the reasons I wouldn't support a ban on cross-sex CP. It would make things worse for girls because, in my experience, female teachers tended to be more severe.


 
 
OZGeorge

Thank you Jenny.

February 1 2011, 5:20 AM 

Thank you for your post Jenny.
I suppose that I should be a little more scrupulous in reading through the threads,as I misunderstood your viewpoint.

From the casual 'research' that I have been accumulating, it would appear that male teachers were far less likely to physically punish girls,even though the circumstances may be identical to a situation where a male child would be physically chastised by them.

However, since it appears that the ladies are less forth-coming in descriptions of their CP adventures at school, this is not an easy task to substantiate.

Certainly,the indications that I have, is that male teachers did not punish girls bare bottom at all, and punished girls infrequently anyway.

Women,on the other hand,were more likely than males to punish both sexes bare bottom, but generally girls fared a good deal better than boys did.

Male teachers were more likely to punish a boy bare bottom in single sex boys schools, and in the insulated community of a boarding school in particular.

The dynamic that seems to leap out at me as I review these anecdotes, is that women were far more likely to punish bare bottom in any institution, especially in the same single sex and boarding situations as I mentioned.

Also,that they were far more likely to do so in front of other children or adults.

The reason for this,appears to me,that women felt much more comfortable and protected in their dealings with children than males did.

I believe that it was assumed that females were more 'motherly' and that their motives were basically pure,and free from desires.

Males on the other hand, were perceived as the 'dominant' sex, and sexual interest may be presumed,rightly or wrongly, making males a good deal more careful in what they did, particularly in relation to the opposite sex.

Ever since the age of 12,when I inadvertantly heard my Mum's female school-teacher cousin, utter that she gained a great deal of satisfaction from smacking naughty boys on the bottom, and I listened to their amused titters, I have been niggled by the question of whether women liked to spank boys' bottoms?

Now I admit that I only heard this snippet of conversation in isolation, and I do not know in what context it was meant.

But this revealation utterly stopped me in my tracks at the time,and in my just pubescent state,set of a whole series of sexual and emotional roller-coasters,which I have ridden to this day.

I cannot deny, if I may be so blunt here, that I fantasised and masturbated over memories of the spankings that I had received from my female primary school teachers,with the dominant thought that the teacher actually spanked me because she liked my bottom,and that spanking me was exciting for her.

Such is the way that adult interests, I will not say obsessions, can occur.
I have no doubt that my boyish fantasies were a great exaggeration of what the truth actually was in the real world.

Nevertheless, my casual researches, and my musings upon them, would tend to lead me to the conclusion that females DID indeed gain some sort of gratifacation in their CP dealings with boys.

Whether this was associated with power over a male,even a not fully grown male,or simply the enjoyjment of power for its own sake,or a sexual or sado/masochistic element, or even a combination of them all,there had to be a reason,apart from tradition,as to why a female teacher would pull our shorts up our bottoms to spank our exposed cheeks,or boys were spanked and slippered on the bare bottom, especially if done in front of a mixed class with girls in attendance.

Was it in some way a demonstration by the female teacher to the girls, of her ability to shame boys, and perhaps as a 'treat' for the watching girls?

Jenny,you would be far better qualified to answer this question than I.
As I have stated before,my wife believes that childrens' bottoms may awake some sort of biological response of the maternal instinct,that may make them extremely attractive to mothers, and also to women in general,including teachers.
It would be interesting to have your views on this.

 
 
The Apache Kid

All over bare the shouting

February 1 2011, 8:07 PM 

A final word on this-I promise!

Not for once in my childhood did I ever consider that bare bottom discipline was anything out of the ordinary As kids way back in the 30s and 40s you just accepted that if you were sent up to your room to get ready for a good spanking you automaticaly expected it to be on the bare bottom and to the point where you would take your own trousers down without having to be told.

I along with many other kids in my street got spanked and spanked damn hard almost as a matter of routine and came to accept it.You broke the rules,you got a spanking.It was as simple as that.OK,so at the time it hurt,realy hurt the way a bare bottom spanking is supposed to.You kicked and squirmed against the pain,the stinging was relentless but it made no difference because hardly had your bottom cooled down from one good spanking you were back up in your bedroom with trousers down feeling another!

Having said that,and while you automaticaly associated a bare bottom with a spanking not for one minute did you ever associate a caning with a bare bottom.It was never done.Certainly you were caned and caned damn hard but never with your trousers down-unless of course you were unfortunate enough to have parents that could afford to send you to Eaton then you would get a rude awakening as you bared your bottom for the first time in your life for some REAL discipline.

So yes,bare bottom discipline was certainly what any misbehaving kid came to expect,and got,in my youth but for the most part it was confined within the home and seen more as a parental method of discipline and quite often a good long hard spell across your mothers knee in the privacy of your bedroom could prove to be just as intolerable sometimes as a school caning and,for that,it needed to be one hell of a spanking but in order for it to felt to that degree-it would have to be given,and given hard,over the bare bottom-and it was.

 
 
OZGeorge

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

February 1 2011, 9:52 PM 

Apache Kid, I agree with you concerning the use of bare bottom punishment in the home.

My siblings and myself were spanked on the bare bottom by our parents,as were my cousins and the great majority of the kids in my neighbourhood and my pals from school.

This was in the 1950s and 1960s.

My wife and myself spanked our kiddies on the bare bottom when they were young,albeit less frequently and considerably less harshly than we ourselves had received it.

It was what we were both used to,and it seemed perfectly natural to do so.
Indeed,it seemed so unremarkable,that I don't think we did more than touch upon it as we discussed discipline when we were expecting our first child.

I have since discerned,that in other states of this country,and indeed even within certain areas of this state,bare bottom domestic spanking was not the norm,and indeed,some folk that I have spoken to quite innocently about it,have reacted with surprise and shock.

My guess is that it depends upon the era,the area,the social norms and ethnic background and values of the population, as to whether bare bottom CP is acceptable or not.

I agree also,that the cane is not usually associated with bare bottom punishment.

My Uncle was certainly caned that way at his prep-school,which was a very traditional institution at the time,in the 1940s,and I have heard maybe one other anecdote of it happening, also at a boarding school,but I do not believe that it was general at all.

To be frank,having experienced a severe caning myself,I do not believe that it would have made a mote of difference to the agony I suffered,even if I did have my trousers down.

Bare bottom whackings at Eton and other public schools,and indeed in many private schools and other institutions,were very common up until the latter decades of the 19th century.

This was due to the preference for flogging the boys with the traditional birch-rod, which is totally ineffective on the clothed seat.

The birch eventually gave way to the cane,one reason for which,I believe,was the distaste and disgust which Victorian mothers felt at the shameful baring of their sons' bottoms for punishment.

No doubt they felt that the cane applied over trousers to be more in keeping with dignity and modesty.

If that was the reason,they were not really doing their sons an awful lot of favours,because a hard,severe caning could be every bit as agonising as the birch,perhaps more so.

I have read,that boys who were in a position to make a comparison,voted a caning by an athletic sixth form prefect to be many times worse than the birch laid on by an older,scholarly master or headmaster, who may have become quite mechanical and lax in punishing after years of having to do so.

My original question on beginning this thread, was how common was CP of all sorts in schools, generally post WW2, and if you possess any material or anecdotal evidence, or wish to share in the discussion I raised as to why teachers would use this punishment,I would be delighted if you would share it with us.



 
 
The Apache Kid

Re how common was bare bottom discipline

February 1 2011, 11:42 PM 

Hi Mr OZGeorge.Thanks for the interest shown in my post.Appreciate it.Anyway,here's an insight into what CP was like at my school way back and when.

At the end of WW11 I was about 15 yrs old and at a boarding school that I don't wish to name as I still go back there at times on Old Boys Day albeit there's not that many of 'class '45 left!

Yes,we were caned and very severly I might add but never on the bare bottom;cane a boy hard enough and there's no need.

It was usualy six,rarely ever less,but twelve would be given for very serious infractions and as a pre expulsion caning administered in front of the whole school at the end of assembly.Because this caning was so severe it would be administered in two bouts-six in the morning in public,the second six later in the afternoon in the headmasters study.

I myself was only ever caned once at the school.I was 14,full of myself and got caught doing things behind the French teacher that I ought not have been doing and in consequence she marched me straight down to the heads study but he was'nt in.So she left me standing in the corridor outside while she went to find him.Well the obvious outcome had to be a caning,and even more obvious it would realy be a hard felt six-and it was.

Dorm'time was inspection time,a time when boys that had been freshly caned would compare weals and bruising an there was very rarely a bottom on display showing less than six and ganeraly the grouping was pheonominal,a true work of art!

As a rule one realy good hard caning was all a boy ever needed and it would see him through to the end of his school days.Those few that did need another visit to the headmasters study for another tremendous six were damn fools but also heroes! As for myself I was a hero too but with cowards legs and the first inckling that there might be a stiff six in the offing you would find me in the next county!

Well Mr OZ George I hope my little account of what a post war caning was like meets with all your expectations but not necsessarily in the same way it met my 15 year old bottom! Sincerest regards,The Apache Kid.

 
 
OZGeorge

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

February 2 2011, 10:05 AM 

Thank you Apache Kid for your reply.

I think that your Headmaster must have had the same thoughts regarding caning as my secondary school Headmaster.

I too was caned but once,along with my best mate,in our first term, aged 12.
Four of the best,not six like you,but they were very juicy all the same!

I believe that our Head went by the principle of get them early,cane them hard,make it hurt badly enough so that they will remember it,and then they will not re-offend.

Sort of a case of being cruel to be kind, and he was essentially a very kind and caring man, as I found when I got to know him better as a Senior prefect.

Now it was a very severe caning, it did hurt excruciatingly, and I did remember it, and I didn't re-offend.

Wild horses couldn't have dragged me into any situation that may have resulted in a repeat performance.

Today,such a caning would no doubt be condemned out of hand,and my Headmaster would doubtless be condemned as a brutal child abuser,and in all likelihood, would be prosecuted.

I had raised weals which took about a week and a bit to disappear,very extensive bruising on my bottom for over 3 weeks,and sitting was painful,and then uncomfortable for nearly a week.

My parents had no sympathy for me,although my Mum fussed a bit,but they reckoned I had received that which I had asked for,and to be fair,my friend and I had been right little tear-aways,and had pushed and pushed our form-master to the absolute limit and a bit over.

We had been given plenty of warnings that if we continued our misbehaviour we would be sent for the cane,so we really had nobody to blame but ourselves.

I don't honestly believe that the Head liked what he had to do,which was essentially to reduce two cheeky little 12 year olds,to quivering,pain-wracked,sobbing little wrecks.

I don't think that he liked to using the cane at all really,but I believe that he thought it was his duty,and that it was kinder to be harsh at the outset,than to have to keep using the cane over and over,because the kids did not fear it.

I now think that such an attitude is emminently sensible,as what is the good of a deterent punishment if it does nor deter?

Quite possibly your Head used the same reasoning?


 
 
The Apache Kid

A fly on the wall

February 2 2011, 1:30 PM 

Have you ever wondered how long it was just after opening it's doors for the first time to all those young,privelaged and unsuspecting few that Eaton dished out its first ever birching?

Of course,we'll never know will we, but that does'nt mean to say that we can't create a light hearted scenario does it?

So,twenty five minutes after opening its doors for the first time we have the headmaster standing at the main enterance,impatient,restless and twitching from the dire need to flog someone,anyone,for whatever reason,for no reason-flog 'em first,find a reason after.

"HEY you boy! yes you!what are you looking so pleased about.This is Eaton sir,and we don't allow smiling,breathing yes, smiling no"..."Eh"..."Never mind,come with me"

Then,thinking to himself once inside his all brand new study "Hmm,should be a birching block round here somewhere" then aloud "Say boy,you did'nt just happen to see a birching block on your way in did you?"..."Eh"..."Never mind,pull your pants down anyway and get over the desk,more,get over more damn it boy! that's it,fine,just hold it there while go fetch the birch.-No birch damn it!what kind of school is this.First no block,then no birch!"..."Er,I think you'll find a cane in the drawer Sir,that's where my father keeps his"..."Hmm,good lad,an extra dozen for that methinks.Ha yes! one cane.Hmm,nice length,good wieght,this should chew his privelaged backside up some,what!

"Er,an extra dozen Sir,bit steep isn't.After all I did find you a cane s-"INSOLENCE!!How dare you Sir dictate the terms of your caning,next thing you'll be asking for soothing lotion.Anyway,I do see your point.Let's say a three dozen then,can't be any fairer than that-brace yourself!!..."Eh"

Oh to have been a fly on the wall...


 
 
OZGeorge

Bloody bills!

February 2 2011, 10:10 PM 

It may be of interest for you to know, that contained within the itemised account sent to a boy's parents of the terms' school fees for Eton College, was a charge of one guinea for birch-rods.

This fee was included whether the young fellow had been birched that term or not.

No doubt the boy's Father would be quite put out,if his hopeful son had not misbehaved sufficiently to have received at least one flogging.

"How dare you waste my hard-earned money in this prissy,sanctimonious manner,you young scoundrel!!! Down with your trousers this instant boy! Jeeves! Fetch me the birch at once!"

 
 
Jenny

Re: Thank you Jenny.

February 5 2011, 3:29 PM 

Hi OZGeorge


I suppose that I should be a little more scrupulous in reading through the threads,as I misunderstood your viewpoint.

I'm an egalitarian. I see no reason whatsoever for discriminating (or differentiating if you prefer) by sex. Even if a relevant factor is far more common in one sex, it should not be presumed it's present in all members of that sex and completely absent from all members of the other. If discrimination is appropriate because of that factor, then it should be based solely on that factor.

Women,on the other hand,were more likely than males to punish both sexes bare bottom, but generally girls fared a good deal better than boys did.

I agree with your reasoning as to why that was. Quite simply, they knew that, unlike men, they were not likely to be suspected of abusing their charges.

Ever since the age of 12,when I inadvertantly heard my Mum's female school-teacher cousin, utter that she gained a great deal of satisfaction from smacking naughty boys on the bottom, and I listened to their amused titters, I have been niggled by the question of whether women liked to spank boys' bottoms?

Almost certainly. Despite this, however, there doesn't seem to be the same concern regarding women using CP on boys as there is with men using it on girls. There were schools where boys could be slippered or caned by teachers of either sex but girls could only be slippered or caned by female teachers. I've never heard of a school where girls could receive CP from either sex but boys could only receive from a male teacher.

Was it in some way a demonstration by the female teacher to the girls, of her ability to shame boys, and perhaps as a 'treat' for the watching girls?

I think that's a very strong possibility. In the past, women were oppressed (it's going the other way now) so I can understand (but not condone) how some woman, suddenly in a position of power over boys, might want to avenge their sex.

Jenny,you would be far better qualified to answer this question than I.
As I have stated before,my wife believes that childrens' bottoms may awake some sort of biological response of the maternal instinct,that may make them extremely attractive to mothers, and also to women in general,including teachers.
It would be interesting to have your views on this.

I see your wife's reasoning but I'm not convinced she's correct in saying that it applies to women in general for those reasons. If it remained dormant until a women gave birth, I'd see that as evidence of a connection. She might be right though, even a dormant instinct could manifest itself at a low level before being fully "switched on". I'm not sure my feelings are particularly pertinent. My husband's "maternal" instincts are probably stronger than mine and, due to our working arrangements, he was the primary carer of our children.



 
 
The Apache Kid

Agood thrashing:when is enough,enough?

February 6 2011, 12:16 PM 

I was reading through some extracts on Naval discipline for boys on training and seagoing ships during the 1800s and was totaly horrified by the accounts of bare bottom discipline administered to boys of just 15/17 years old and,to be quite frank,I just can't possibly bring myself around to believing in any of it and here's why.

Take an average fit and healthy 16 year old lad for example.He could,by gritting his teeth,take a fully laden six of the senior cane across his bare bottom-but only just.Had it been a Reformatory cane-42inches by half inch thick-well I'm not so sure.

So,I would take that as about the lads limit though he might JUST about hold for eight yet,and according to records which like all records,are only as accurate as whoever wrote them down in the first place,lads of 15/17 were strapped to a cannon and-ready for this?-given SIXTY lashes,I repeat,SIXTY lashes with a cat o' nine tails across their BARE buttocks.In one instance I read of a 200 lash flogging-who they trying to kid?!

Now having been caned as a 14 year old myself I can say,with all confidence,that it took all of my reserve to hold for a six stroke caning from my headmaster and if it had'nt been because I was laid over a table when I took the caning I would have collapsed in a heap on the study floor and I'm more than just certain had that been a bare bottom caning I wuold still be dancing now!

Well,having experienced the sheer agony of a traditional school caning that I can still 'feel' in my mind to day a life time on,can I possibly believe,with all the will in the world, that a mere lad of 16 can take such a brutal flogging one day and be able to clamber up a ships rigging the next.Just think about it.

 
 
OZGeorge

To Jenny.

February 7 2011, 4:56 AM 

Jenny, I want to thank you so much for your very interesting posting.

There was something that I would very much like you to elaborate on,if you feel you can.

In your reply to my question as to whether women actually liked to spank boys's bottoms,and,by extension,pull their pants up or down to expose their buttocks, you replied 'almost certainly'.

This is obviously the opinion that you hold,but I would very much like you to elaborate on it and qualify it, as it were.
I most certainly agree with you, but as a male, I cannot really do more than take educated guesses concerning their motive/s.
I put forward some ideas as to what could have been the attraction/s,but I would like very much to hear yours.

I think that it is true when you said that society in general,does not consider women performing such punishments, in the same light as males.

Some of the comments I have heard from various chaps seems to bear this out.
My young cousin who was punished bare bottom by females at his prep-school,emailed me to say that he thinks it is probably true that the women enjoyed it,but doesn't see that it matters,and doesn't really care.

His older brother,on the other hand,who went to the same school,is more like me,and is very curious of their motives and intents.

Both boys were punished by males in this fashion also,and like other chaps I have spoken to,tend to laugh it off.

I notice though,that people in general,seem more willing to put forward the idea of egregious and suspect-even sexual motives in men as opposed to women.
It is as if with women,it is a harmless eccentricity and a little amusing,while with males a darker motive is suspected.

For example,I know that my Mum was well aware that my brother and I were spanked with our pants pulled up our bottoms,and our cheeks all but bare, by lady teachers,and had not a whit of a problem with it,but would have taken a much different attitude towards a male teacher acting in the same fashion.

It would be interesting if you would be willing to put forward some considered view-points on this,Jenny,if it would not be an imposition to you.

 
 
Caroline

Bare bottom spanking

February 7 2011, 9:58 AM 

My mother would spank my sister's and I across her lap with the back of a wooden hairbrush that she kept on her dresser. We received our punishments over our knickers. We were raised in a conservative household where modesty was paramount. I do not know why Mother spanked the three of us over our knickers but I wonder if it depended on the household and the values of the parents. I spanked my children when they were naughty and spanked them over their underpants but they certainly were not spanked for the behaviours that my sister's and I were spanked for when we were children.

 
 
kooboo

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

February 7 2011, 12:19 PM 

bare bottom spanking in schools did exist in the 1970s, i know as it happened to me. it was done in private by the pe teacher in junior school in his empty classroom which was a hut. i was sent off the field were we playing football and marched down to his classroom with him following behind me. in the room he turned around and slammed the door, took me by the wrist over to his desk where i was to recieve a short lecture about attitude. i was only wearing a pair of thin shorts and underpants so i didnt really see the need to bare my bottom, but he pulled down my shorts to my knees and then came down my underpants. i was a bit taken back by this although this is how i would recieve a spanking at home, at this time i was 11 years old so it didnt bother me so much about being naked from the waist down.he laid me over his knee and my head was nearly touching the floor, he began the spanking and after 2 my legs were kicking so he reajusted me over one knee and his other leg against the back of my legs so i couldnt move. i recieved another 4 and it was probably the worst spanking i had had. my mum was the spanker in home but this teacher certainly knew how to spank. his hands were big and the whole of my bottom was red as i checked when i got home. i dont know why he had to spank bare bottom as i only had thin clothes on anyway, i suppose it was see that he was doing no serious harm and that my bottom was just red and not bruised. i did tell my mum when i got home as i had to have a bath and she noticed my bottom was red when i got out and was drying myself. i told her that i got it bare but she just said thats how its done im afraid and had better behave in the future...

 
 
willyeckaslike

How common was bare bottom discipline?

February 7 2011, 7:17 PM 


I have been looking for a post, and can't find it. I am taking a guess that it was in this thread. I think it was from Steve, in it he mentions about "his" girls, from Bacons, and says some of them are still in contact with one another. The post also mentions the famous, or infamous, which ever way you want to look at it, the paddling of two girls at Helston GS.

What I am curious about is, the only thing I have heard about at Helston, was the well publicized paddling of the two girls.

Were any other girls spanked the same way, but not as many whacks, and consequently did not attract the same publicity.

Was this a well established way of dealing with girls, by either Mr Guise and Mrs Smith jointly, or by Mrs Smith on her own, but we have just not heard about others.

Or was this his first foray into bare bottom paddling of girls, which had unfortunate consequences, both for him, and the girls, due to the the severity of the punishment.

It seems it was well thought out ritual, the girls having to take their skirts off. I can recall reading a report at the time, about the girls being told to roll the legs of their knickers up inwards, and to lift them up at the back, so they were well out of the way. One girl having to take her roll on off. Then having to bend over a table, which seems well planned.

Has anyone heard of, or know of, if this sort of thing happened to other girls.

Also there was one report on friends reunited of one girl having to take her skirt off for the cane at Smithills school Bolton. Was this normal, did this happen to any other girls.

 
 
Caroline

My experience

February 8 2011, 2:45 AM 

The first and only time that I received the cane I had to bend and place
my hands on my shins. The Senior Mistress instructed me to raise my skirt and she caned me over my school knickers but I did not have to remove my skirt. The same thing happened when I was slippered, I received
one slippering in front of my class and that was over my skirt. I can't imagine that a girl would be told to remove her skirt as a skirt can be lifted with no fuss.

 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

February 8 2011, 8:24 AM 

Hi willyeckaslike. You said above:

I have been looking for a post, and can't find it. I am taking a guess that it was in this thread. I think it was from Steve, in it he mentions about "his" girls, from Bacons, and says some of them are still in contact with one another. The post also mentions the famous, or infamous, which ever way you want to look at it, the paddling of two girls at Helston GS.

There are two posts in this thread which mention Helston Grammar School. One is your post above, the other is this post which also mentions Steve and Bacons School. Prior to that the last post in the Forum to mention both Helston Grammar School and Bacons School was your own post here but that post did not mention Steve.

For the record the two unfortunate girls in the notorious Helston Grammar School case were not subjected to paddling, they were beaten with the back of a hairbrush or a (foot long) clothes brush depending on which report of the court proceedings is correct. See various press reports on the excellent CorPun.com site. Paddling is of course a vicious and brutal US invention usually administered with an implement rather larger than a hair or clothes brush, whereas chastisement with the flat side of such domestic items is a long-standing British tradition, though admittedly rather uncommon in schools! My own impression is that the event at Helston Grammar School was unique and not a regular mode of punishment, but other contributors may have information to the contrary.

I doubt if Helston Grammar style adjustment of underwear was ever common, but I think it was probably rather more likely to be encountered than the unusual punishment implement in that case. In some schools the 1950s and 1960s it seems to have been an additional sanction imposed on girls being punished for offences which were viewed as especially serious. Dorothy, who posted here for a time, recorded that this was the case at her boarding school, as in this post, and other instances have been quoted here.

 
 
Jenny

Re: To Jenny

February 8 2011, 6:36 PM 

Hi OZGeorge

Jenny, I want to thank you so much for your very interesting posting.

You're very welcome, I'm pleased you found it interesting.

In your reply to my question as to whether women actually liked to spank boys's bottoms,and,by extension,pull their pants up or down to expose their buttocks, you replied 'almost certainly'.

This is obviously the opinion that you hold,but I would very much like you to elaborate on it and qualify it, as it were.

Women admire men's bottoms just as much as men admire women's. There are probably quite a few men who would like to slap my bum (for more than one reason wink.gif ) so there's nothing strange about a woman wanting to slap a man's - or a boy's. There are plenty of reports of female teachers apparently taking great delight in spanking, slippering or caning caning boys but turning a blind eye to girls' misbehaviour. If those teachers were just using CP as a punishment, and not because they enjoyed punishing boys, why would they have exempted girls? I'm afraid your hypothesis doesn't explain why it's only boys.

My young cousin who was punished bare bottom by females at his prep-school,emailed me to say that he thinks it is probably true that the women enjoyed it,but doesn't see that it matters,and doesn't really care.

I strongly suspect some of the male teachers got a thrill from slippering girls. I don't think it matters either - provided there was a legitimate reason for the slippering. I'm not so sure about bare bottom though because I can't think of a legitimate reason for it. I'd be willing to negotiate though - six across my knickers or three with them down? wink.gif



 
 
Iris

Just a thought or two for Jenny.

February 10 2011, 4:55 AM 

Jenny,I have read some of George's posts here and the replies,and I was interested in this enough to want to post something myself. I am not a forum type of person,so I will not be posting often at all. I do not share George's fascination in this subject to any great extent,nor am I a believer in the use of the cane in schools,however,I understand his background,and some of the reasons he has for his interest. I see it as harmless,but I also think that the memories leading to it were not. I read your statement that women find men and boys bottoms attractive. That is not news really is it? It has been reported in any number of books and articles in regard to erotic zones and sexuality.It is certainly true in my case,as in yours also. It is natural I suppose,as bottoms are a focus of attraction to people from a young age.You also said,that in some instances,teachers,male and female,enjoyed spanking or caning children of both sexes. The number of sites involving corporal punishment on the internet,would seem to indicate that this is a very common fetish. So I agree with your opinions.

In my view,a teacher is no more immune to basic human frailties and desires than any other person. Place anybody in a position of power over another,and abuses may happen. Abuses are more likely if the person in power has considerable autonomy,and if regulation is relaxed or non-existent.
If the person who is under the other person's power is young,dependant,and essentially helpless, the potential for abuse is considerably increased.

As a mother,I delighted in my children,and I loved everything about them,well nearly.Their lovely little faces and bodies,their personalities,and indeed,their bottoms too,as part of the adorable package. I believe that every mother does. I did not enjoy spanking my children in the sense that it gave me pleasure,but sometimes,if the child had been very naughty,it gave me some sort of satisfaction to make a little bottom pink.
A teacher is not a parent,but I believe that a teacher may punish a child in the same fashion,and derive the sort of teach you a good lesson satisfaction from it as I described. I would say that this would have been true of the vast majortiy of the school spankings that I remember. On the other hand,spanking or caning the child may very well appeal to a fetish that a teacher may have,either for corporal punishment or for an attractive bottom or both. It can also appeal to a sense of power as I described before,perhaps in tandem with a fetish.

I am not brilliant in setting down arguments,but I think that we would be burying our heads in the sand, if we denied this sort of motive in some degree or other,existing in probably a large number of teachers in the past. The right to administer corporal punishment and the relative lack of regulation and oversight in many cases,would have appealed to some people enormously.It may well have been a major attraction to begin a teaching career to begin with. In areas,as I have said before,where teachers were largely autonomous,baring childrens' bottoms was a distinct possiblity,and I believe that women,as less likely to be suspected of other motives,may have been guilty of this more than men. I believe that outside of a parental sphere,sexual feelings and desires could be aroused by baring bottoms. It is after all a very intimate and emotionally charged action.I do not believe that it could ever be appropriate in schools, and as I have said,the potential to abuse is very real.

Teachers may be in loco parentis, but they are not the parents of their pupils,and do not have the same feelings and love for them,nor do they understand the idiosyncrasies and personality of the individual child as a parent does.For this reason,I believe that withdrawing corporal punishment from schools was a wise decision. By the same token,the responsibilities of parents should have increased commensurately,but I believe it has actually gone backward alas.




 
 
R.G. Tracker

Welcome Iris!

February 10 2011, 8:14 AM 

In OZGeorge and Iris we have our first ever Husband and Wife Writing Team.

 
 
Jenny

Re: Just a thought or two for Jenny.

February 11 2011, 1:08 AM 

Hi Iris

George seemed a little surprised at my saying "almost certainly" in reply to his question as to whether women actually liked to spank boy's bottoms and expose their buttocks. As you say, it's not news.

On the other hand,spanking or caning the child may very well appeal to a fetish that a teacher may have,either for corporal punishment or for an attractive bottom or both. It can also appeal to a sense of power as I described before,perhaps in tandem with a fetish.

I have no doubt corporal punishment (CP) was abused by some teachers and even some school policies. For example, exempting girls from CP, regardless of what they had done, but using it on boys was an abuse. If it were needed to maintain discipline, girls could not be exempt. Having a blanket exemption for girls amounts to an admission it's not needed to maintain discipline. Please note, I am not saying boys were abused by being subject to CP when girls weren't. If a girl could be given an equivalent non-corporeal punishment, then so could a boy. Equally, if a boy could be given CP, so could a girl. There are also plenty of other ways teachers can abuse their pupils without using corporal punishment. If I had been given a detention for something an equally guilty boy got let off with a couple of whacks with the slipper for, I would have felt abused. Punishing a child by any means, without justification, is an abuse and non-corporeal punishments are far less regulated than CP.

Some teachers (of both sexes) might derive sexual pleasure from administering CP but that only becomes a problem if they use it without justification. If there is a legitimate reason for a punishment, that reason remains valid regardless of the teacher's feelings.

I believe that outside of a parental sphere,sexual feelings and desires could be aroused by baring bottoms. It is after all a very intimate and emotionally charged action.I do not believe that it could ever be appropriate in schools, and as I have said,the potential to abuse is very real.

I agree. There is no legitimate reason for a teacher to bare a child's bottom for the purpose of administering CP. If a male teacher were to do this, his motives would be suspected immediately but, as we agree, a female teacher is far less likely to be suspected of impropriety.




 
 
The Apache Kid

Naughty girls.Who should spank them,Mum or Dad?

February 19 2011, 2:12 PM 

I was reading about this in another forum and it got me to thinking how as a parent disciplined our two children-one boy,one girl.

Well it would have been sowhere in the 50s that our children reached the age when a spanking was badly needed to put them back on the straight and narrow but there was a problem-namely that I just could't bring myself to do it-a clip round the ear maybe,but the idea of bearing their backsides for a proper spanking,well to be quite frank,was apalling especialy if it was my daughter who needed it.

So,like all cowards I found an easy way out-Ihanded their tender little bottoms over to my wife who,I might add,did a pretty good job of it considering that as a kid she had only ever been spanked once,and that was by her Grandmother because Ma,and Pa not unlike me just could'nt bring themselves around to doing it.It's a pitty my school Headmaster did'nt feel the same way when he shredded my backside without the slightest show of compassion-in fact I doubt that he even knew my name!

Anyway,and inspite the fact that the only way to administer a proper spanking-that's one that can realy be felt-is to bare the bottom,my good wife,now not with us anymore,could only bring herself to give a spanking over a clothed bottom which of course was totaly ineffective so realy all it ever was,was a token spanking the same as my caning should have been!

Well it don'nt matter now any way,both kids grew up and are more than doing well.One's an axe murderer,the others a serial killer.Maybe we should have bared their bottoms after all-just kiddin'folks you're quite safe,both are doing life for blowing a hole in the side of Fort Knox but watch out,they're due for parole soon so lock your daughters up-or spank their bare bottoms,choice is yours!

 
 

Differences between Male and Female Teachers

February 28 2011, 6:02 PM 

An interesting thread to which i would like to add a few comments or observations from my own experience. I grew up in Scotland and was the son of a teacher.

There were 2 types of punishment at school -

In class/ get it over it

or

the after school.

They were essentially different in 2 ways severity and type of clothing allowed to be worn.

In Class

Punishment was usually on hands with Tawse - both girls and boys subjected to the same levels of punishment and severity. On occassions a Teacher would use the cane and this was always on the backside. For boys whether a Male or Female teacher this was always on Trousers. For girls: male teachers would cane over skirt and most therefore preferred to use the tawse on the hands; Female teachers would lift the skirt and cane on knickers. I always thought as a boy we were better off being able to keep 2 pieces of clothing in the target area.

After School

Punishment was either with tawse or cane depending on teachers preference and was always bare. However as boys we were expected to change into gym kit with Athletic support or Jock strap so we were bare but not exposed. Boys could be punished by either Male or Female teachers.

Girls were only punished by Female teachers or Deputy Headmistress. The Deputy Headmistress substituted for a Male teacher if he decided that a stronger punishment was required than one to be given in class. These punishments were given knickers down on the bare. Some girls (one of which was my girlfriend) preferred an unofficial bare bottom spanking over a Male Teachers knee to being caned by the Deputy Head as she was formidable with a cane. Perhaps this is what Jenny also meant by negotiating?


At home my Mother was chief spanker and these were always bare. For more serious trouble my Father brought home his tawse which was given bare. This always happened the next day as he left his tawse at school unless it was needed at home. This led to 24 hours of trepidation which was nearly as bad as the strapping including changing into pyjamas when back from school and waiting in your room.

So - Yes in my experience Bare Bottom punishment did happen - it was accepted as a norm at home and in the community so it was also expected in the scholastic environment. As attitudes changed to punishment in the home so did the attitude to using CP bare or otherwise in school.

I have never spanked my kids - but have spanked and caned many willing recipients over 18 including my ex-wife who expected to be punished as she was brought up with the punishment as a norm.

 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: Differences between Male and Female Teachers

February 28 2011, 9:57 PM 

It's the Scottish education system Jim, but not as we know it. happy.gifwink.gifhappy.gif


 
 
OZGeorge

Scotland the brave.

February 28 2011, 10:54 PM 

Thank you for your very interesting contribution HankIPankI.

Could I ask you to possibly elaborate as to what era you were speaking of please?

Was your school a private or a state school,and also,if you wouldn't mind, what ages groups would these punishments have applied to?

It would be most interesting also, to hear your version of the effects of the punishments, that is, the relative painfulness of tawse as opposed to the cane,and whether or not it was more painful on the hands or the bottom.

I have spoken to several chaps from Scotland, who are now living in Australia, and we have discussed these themes.
Only one of them appears to have been punished on the bare bottom at school, and that was in his primary school.
Most were spanked bare bottom at home however.

I will hopefully await your reply,and then I will post the results of my coversations and your answers to find some sort of concensus.

As to waiting, I often thought that this was the worst part of the whole event.
When my Mum would send me to my room, to await my Dad's hairbrush, I would also have to change into pyjamas straight after my bath.

It was miserable sitting in my room on my bed, my tummy full of butterflies, my ears pricked up listening for the tell-tale signs of my Daddy's homecoming.
I only had to wait perhaps a couple of hours or so, but that time seemed endless and awful.

The only times that I had to wait longer for the painful inevitable, was when at high school, our particularly toxic and sadistic house-master, would send you away from his room when you fronted for the strap, saying he was too busy to deal with you.

He would set a time for you to return,usually right at the end of the schoolday, and even then he might send you away again,telling you to front up in the morning.

God he was a bast--d!
He did on purpose I am sure, simply to increase your apprehension and nervousness for his own twisted pleasure.

He made you drop your trousers, and bend over,then pulled your white 'y' fronts tightly over your bottom, before getting stuck in with his strap.
Pity help you if you were not wearing the regulation 'y' fronts, but some other form of underwear.

I heard rumours that he made the boy take the offending undies off there and then, and confiscated them.
Then the boy was strapped on the bare bottom, and if he had no other underpants at school, had to go without them for the day.
We used to speculate as to what he did with the confiscated underpants, but we won't go there.


 
 

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

March 2 2011, 12:34 AM 

For me, growing up in the northeastern U.S. in the mid-fifties to early sixties, bare bottom strappings were the norm at home. My dad had a thick "military belt" that he'd worn in the service and used on my, oh, I'd guess three or four times a year until I got into my mid-teens.

At school (Catholic girls school), bare bottom was practically unheard of. For serious stuff, the nuns mostly used the dustbrush on us, and it hurt like the dickens no matter how thick your clothing might be. For run-of-the-mill stuff, you'd normally have your face slapped (and maybe your cheeks pinched or ear twisted or hair pulled), or you'd have your hands rulered.

Once when I was fifteen (sophomore in high school) I got in trouble for cheating. It was actually the other girl that I was helping, but we both got the same treatment, sent to Mother (the principal, the other nuns being called "Sister") who sent us each to cut a switch from the willow trees out by the school yard. I guess everyone could see us from the windows bringing those darn things back to the school building. Our skirts and slips were raised, but she didn't take our undies down, though it really didn't make any difference. Judi and I each took six in all, four across our backsides then one across the back of each thigh where it's really sensitive. Then she stuck a sign on each of our blouses that said "CHEAT" and made us sit on a bench by the main stairway for the rest of that day and all of next. When my folks found out, the strapping my dad gave me was the worst I ever got from him.


 
 
Ken

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

March 2 2011, 5:00 AM 

I was punished on the bare bottom at school. In 1985 when I was eight years old and in Grade 3 at a private primary school in Melbourne, Australia. Most of the teachers at that school used some form of corporal punishment, most often, smacking kids across the bottom with their hands but my teacher in that year was one of only three teachers in the school - all women - well known for spanking kids on the bare backside. She normally did it in front of the class - mostly boys, but there were a few girls, and we were just expected to deal with it if it happened to us. I think they just assumed she could be trusted and if we were naughty we deserved whatever we got. And to be fair, I never heard any suspicious complaints against her or anything. She was very strict, and handed out quite severe punishment, and she had some ideas about behaviour I'm not sure I agree with, but most of the time she wasn't unfair or anything.

The only problem I have with what she did to me is that it was part of a process that later lead to me being abused by a teacher (well, sort of a teacher) whose intentions towards me and other boys weren't what they should have been. What happened in her class meant that when he made me pull my pants down to punish me, I wasn't as sure of my ground - why, if I'd accepted it from her, was I feeling like I should argue with him. He took advantage of me and what she and some other teachers had done made me less able to deal with that. I didn't report him when part of me thought I should. I was confused. I don't think it's fair to blame her for that - she couldn't have known and to be honest I think if, somehow, magically she'd been around, she'd probably have murdered him. But what teachers do can have consequences they don't know about. She was only part of that - what happened in another class was much more important. But she was part of it, what she did was part of it.

 
 
GaryJ

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

March 4 2011, 1:56 PM 

I participate in a discussion board devoted to UK politics and current affairs.

www.vote-2007.co.uk

There is currently a thread discussing a recent TV programme which alleged that children are being hit by the teachers in a Moslem equivalent of a Sunday School.

A regular contributor whom uses his real name and as far as I know has no special interest in CP has said:

"I also recall receiving corporal punishment at primary school in the 1970s....when I was about 5 or 6. No cane but bare hand on bare backside, par for the course I think in those days"


I attended a primary school in London from 1959-64 and I don't recall any pupil being hit on the backside, let alone the bare backside. The norm was a slap on the hand, arm or leg, rising to the ruler on the palm of the hand or, in pretty rare cases, the cane on the hand. I recall one occasion when I was about 8 when my class teacher lifted the legs of my mid-thigh short trousers and gave me one hard slap on the back of each leg - this was considered quite a severe punishment.

After receiving the flat of the ruler on my palms at primary school I was very distressed at secondary school where one teacher had the horrible practice of hitting us with the edge of a ruler on the fingers (not knuckle side). Although I found that I could take the cane or slipper on my bottom without too much distress, I could never get accustomed to this punishment.

 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

March 4 2011, 9:52 PM 

Hi GaryJ. With regard to the claim by a contributor on another Forum you frequent that he had been smacked on the bare backside at primary school in the 1970s you said above:

I attended a primary school in London from 1959-64 and I don't recall any pupil being hit on the backside, let alone the bare backside. The norm was a slap on the hand, arm or leg, rising to the ruler on the palm of the hand or, in pretty rare cases, the cane on the hand.

In the UK we must always be very wary of assuming that what happened with regard to corporal punishment in the school we attended was typical of anything other than that school at that time. There was great variation between schools, even the same type of school, over the Country and over time. I would think the report from the 1970s that you quote was probably unusual, but it was certainly not impossible.

You say that in primary school in London in the late 1950s early 1960s you never encountered punishment on the bottom. Our esteemed fellow contributor Steve was at primary school in South London only a couple of years prior to you. His accounts here and here indicate that the corporal punishment practice mentioned on the other Forum was in use at his school then, and indeed was still in use there some 12 years later, virtually into the 1970s. Who knows, the contributor to the other Forum may even have encountered Miss Savage! happy.gif

You also say:

I recall one occasion when I was about 8 when my class teacher lifted the legs of my mid-thigh short trousers and gave me one hard slap on the back of each leg - this was considered quite a severe punishment.

You have my sympathy, I had a dose of that in the 1940s, described here. It influenced the rest of my school career and to this day puts me at a disadvantage on this estimable Forum! wink.gif



 
 

bare bottom punishment

August 6 2011, 6:41 PM 

I was at school in the 1930s and 40s.
During WW2, older, retired teachers came back from retirement and returned to the ways of their time as teachers -- MOST canings, in front of the class, and in private, were "trousers and underpants down"
It hurt, it was a bit embarrassing at first, but we soon got used to it.
After all, we saw each naked in the showers every day after gym and games.

 
 

A School For Spanking

September 16 2011, 9:16 PM 

My apologies, first of all, if I'm repeating myself from a few years ago. I attended a rural Canadian public school from the mid-Fifties to the mid-Sixties. Corporal punishment was administered in the form of strapping and spanking. While I only ever saw one child spanked, it was talked about often enough that I'm sure there were other instances.

There was one married couple, probably in their thirties, who both taught. They were both physically imposing. He, in fact, was the school's Phys Ed/Health instructor. She was the teacher I saw spank another boy in my Grade 7 class. It wasn't even her class, but she stormed into the room (possibly just after recess), dragged this known-to-be-mischievous boy from his desk to a bench at the back of the room, pulled him over her lap and vigorously walloped the seat of his pants with her hand. It was never made clear what he'd done, and while he didn't cry, he had to have been embarrassed.

It happened that my mother was on the staff. That left me privy to some after-hours chatting, and I heard this woman tell my mum about paddling her own little boy at home. What with her husband having told us once in his Health class that what some of us needed was "a good stiff hairbrush on [our] bare bottoms," I'm sure my classmate's pants would've been taken down but for it presumably not being allowed. These were two decidedly pro-spanking teachers.

I remember my mum once getting a phone call at home from the father of a boy in her class (Grade 3 or 4). Whether or not she'd spanked him that day, the father learned he'd been naughty and was calling to tell my mum that the boy had since been spanked on his bare bottom. After relating all of this to my oldest sister and me, Mum wondered aloud if I might not benefit from similar treatment. My sister said spanking me wouldn't work because my bum was too fat. Personally, I wouldn't have thought so, but I did have the rare distinction in that environment of growing up without ever getting an honest-to-goodness spanking.


 
 
Scotty the occasional Poster

I Tell all I know

September 23 2011, 5:12 PM 

I attended four schools which used cp between late 1960s and mid 1970s. None punished on anything other than the clothed backside. The prep school used the slipper and cane, the others all used the cane.

There was one instance where a boy at my prep chool was sent to be "thrashed" wearing only his PE kits (thin cotton no underwear) whether he was caned or slippered I do not know. There was also another instance where a boy was caned for turning off the school electricity who padded his trousers, was found out and had to remove padding to get another dose of the cane. Alas I fear his trousers returned to the up position prior to the second dose.

In all my time at school I only saw one marked backside (from the slipper).

The only other thing I can report was a chance remark by a boy who had been at Caldicott (a Berkshire prep school) in the late 1950s and early 1960's who reported being caned on his bare bottom "several times". I believe this era has received attention in the documentary "Chosen". A picture of the boy is on the friends reunited site for Caldicott.

So that is all I can report! Yes bare bottom cp did happen but I think it was comparatively rare, which is why it is remarked on so often perhaps?

Scotty

 
 

School Spanking

November 12 2011, 9:49 PM 

I was at Primary School in the 1950s and if a boy up to about 8 or 9 years old was really naughty in class he would be called out the front. the teacher usually female would drag his pants down and lift him over her lap and give him a bare bottom spanking but girls were never spanked on the bare to my knowledge.
After primary school and at about age twelve a friend and I were playing around while the teacher was out of the room and he caught us when he returned.We were both bought out the front of the class and both made to face the teachers table.We were told to undo the front buttons on our trousers and then lifted over his table and our pants lowered and got six each with the strap on our bare bottoms.
That was the last time I can recall I was publicly spanked in front of the whole class on the bare.

 
 
de Wolf

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 13 2011, 1:40 PM 

There may have been the very rare exception, but "school corporal punishment" on the bare, didn't exist, only in peoples' imagination.

 
 
Rob94

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 13 2011, 5:14 PM 

I don't believe that, in the last 70-80 years at least, bare bottom corporal punishment happened in British schools, with the exception of a few notorious boys public schools such as Eton and Repton. It has been reported that Anthony Chenevix-Trench at Eton had an unhealthy interest in brutal bare-bottom canings and was also a notorious drunk. Worryingly the equally brutal Dr Geoffrey Fischer at Repton went on to become Archbishop of Canterbury and presided over the Queen's coronation.

 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 14 2011, 7:01 AM 

Hi de Wolf and Rob94,

You both effectively deny the existence of school corporal punishment 'on the bare' in British Schools, de Wolf at all except in very rare circumstances, and Rob94 in the last 70 or 80 years except at "a few notorious boys' Public Schools".

I'm sorry, but you are both wrong. Caning and other corporal punishment 'on the bare' certainly happened in British Schools inside the last 70 years. But the place to look for it isn't 'a few notorious boys' Public Schools' though if you say so, Rob94, it may well have happened in some of them.

Most corporal punishment 'on the bare' happened to younger children, and it happened in the mainly boarding, but sometimes with some day pupils, Pre-Preparatory and Preparatory Schools. These were private schools, usually small, taking pupils up to age 12 or 13. The better ones would prepare pupils for, and send them on to, the Public Schools or the better Private Secondary schools. The lesser ones would pass their pupils on to less illustrious private secondary schools.

They were often fairly isolated in country districts, often run as family fiefdoms, not overly regulated or inspected, and crucially drew their pupils from a social class where robust discipline and a fairly hard life were the norm. Not hard in the sense of a shortage of money, often parents were very affluent, but hard in the sense of being expected to stand on your own feet and look after yourself from an early age. Frequently the parents were out of the country, in military, diplomatic or other employments requiring expatriate status, or they were fully engaged in managing their businesses and hadn't the time to bring up their children.

The school staff were often a substitute family for the pupils, and, just as punishments in families were likely to involve corporal punishment of a rather more intimate nature than might occur in a state day school, so it not infrequently was in the in the Pre-Prep and Prep schools.

I don't know if you've looked through the full thread. In case you haven't I'll quote two instances. One from my own experience, one from a former contributor here who I certainly believe was genuine. Myself and another of the Forum's sceptics tried hard to fault him. He passed all the tests with flying colours. These are just two cases. There are a great many more.

In 1954 I started, age 12 at Nottingham High School, an all-boy day school, a member of the HMC, and hence technically a Public School. The school had its own Prep School, but there were no boys from that in my form. My Form-Master was very young, very large, and very fit! He punished with a size 12 leather soled sandal with the 'victim' bent over touching his toes, and he used his strength! I never encountered this deterrent, but many of those who did evinced considerable distress, some tears weren't unusual.

One boy though took these beatings without so much as an 'ouch', never displaying any distress. He travelled on the same bus as me, and lived not far away and we saw quite a bit of one another. He was a pretty hard character, I certainly wouldn't have tackled him in a fight though I was larger than him, and he was frequently in trouble. His parents had been abroad for the previous few years (his dad was a mining engineer) and he'd been at a small suburban boarding prep school in Nottingham. Our bus actually passed it, essentially a collection of houses converted from residential use.

He attributed his immunity to the leather soled sandal to having been given six strokes of the cane on the bare several times at the prep school. He said after that the sandal, which was applied over the protection of underwear, shirt tail, and the fairly thick grey shorts everybody wore until about age 14 in those days, didn't even register on the pain scale.

I've nothing to judge his claim by, as I never got the sandal, and I was certainly never caned on the bare, but he was an extremely straight-forward and honest character and I don't believe he lied. It was common knowledge that the cane was used a lot at that prep school, and at that time everybody knew that at some schools caning was sometimes on the bare. I won't name the prep school. It's long since closed and the name is now used by a kindergarden and pre-school in another part of Nottingham, so confusion might ensue. However if I say a very bright striped blazer and concentric circles on the cap any old Nottingham hands might identify it.

Another account here that I believe to be true is from a contributor using the name Severnboy, and sadly absent from the Forum for some time. The caning he recounts is unusual, because he was caned with a girl, and they were both caned on the bare. I have no doubt whatsoever that vastly more boys than girls were caned on the bare, but there were specific reasons for the occurrence in this instance. This was at a small family run mixed prep school, in the second half of the 1950s when he was 10. His account is here.

Severnboy was questioned extensively about the incident, and he responded to the various questions later in the thread. The thread concerned is to be found here and the queries to Severnboy, and his responses, occur at intervals after his post about the incident at 3:21 PM on 10 January 2009.

 
 
KK

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 14 2011, 6:44 PM 

Attitudes to bare have changed markedly in recent times and it can be hard to remember how things were. Families were often large. Brothers often shared bedrooms. Bathrooms were busy places and often shared too. Males often swum nude. Boys often saw each other naked. Teachers and other adults often saw boys naked in the ordinary course of living. Boys were often smacked bare at home.

 
 

Dean Clarke

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 14 2011, 8:25 PM 

In my notes, I have reliable information about bare bottom corporal punishment being used post-World War II (it's a convenient, if sometimes arbitrary, dividing line for historical purposes) in 27 English schools. Mostly public schools like Eton and Repton (interesting use of the word 'notorious' to describe them), but not entirely. I have credible information - I'm inclined to believe it, but could not present it as really supported by evidence - of its use in a further 19 schools. I have reports ranging from the plausible to the utterly ridiculous, of about 120 schools.

With thousands of schools across England, these numbers do support the idea that it was certainly rare and unusual. But I don't think it was anywhere near as rare as some people seem to think.

It's interesting to note that the only case involving girls in the 'reliable' column is one that lead to a court case, and there is no girls school at all in the credible column either. And only two in even the somewhat plausible sections of the third group.

When they used corporal punishment on the bottom, girls schools do seem to have been statistically more likely than boys schools to punish on the underwear. But, far, far, less likely to punish on the bare.

I also have gathered similar data for schools in Australia, Canada, South Africa, New Zealand, and the United States.

 
 

Dean Clarke

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 14 2011, 8:27 PM 

A stupid error in my previous post - where I said 'England' read 'United Kingdom'.

 
 
PC21

How common was bare bottom discipline

November 14 2011, 9:54 PM 

Further to recent posts an example of bare bottom caning of girls as recently as the 1990s can be found at www.suzannehowell.wordpress.com. The name of the (independent)girls school is mentioned; only the headmistress caned the girls, but the teachers were empowered to administer the strap in class,or the dormitory, with skirts raised.

 
 
Jenny

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 14 2011, 10:11 PM 

Hi Dean Clarke

When they used corporal punishment on the bottom, girls schools do seem to have been statistically more likely than boys schools to punish on the underwear. But, far, far, less likely to punish on the bare.

A loose skirt can be a serious impediment to a cane or slipper. Lifting girls' skirts out of the way and caning or slippering them on their knickers was a purely practical measure. We wore plain skirts at school, which didn't hang loose when we bent over so didn't need to be lifted clear of the "target". Gym skirts were loose so, if we were slippered in PE, they'd be lifted and we'd get it on our (not bottle green) gym knickers.

Those practicalities don't apply in the case of trousers so requiring a boy to lower his trousers would be only to humiliate him. With that purpose in mind, requiring him to lower his underpants was to increase his humiliation.


 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 15 2011, 3:53 AM 

Hi Dean Clarke,

I am interested to read your conclusions regarding bare bottom corporal punishment in UK schools post WWII. I have absolutely no doubt that your conclusions regarding the punishment of girls are absolutely correct. I have always regarded the post by Severnboy that I quoted above (twice actually, because I also quoted it in an early post in the thread) as very unusual indeed because it involved a girl being caned in said mode. Jenny has documented very clearly the reasons why it might be not uncommon for girls to be punished on their underwear, and indeed there seems adequate evidence of this, whereas I think such evidence is less common for boys.

I am a little surprised though at the relatively small number of schools where you have either 'reliable' or 'credible' information as to boys receiving corporal punishment on the bare. Clearly as you have eventual publication in mind your criteria have to be a great deal more stringent than someone saying 'I am absolutely certain that happened at school X', so I shall take no umbrage whatsoever that a former Nottingham Prep School whose name might be linked to a Scottish historical novelist and poet (cryptic crossword type clue happy.gif) probably doesn't feature in your records.

However, if you are prepared to give details, I would be interested to know what standards you apply to determine that a report is 'reliable', 'credible' or 'plausible'. I appreciate that the standards are likely to be less specific and completely defined as we go down the scale.

As regards Rob94's mention of two of the UK's best Public Schools as 'notorious', he may belong to the faction which regards any schools attended by significant numbers of the future 'the great and the good' as notorious. But then again he may not. I'd hate to do you an injustice, Rob94! happy.gif

 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 15 2011, 8:23 AM 

Hi Jenny,

Without so much as a qualifying emoticon you said above:

Gym skirts were loose so, if we were slippered in PE, they'd be lifted and we'd get it on our (not  bottle green ) gym knickers.

Hmm, I wonder who on earth the 'not' colour information was intended for? happy.gif

It is of course a great pity they were not  bottle green  as it is well known that the  bottle green  variety were superior in resistance to slippers, canes, RPGs, nuclear missiles and most other things likely to be deployed by gym mistresses! wink.gif

It has to be said that although we now know that you did not wear  bottle green gym knickers  there will be those who will be speculating as to what colour you did wear. You may rest assured that wild horses will not drag that information out of me, nor will I reveal if or where it may, or may not, be on record here. When it comes to gym knickers we Systems Programmers must stick together! wink.gif

On a more serious note, fairness being a serious issue, with regard to your explanation of why skirts might sometimes be lifted for corporal punishment you said above:

Those practicalities don't apply in the case of trousers so requiring a boy to lower his trousers would be only to humiliate him.

Not necessarily so I think, though my example may only be hypothetical. In a thread I won't reopen because of recent unhappiness it was said that at a certain school girls were sometimes caned with their skirts lifted. It was also confirmed that boys were sometimes caned on their underpants. At this school equality between the sexes was, ostensibly at least, of considerable concern. You'll know where to find the link.
Here's the link!
Suppose that a boy and girl at the school had committed the same offence together and were going to be caned for it, the boy by the Headmaster and the girl by the Deputy Headmistress. To equalise everything we'll say in each case it was a first offence of smoking and they are the same age. The girl was wearing the uniform winter skirt which for practical reasons akin to those you give above for gym skirts the Deputy Headmistress decided to lift out of the way.

Now surely the boy should have been caned trousers down, and if this had been done it would have been for fairness NOT for humiliation? Or am I overlooking something? happy.gif

 
 

Here we go again

November 15 2011, 7:35 PM 

Well I did witness the slipper applied to a classmates bare bottom. To save me describing the incident all over again I would ask Another Lurker to kindly work his magic and find the previous post.

 
 


Bare bums, skirts etc..

November 15 2011, 8:48 PM 

Hiya Lurkio. And hello Jenny-I've missed your rants!

Jenny is right when she says that skirts were lifted for practical reasons. Caning over a skirt is technically difficult, especially if it's as short as the type her ladyship used to wear at school. The hem is bang where you want the cane to land. The only time I was caned with female co-accused they were wearing jeans, but my guess is that when skirts/knickers are involved the caner would take into account the protection worn. What say you Jen? Where you ever in a mixed-sex punishment?

Lurkaman - for bottle green knickers all I can say is Upton Convent School, Wirral. Green blazers, green skirts & [late 70s] green hair a few of them.

 
 
de Wolf

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 15 2011, 9:38 PM 

Hi Another_Lurker,

The Boarding and Prep schools, were the "rare" schools I was alluding to.
I was using state schools as my yard stick. I wouldn't hazard a guess to the pecentages of state school children, to that of their counterpart, when CP was still used, but I confidently believe the state school kids far out weighed the private school children in numbers.

I attended a state school, but I did have a few friends who did go to private boarding schools, and obviously school punishments invariably cropped up in conversations, and in their case, no CP administered on the bare. The same results were recorded when I've been discussing schooldays with other ex-state students, with never a mention of discipline on the bare.

I agree with you in regards the boy who showed no emotion, while being slippered. He very likely was caned on the bare, but I very much doubt it was that reason he appeared to take the slippering in his stride.

There are references of girls receiving CP with their knickers adjusted in such a way they are actually being whacked on the bare, but officially they have retained their knickers, bottle green, or any other colour.

 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: Here we go again

November 15 2011, 10:30 PM 

Hi Worldwide traveller,

Good to hear from you. You said above:

Well I did witness the slipper applied to a classmates bare bottom. To save me describing the incident all over again I would ask Another Lurker to kindly work his magic and find the previous post.

At your service. The impossible we do at once, miracles may take a little longer! happy.gif And to illustrate why this assignment was definitely in the 'miracles' category, I recently commented to another contributor who had questioned who you were that he should have known because you went back to 2005. In fact I find you actually go back to at least 2003! However an excellent journey through the placid coves and wilder shores of this estimable Forum. In the course of it I encountered various oft mentioned but seldom seen posts, including the very first post by one of our sadly very few lady contributors. Three strokes of the cane with skirt lifted for possession of alcohol aged 14. No, not THAT lady contributor! happy.gif

Here's your post. I'll quote it for you because it is rumoured some of our visitors don't click on links:

When I attended school it most certainly did happen.

In my senior school, Thomas Calton I know that on at least two occasions CP was administered on the bare bottom as I was there when it happened. Both times the recipient was a male and the one and only time I saw a girl caned, she was not even made to lift her skirt.

In the early sixties the cane and slipper were in almost daily use at Thomas Calton and there are various references to this under 'Teacher Memories' on the Friends Reunited site.

As a result of the baby boom, the year in which I was placed probably had more pupils than the school had ever seen. I believe that there were eleven classes and all the boys had games together on a Wednesday afternoon. I don't think a week went by without the slipper being used at least once and it was normally Mr.Keenan, our PE teacher who gave it.

At the start of the period we were made to line up to be told what activities would be taking place. Mr Keenan would take the opportunity to inspect the boys to make sure that only regulation white shorts and plimsolls were being worn. On this particular occasion he was horrified to see that one boy was wearing track suit pants and called him to the front to be punished for breaking the rules. Presumably because he was not supposed to be wearing them, the boy was made to lower the track suit pants before receiving the slipper. In doing so he revealed that he was wearing underpants which was also against the rules so he was made to take them down as well.

The humiliation of being whacked on the bare behind in front of his schoolmates was no doubt worse punishment for the lad that the pain that was inflicted. It must have hurt though and his bruised backside was attracting much attention in the changing room afterwards.

Mr Keenan was well known for his frequent use of the slipper but it was the maths master, Mr Akam who seemed to use the cane more than anybody else. Anybody who stepped out of line during his lessons were sent to fetch the came and book. He then took the miscreant outside the classroom to deliver the punishment. The others would sit there listening to the cane coming down and counting the strokes. One boy who was caught cheating was punished in the way and given three strokes. As the third whack came down the boy sitting next to me said that it sounded as though it was given on the hand. When we asked him afterwards why he had not taken all three on the backside the boy surprised us by saying that he had. Although nothing was said we all knew that the sound of that last whack was the cane on his bare bottom.

That post is to be found here. It is repeated in an abbreviated format here. An account of one of your own school punishments, though not on the bare, is quoted by Big John here, and a follow-up comment by you is here. It would appear that your original post quoted by Big John was unfortunately removed to the vaults together the associated thread some time ago. However its spectral remains may still be found here in the fabled 'Chronicles of East Dulwich in ye olde times'.

I have omitted to link one of your accounts which most certainly involves bare bottom discipline (yours) on the grounds that there is no confirmation that it took place in a classroom or that the attractive young blonde lady administering it was a school teacher. If you confirm that those criteria were in fact satisfied I will of course happily link it for you. happy.gifwink.gifhappy.gif

 
 
Jenny

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 16 2011, 2:55 AM 

Hi Another_Lurker

It is of course a great pity they were not bottle green as it is well known that the bottle green variety were superior in resistance to slippers, canes, RPGs, nuclear missiles and most other things likely to be deployed by gym mistresses! wink.gif

Are you sure there are no other reasons why you think it a pity they weren't  bottle green ? wink.gif

It has to be said that although we now know that you did not wear  bottle green  gym knickers there will be those who will be speculating as to what colour you did wear.

Actually, I didn't usually bother with gym knickers at all. wink.gif ('cos I usually skived off PE by "forgetting" my kit - not what some may be thinking. wink.gif )

On a more serious note, fairness being a serious issue, .....

.....To equalise everything we'll say in each case it was a first offence of smoking and they are the same age. The girl was wearing the uniform winter skirt which for practical reasons akin to those you give above for gym skirts the Deputy Headmistress decided to lift out of the way.

Now surely the boy should have been caned trousers down, and if this had been done it would have been for fairness NOT for humiliation?

In that case, I agree it would be fair to require the boy to lower his trousers but not his underpants as well - unless, of course, the girl had to take her knickers down to be caned. I believe it's something I've advocated previously but I can't find the relevant post. Perhaps you could work your magick on that one. wink.gif

Or am I overlooking something? happy.gif

The fact that Dean Clarke and I were comparing practices in boys' schools with those in girls' schools perhaps? In such establishments, the matter of sex equality doesn't really arise. Exceptions might be where a school accepts guest pupils of the opposite sex for certain subjects not provided by the pupils' home schools or where two, opposite sex, schools combine to share facilities and resources. In such cases, neither sex should be treated more or less favourably than the other.

There is sometimes a practical reason to lift a girl's skirt to cane her so, overall, girls were more likely to be punished on their underwear. As that reason is absent in the case of trousers and, in a boys' school, sex equality is not an issue, there must be some other motive involved in requiring a boy to lower his trousers AND underpants. Can you think of one other than to humiliate the victim?


 
 

Another_Lurker

Felixstowe College

November 16 2011, 10:36 AM 

Hi PC21,

Very good to see you back. I'm afraid I almost missed your post, along with several others. The Forum Management may well contradict me and say that posts would still be delayed, but subject to that possibility I'd strongly urge everyone to get themselves a Network54 login and use it. If your post gets held for moderation, which it certainly will be if you don't log in, it may be delayed for several hours before it appears BUT it will still appear under the time that you made it. In fast moving threads that can mean that there have been several more posts in the meantime, and the delayed posts can easily be overlooked.

You said:

Further to recent posts an example of bare bottom caning of girls as recently as the 1990s can be found at www.suzannehowell.wordpress.com. The name of the (independent)girls school is mentioned; only the headmistress caned the girls, but the teachers were empowered to administer the strap in class,or the dormitory, with skirts raised.

Hmm, I would be just a teeny tad suspicious about Ms? Suzanne Howell. I'm all in favour of a bit of spanking fiction. In fact I've even been known to try my hand at it in this estimable Forum when we let our hair down a little around the festive season. (Think attractive young policewomen and judicial caning as an alternative to speeding fines for poverty stricken pensioners with a heavy right foot - not long to go now. wink.gif) But I don't think there would be any risk of my efforts being taken as anything but fiction!

In the case of Ms? Howell I can't comment on the claimed CP regimes in Hong Kong schools, though I'm somewhat sceptical. But as for Felixstowe College, that bit is highly suspect. See this thread by the very well informed Research Assistant 2.

The whole thing is a bit of a Curate's egg, good in parts. The superb Google Picture Match facility indicates that some of the photographs of the school are indeed of a boarding house at Felixstowe College, a girls' school which closed in August 1994. But one of the photographs, this one, is actually of Benenden School, a rather more famous establishment with Royal connections! See this picture on Flickr.

The picture of the young ladies displaying their knickers might also have been taken at Felixstowe College as the summer dress they are wearing is very similar to the dress worn by the girls in the Lower IV form in this 1990 photograph.

But all that strapping over said knickers and bare bottom caning. No, I think not!

 
 
Jenny

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 16 2011, 1:54 PM 

Hi Garshin

I've been a bit busy recently so haven't had time to post as much as I'd like to.

What say you Jen? Where you ever in a mixed-sex punishment?

Most of my punishments were mixed sex. I was caned six times as one of a mixed sex group, although the first time the other girl and I were caned on our hands. I lost count of the number of times I got the slipper in front of the (mixed sex) class.

The sexes associated a lot more than seems to have been the norm in other schools. As a result, we tended to misbehave together and be caught and punished together.

We wore plain, straight skirts that weren't much of an impediment to the cane so they were not lifted when we were punished. Quite often, a girl's skirt would be too short to provide proper coverage when she bent over so she would get the slipper or cane on her knickers.


 
 
Worldwide Traveller

Many thanks!

November 16 2011, 8:01 PM 

Thanks for the trip down memory lane AL.

You obviously went to a lot of trouble and it is appreciated from my side.

 
 

Dean Clarke

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 17 2011, 9:24 AM 

Hi Another Lurker,

Theres no easy answer to those questions because I dont have one set of criteria I use to say if a particular piece of information is reliable, credible, plausible or ridiculous. I look at everything I 'know' about a particular school in making that determination, and I look at how I know it.

In some cases, its mentioned in a school's own published history or in a quality biography or even autobiography of a particular student. In one case, for example, three biographies (one of them an autobiography) of ex students who attended a particular school in the 1960s all mention such punishments. In another case, I've seen discussions on a web forum of ex students of a school all of whom clearly recognise each other as people they went to school with years earlier, all discussing such punishments. Again, I consider that reliable especially seeing when somebody did try to join in their conversation claiming to be one of them and claiming something that went further that what they were saying, they were pretty decisive in shutting down the attempt.

A lot of the time the borderline between reliable and credible is not that different really. If I consider something credible rather than reliable, it's often because there's just something about it, that doesn't seem quite right to me. Sometimes its a matter of "If this is true, I'd expect there to have been some mention of it here." for example I have a report of it in one school where I have found references to another twenty or so canings from the same general period and none of them mention anybody being caned on the bare bottom, despite discussing the subject in some detail. That could mean the one account I have is exaggerated. Or that it was something that was very rare. It doesnt have to mean it didnt happen.

Plausible basically means it seems totally reasonable and could have happened, but I've generally got no evidence except the particular claim. It also things like: "The Head always threatened to cane you on the bare bottom if you were sent back to her, and everybody believed it had happened to one girl but when we asked her she refused to discuss it and got very upset when we pressed her." Four women were involved in that discussion who knew the girl and three thought the girl probably had been caned that way, while one didn't, but none were sure.

 
 
KK

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 17 2011, 7:05 PM 

Personally, when it comes to glass bottles I prefer this shade of bottle "green" to that favoured by most esteemed AL. (I note that since his icon was animated my band width consumption has increased nearly 2.73%.)

The common place rarely gets specifically discussed although it may be mentioned in passing as part of some other discussion. The extraordinary is discussed, usually repeatedly and in detail. The same is likely to apply to bare caning. If it were common place it might escape much discussion.

At my school canings on trousers were common place. There are very few mentions of them on the school's "OldFriends" web site. They were not an issue at the time, or since. There were no bare canings that I am aware of. They would have been big news if they had occurred. However, I can not be certain none ever occurred. For example, it is possible that a special punishment of the, say, first fifteen might have been kept strictly within team, as a team secret.

 
 
Naughty Robert

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 18 2011, 10:06 AM 

Under Common Law teachers gain the right to punish children, in the UK they were seen as acting in Loco Parentis, Which means, they were acting in place of the parents, up untill the 80s It was common practise for parents to punish children on the bare bottom, therefor school teachers would be allow to do the same, I would suggest the reason for all the court cases concerning Corporal Punishment in the UK, were the childs bottom was bare, was cause by the nature of the punishment which followed the baring of the bottom.

 
 
george

complaints

November 20 2011, 8:51 PM 

I have made many post concerning the punishment of boys on the bare bottom, certainly during the war years. I would be happy to answer any direct quetions on this. On thing that must always be kept in mind, is that teachers had the same authority as parents, and in an age or area where parents mainly punished on the bare bottom this was acceptable at school. Certaibnly prior to 1970 most of the court cases/complaints about punishment on the bare bottom were related more to the severity of the punidhment rather than the fact the bottom was bared for the punishment.

George

 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 21 2011, 5:18 AM 

I have got very in arrears on this thread, and as I dislike leaving loose ends a quick trip back in time seems appropriate.



Hi Garshin,

In connection with the wearing of the green you mentioned in your November 15 2011, 8:48 PM post above a school where in the 1970s some of the young ladies even sported green hair! I am amazed, especially as you say it was a convent school. Nuns normally had fairly firm opinions on that sort of thing which they didn't hesitate to enforce. I bet there were a few monumental battles of wills! happy.gif



Hi de Wolf,

In your November 15 2011, 9:38 PM post above you said:

The Boarding and Prep schools, were the "rare" schools I was alluding to.
I was using state schools as my yard stick. I wouldn't hazard a guess to the pecentages of state school children, to that of their counterpart, when CP was still used, but I confidently believe the state school kids far out weighed the private school children in numbers.

I can't argue with your state/private pupils ratio comments. However, there were a great many private boarding and prep schools. They tended to be much smaller than state schools for the same age of pupil. Many were in country areas, but when I was at school in Nottingham there were several small private schools almost within a stone's throw. It is very difficult to prove punishment on the bare conclusively, Dean Clarke's posts above illustrate the difficulties. But certainly in the late 1940s and the 1950s I think rather more boys encountered this mode of punishment than we can readily accept now.



Hi Jenny,

In your November 16 2011, 2:55 AM post above you said of your 'sports' attire: wink.gif

Are you sure there are no other reasons why you think it a pity they weren't  bottle green  ? wink.gif

I cannot tell a lie! Of course there are - but I can't discuss them here, people might think I had a 'thing' about it! happy.gifwink.gifhappy.gif

And you also said:

There is sometimes a practical reason to lift a girl's skirt to cane her so, overall, girls were more likely to be punished on their underwear. As that reason is absent in the case of trousers and, in a boys' school, sex equality is not an issue, there must be some other motive involved in requiring a boy to lower his trousers AND underpants. Can you think of one other than to humiliate the victim?

Basically no. I have heard it suggested that it increases the pain of the punishment, perhaps a legitimate objective in some cases. But others argue that with normal trousers and underpants and a severe caning it doesn't make a ha'porth of difference. Yet others say that as trousers tighten over the bottom if bent over there is less 'flex' to absorb the strokes and the punishment is actually more painful over trousers than on the bare! If that is true caning on the bare might be a kindness rather than a humiliation or mode of increasing the pain. Still others claim that it is safer to cane on the bare because the fall of the strokes can be accurately assessed and overlaps avoided, again almost a humanitarian choice. My reaction to that is surely that's a function of the skill of the caner, whether the target is clothed or unclothed!

All I can say is that if I'd ever been caned on the bottom, given a choice I'd have opted for fully clothed every time. If anyone who has actually been caned is inclined to say that would have been a wrong choice given strokes of equal severity, well the floor is theirs, that's what this estimable Forum is there for, informed discussion!



Hi Worldwide Traveller,

Thanks for the November 16 2011, 8:01 PM thanks. Much appreciated, not everyone goes to the trouble. Actually it wasn't too difficult, and obviously knowing your schools helped. Big John MOI played a significant part as he often refers to the site of one of my favourite pictures as the school wherein you received the gift of education! happy.gif



Hi Dean Clarke,

Thank you for your excellent November 17 2011, 9:24 AM explanation of how you assess and grade the reliability of reports on CP usage. I certainly can't see how you could improve your criteria. This sort of information is almost always going to have a smoke and mirrors component and with publication in mind you clearly have to avoid allowing this to mislead you.



Hi KK,

We've discussed our differing perceptions of colour before! If the sample in your November 17 2011, 7:05 PM post is bottle green I've got very serious vision problems! I'd say it it was nearer Broadgate Brown!

 
 
Scotty the Occasional Poster

Complaints - query to George

November 23 2011, 4:43 PM 

I can recall reading the occasional "excessive caning" complaints. The case I recall most vividly was at a boy's home in Shrewsbury where a housemaster was done for repeatedly beating several boys (aged 9-15) one description (I quote from memory) was "The boy was made to remove his pyjama trousers and given 20 strokes with the cane, taken up to his dormitory, bent over the end of his bed and given 20 with the slipper and then put over the master's lap and given 20 smacks with the hand". I believe this was in the mid 1970s.

I have never found this story since. Perhaps George you can remember a few and would the above punishment sound excessive to you given your own experience (20 with the cane certainly sounds a lot to me).

Scotty

 
 
KK

Colour perception

November 24 2011, 1:08 AM 

Another_Lurker,

Please be careful to distinguish between Green and "Green".

 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: Colour perception

November 24 2011, 8:16 AM 

Hi KK,

Yes, I note the quotes.

Here is a nice block of #801010:


Now if I was throwing away any glass bottles in that colour at my local recycling facility the little man who stands guard over it would get VERY irate indeed if I threw them in the green glass bin. He would quite rightly insist that they went in the brown glass bin. Technically I guess it's a dark red. A green of any sort it certainly isn't!


Here on the other hand is a block of #0f6616:


One of the top colours for gym knickers in the old unenlightened days before schoolgirls wore the same sports gear as schoolboys. As worn by our Honorary Life Member Fran of Wembley during her traumatic and oft recorded slippering by a male PT teacher in a room beside the gym at Copland School, Wembley. And of course by a young lady of my acquaintance in Junior class 3A during her severe but not quite so oft recorded slippering by a male teacher in a PT lesson outside the temporary classroom accommodation at ........... But enough of this. I'm sure you'll tell me what you're getting at with this mystery colour stuff eventually! happy.gifwink.gifhappy.gif

 
 
Rob94

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 24 2011, 12:56 PM 

I don't know how helpful or relevant this is, but the inability to differentiate between red and green is the most common form of colour blindness. It occurs more often in males than females. People with such a disability are barred from certain occupations, such as train driver, but I don't think headmaster or headmistress were ever among them. happy.gif.

 
 
KK

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 24 2011, 6:35 PM 

Colour perception is affected by the size of the object being viewed. Computer screen colours are much affected by the type and how the monitor is adjusted. This makes it difficult to convey colour information.

I do not understand the origin and meaning of bottle green. All the bottles of interest to me are brown or amber and they contain carbonated brown liquid made by fermenting roasted sprouted barley in the presence of female flower clusters of Humulus lupulus.




 
 
prof.n

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 24 2011, 10:21 PM 



I believe in some of the British Army's illustrious units there was in the 19th century a prohibition of 'brown' bottles at table in the officer's mess as opposed to 'green'. This arose due to the general bottling of wine in clear or green bottles, and beer in brown . Beer was NOT allowed at the dinner table in these units. Unfortunately , of course, some Rheinish wines were also bottled in brown , though not Moselle . Thus , I understand lies one possible derivation of 'bottle green' .

Anyone unfortunate enough to drink Rheinish might well have found themselves called out for breach of the brown bottle rule , on , of course, a pure technicality , which would shown their ignorance of tradition .

 
 

von Garshin

Bare wine bottles [best link I could think of]

November 25 2011, 5:12 PM 

Hello prof.n!

Nothing wrong with wein auf Rhein if you know where to look! Somewhere on here [Lord knows where] I've mentioned a German girlfriend from the past. She's from Remagen [as in The Bridge At .. film] and the Rhinewine from the local vineyard was excellent. It was from the Ahr valley [Ahrweil], the next tributary down from the Mosel. Proprieter had a name like "Hockenheim" and he wasn't fussed what colour the bottles were, just as long as he could get them on the cheap. His concern was the wine. Incidentally he produced the world's only red[ish] Liebfraumilch grape, and very nice too.

In an attempt to get back to the theme, I can confirm that Marlene, the lady in question, was educated in the last days of German caning [private school] and got it on knickers coloured ...... black.

[see colour chart when you turn of computer Lurkio] ;0)

 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 25 2011, 11:13 PM 

Hi Rob94Thank you for the information relating to red/green colour blindness. I have to say that in my experience a huge number of motorists suffer from this and as most of them are male it seems to confirm your comment on the balance between the sexes. I don't think my very esteemed fellow contributor KK is afflicted with red/green colour blindness though. In his case it's just plain cussedness, a common problem with New Zealand mountaineers. Otherwise how would one of them have got to the top of Everest first? happy.gif



Hi KK,

Hmm, I see we are on #802E00 now. Definitely greener than #801010, 26·4% green instead of 10% but still predominantly red. Tell me, are you familiar with this site?

www.color-hex.com/color/rrggbb#

Any RGB triplet you like and you'll get a page with all sorts of useful data, complementary colours etc. Comes in very handy for page design.



Hi Prof.n,

A fascinating story! Beer in the Officers' Mess! Gad sir, the damn country is going to the dogs! happy.gif



Hi von Garshin,

My goodness, you certainly got around with the girlfriends! Peruvian, German, and I seem to recall you even had one on my patch, and you can't get more on the fringes of civilisation than that! happy.gif I think this is the post referring to the German girlfriend that you comment on, though in gross dereliction of duty you didn't mention either the black school knickers or the administration of the cane thereto! sad.gif

In a desperate attempt to say something vaguely on topic (very vaguely happy.gif) I shall pick up on that post, where you observe that both the Peruvian and German girlfriends got their CP in multiples of 5 because both countries used the metric system. Interesting that in the US, where most people outside the military wouldn't recognise the metric system if it jumped out and bit them in the bum, 5 swats seems to have become the permitted maximum for school paddlings in many administrations. Indeed, over in Renee's classroom thread here my current project is to commit a sin so heinous as to require a visit to the cyberspace conference room to undergo just such a fate. Trouble is while I await my chance I have to keep doing the darned homework to avoid getting suspended! happy.gifwink.gifhappy.gif

You said above:

[see colour chart when you turn of computer Lurkio] ;0)

Hmm, not sure what you mean by that. I see lots of colour charts. When somebody says "I'd like that background a bit purplish" (and believe me that's a highly explicit instruction by the standards of most people I deal with), all you can do is refer them to a colour chart!

 
 
KK

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 26 2011, 6:12 AM 

Esteemed and most worthy Another_Lurker,


Glass bottles come in a wide range of sizes, shapes and colours. There is no way of knowing how others perceive the colours, or of accurately displaying any specified colour on a computer monitor.

Coloured objects, such as bottles and knickers, absorb light - a subtractive process. Computer monitors emit light (red, green and blue) - an additive process.

The hexidecimal codes relate to the voltages applied to light emitting diodes on the monitor and not the resulting perceived colour, although the two are presumably roughly related.

My attempts to portray beer bottle brown above was not successful.

"Bottle green" confuses me as does "sky blue" (a mustard colour in Los Angles but a grey colour in England).

The not that important question is what colour is best for girls bloomers in the very unlikely event they might commit an offence and be appropriately punished for it. I would contend that knicker colour is not at all important in the case of bare bottomed punishment unless you are concerned about colour coordination after.


 
 


5 [or is it 6] green/brown bottles...

November 26 2011, 8:00 PM 

Evening Another_Lurker!

Yes, that message about Peru & Germany was brief. If my current partner had arrived & found me going on about the 2 of them on here her wrath would have been of biblical magnitude. Ms Peru didn't go into much detail but, re the metric business, she did mention that the usual implement was a "standard 25cm ruler" [5x5=25?]. Ms Germany is mentioned somewhere else apart from the message you found. Again not a clue where, but I know that at her German convent school it was cane ["rohrstock" I think], usually on the hands but if delivered by one particular Sister invariably on the [black] knickers. Punishment on the bare only happened to the younger girls via a spanking. At home she also got the wooden spoon on the bare from her mum until she was into her teens.

Thinking about the "5" business, if you were at a punchbag/killing tarantula/hammering something into a wall don't you hit in fives? I know I do. Maybe the "6" thing is part of ritual. As for Lady Mansfield, I G'gled her & she now looks like an Eva Braun Halloween mask. Nice part of the world though.


 
 
American Way

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 26 2011, 11:14 PM 

I found these two sites helpful as a beginner when it comes to colors and texts. Easy peasy to copy/paste text.

http://www.ripper1.com/nw54/marquee.php

http://www.colorcombos.com/orange-color-schemes.html


 
 
KK

Mountains and colour perception

November 27 2011, 11:42 PM 

Another_Lurker,

Climbing mountains is an entirely pointless activity. When you get to the top you just have to come down again. It is hard work, often uncomfortable, dangerous, and you often see very little but snow and ice.

Photographic evidence is attached.

The Mountain:

[linked image]


All that could be seen from the top:

[linked image]

Nothing bottle or other vaguely green in sight.

None of the mountains have ears.

 
 
Worldwide traveller

Correction

November 28 2011, 7:03 PM 

@AL I think you meant "I'd like that backSIDE a bit purplish"


 
 
Maureen

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 28 2011, 10:08 PM 

I was caned on the bare bottom and by my entirely male Headmaster in 1961. I don't really expect anybody to believe me. I had a hard time getting anybody to believe me fifty years ago. But it did happen. Trust me. For some reason I remember it vividly.

I have often wondered since at my Headmaster's motivation. I deserved to be punished very severely and the punishment I received was no different from that I know he gave boys, including my own brother a couple of years later who didn't deserve it as much as I did. I would like to believe that there was no ulterior motive in what happened but I'm not as naive as I was at the time and, of course, I wonder about it. I don't bear him any ill will anyway although it was a horrible experience at the time even if I did deserve it.

 
 
KK

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 28 2011, 11:05 PM 

Maureen,

You can do much to cool skeptism by providing a few details. You can do so without identifying or embarrassing anyone.

 1.      Where did your caning occur? Country, county or nearest large town?

 2.      What type of school? Large? Well known? Co-ed?

 3.      Approximately how old were you at the time, or what grade or class were you in?

 4.      What was the alleged offence?

 5.      Where did the caning take place? Headmaster's office, classroom, ....

 6.      Did the headmaster cane boys or girls often?

 
 
de Wolf

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 29 2011, 12:11 AM 

Hi Maureen,

I see no reason why you shouldn't be believed, especially as you state it was only the one caning. You sound quite convincing to me.
I have stated here, that it did go on in schools, but only on rare occasions.

Another_Lurker did inform me of the amount of small private schools, where the use of corporal punishment was given on the bare.

Also ex-headmaster George, lays claim most of his canings and slipperings were given on the bare, but that's debatable.

 
 
Maureen

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 29 2011, 7:58 AM 

In answer to your questions, KK, the school was a coeducational Grammar school in Derbyshire with a few hundred children. It was reasonably well known but it wasn't a really famous school. I was fourteen and I was caned in the Headmaster's office. Boys were caned quite often. It if wasn't daily, it was certainly more than weekly. Girls were caned much less often, only a few times a year. Both boys and girls got the slipper even more often.

I was caned because of two things that happened at the same time. Writing anonymous poison pen letters to one of our mistresses, and also stealing by finding a large amount of money. Both crimes were detected simultaneously when I was told to empty my pockets.

 
 
KK

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 29 2011, 5:38 PM 

Not much used in recent times but not forgotten, even if not infallible: Gender Genie


Algorithm (rather "technical" / "scientific"): http://u.cs.biu.ac.il/~koppel/papers/male-female-text-final.pdf

 
 
Alan Turing

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 29 2011, 8:13 PM 

KK: I see that Gender Genie thinks that Maureen's first post was written by a male, and that her second post was written by a female. Make of that what you will.

Maureen: Sorry about that: welcome to this Estimable Forum. As you say, I don't really expect anybody to believe me; over the years there have, indeed, been some strange posts here, but also many genuine and fascinating (and, occasionally, horrifying) tales of schooldays. If your tale is unusual, you might need to say a little more in order to convince some of our more sceptical readers.

I wonder if I might ask you a question? It is this: are you willing to say why you decided to post here? How did you find us?

 
 
Maureen

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 29 2011, 8:31 PM 

Despite what the Gender Genie might think, I am entirely female and while I am not at all surprised that people might find what I am saying hard to believe and might look for reasons not to believe me, I am telling the truth. If people do not believe me, then no skin off my nose, but that attitude could be why some women are not willing to talk about these things even when they did happen. Speaking for myself, I did find it very hard being disbelieved by most of my friends when this happened and it was even harder as a young woman. I became a teacher and I nearly always refused to use corporal punishment despite pressure from older staff and once when I was asked why by one of them and I told this story to her, it almost cost me my job because she wouldn't believe me either and jumped to some interesting conclusions. I was very glad when it was abolished although there have been times since where I would have liked having it back for a while.

If people want to ask me questions I am willing to try and answer them if I can. I should say right from the start that I am not going to tell people the name of my school. This is only because I believe my Headmaster might still be alive. He would be in his early 90s now but I know he was alive two years ago because I read a newspaper article about him then. I want to believe he was a good man and if I am right about that, I do not want to say something that might be used to damage his reputation.

I do think I should make one thing clearer. Most of the canings that the Headmaster gave were not on the bare bottom. Even with boys this was only an occasional thing. But we all knew that he did it sometimes. I did not expect it to happen to me but when it did because I knew it did happen to boys sometimes I couldn't really summon an argument against it even if I had been thinking clearly instead of being in a state of overwhelming guilt, panic and fear.

 
 
Maureen

Re: How common was bare bottom discipline?

November 29 2011, 9:16 PM 

Alan Turing, a friend drew my attention to an old discussion on this forum about canings in Derbyshire. After reading it, I found myself on the front page and saw this discussion. I decided to post a reply because a few people had mentioned the issue of girls and punishment on the bare bottom and I have something to say about that. I know it happened although I do not know how often but I also know how hard it can be to talk about it because it is often difficult for people to believe.

I am willing to answer most questions if people want to ask me. I am not going to answer every question. I am willing to talk about what happened to me but only if I think I am going to get a fair hearing. I cannot prove anything. I was not even able to prove it to my best friend when it happened. So I do not expect everybody to believe it if I write it down. But I do want people to try and be open minded.

 
 
American Way

Life in not fair

November 30 2011, 4:39 AM 

I try not to personalize things but wait a doggone moment. The honorable originator of the appellation estimable Forum had taken yours truly to task for improper capitalization. He didn't rebuke Alan or Renee for that matter for such an egregious error. sad.gif American Way

 
 
Alan Turing

Capital!

November 30 2011, 7:56 AM 

My dear American Way:

One starts with a forum. When talking about a particular forum, one would give it an initial capital letter; hence one talks about this Forum.

This Forum may be described, in due course, as an estimable Forum.

After some time, when no other forums1 have been described as estimable, one may regard the adjective "estimable" as part of the Forum's name. (The capital here indicates that I am talking about this Forum, not any other forum.)

Hence one may now talk about this Estimable Forum, in the same way as one talks about the Roman Forum.

I hope that's clear. wink.gif


1. As I have mentioned previously, the Latin plural fora is not an English word, and I will not use it here.

 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: Life in not fair

November 30 2011, 10:40 AM 

Hi American Way,

You say above:

The honorable originator of the appellation estimable Forum had taken yours truly to task for improper capitalization. He didn't rebuke Alan or Renee for that matter for such an egregious error.

Worry not! You should merely take it as a sign that in my eyes you are numbered amongst the great and the good of this estimable Forum. You are in extremely distinguished company for here I remonstrated with Jenny over that very same thing! wink.gif

Regarding Alan Turing, he is of course numbered amongst the great and the good, but he is also a Mathematician, and being considerably in awe of Mathematicians I would never dare to remonstrate with one over anything at all. Perish the very thought! happy.gifwink.gifhappy.gif

As for Renee, the objective danger posed by drawing attention to oneself, especially by remonstration of any sort, is simply too great, as that long overdue celebratory post will illustrate all too graphically. Allegedly! happy.gif

 
 
Alan Turing

Furthermore ...

November 30 2011, 11:57 AM 

The link given in Another_Lurker's post above (at 10:40 am) requires the word Forum to have an initial capital letter, but does not offer any view about whether or not the word Estimable should be written likewise. It follows that both "estimable Forum" and "Estimable Forum" should be regarded as correct usage; I have indicated that my preference now is for the latter.

 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: Correction

November 30 2011, 12:24 PM 

Hi Worldwide Traveller,

In response to a remark I made regarding background colours you said on November 28 2011 @ 7:03 PM:

@AL I think you meant "I'd like that backSIDE a bit purplish"

No, sorry, I was definitely referring to the CSS1 backgound-color:#rrggbb; property and property value.

Despite considerable pressure from the worldwide spanking community the proposed new CSS property

backside-state

together with the long list of proposed property values including:

appearanceCor, I bet that hurt!
A bit [CSS color value]ish
Well striped
Bruised
Looking distinctly tender
Definitely gated
etc., etc.

was omitted from the Backgrounds and Colors module of CSS3, and as this module is now in Candidate Recommendation status it is likely to be a considerable time before the proposal is considered again, if indeed it ever is. sad.gif

 
 

Another_Lurker

Re: Questions to Maureen

November 30 2011, 3:11 PM 

Although Maureen mentions that she is aware of the Forum Index and will thus have seen the new thread opened for her by The Forum Management, for the benefit of future readers of this thread it may be worth mentioning that the discussion initiated by Maureen's November 28 2011, 10:08 PM post above has now removed to the new Questions to Maureen thread.

 
 
Adrian

Bare bottom punishments

May 23 2012, 9:01 AM 

I went to school in the UK in the 1960's corporal punishment was very common & I don't know of any kid boy or girl who escaped getting it at least once. Being spanked or caned on the bare bottom though was very rare & reserved as a "special" punishment & since they were almost always administered in the principals office, most kids were too embarrassed to tell. I did get a bare bottom spanking once at primary school though by a female teacher along with 2 other boys & 2 girls. We played a lot together & were known by the teachers as the, "famous 5" & the concensus was we needed taking down a peg or 2. We'd been playing tag & were supposed to freeze like statues when the teacher on yard duty blew their whistle on the 2nd whistle we had to line up in our classes to go into school. We tried for ages extra seconds play time when the whistle blew & the teacher told us to line up with her class, not our own. She lined us up at her desk & spanked all 5 of us on the bare bottom in front of her class. The boys had their trousers & underpants pulled down & the girls got their dresses pulled up & their knickers taken down. It was so humiliating we were in the last year of primary school aged 11 & to be spanked bare bottom in front of her mixed class of giggling $ smirking 9 year olds was so embarrassing my cheeks were burning the girls were crying before they even got in when they realized what they were going to get. Must have shaped my behavior though because I never got another one.


 
 
Alan Turing

First principles

May 23 2012, 7:22 PM 

I went to school in the UK in the 1960's ... almost always administered in the principals office

In the 1960s schools in the UK had headmasters or headmistresses. They didn't have "principals".

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