Caning with trousers dowm

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/schoolcorporalpunishment/caning-with-trousers-dowm-t3258.html
Apr 17, 2012#1
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

After a few terms the headmaster changed and a much younger headmaster was appointed. He was much more concerned about discipline and used the cane quite frequently. He made boys drop their trousers and bend over when giving the cane which he was quite expert at. Four strokes in your pants was standard for offences such as smoking, talking to girls and other usual bad behaviour at a boarding school. Six would be given for the more serious matters particularly those that caused considerable trouble. Most boys said that either four or six was quite a painful experience.

He also introduced caning for poor work, this generally occured after a staff meeting during the middle of the term when work standards of each pupil were discussed. One term I was one of a number told to report to his study after morning classes. I was almost expecting to being caned in my pants and was almost looking forward to it! However, I was given a lecture about poor work and put on a work report scheme. Afterwards two other boys showed the results after being caned in their pants which were four red wheals.

Another_Lurker
10K
256
Apr 18, 2012#2
<div style=”width:100%;background-image:url(/realm/A_L_123/A_L_trg.gif);”>Hi Michael,

A most interesting post! But first let me say a personal welcome to this estimable Forum. I hope that you’ll find it worthwhile to continue posting.

Your post: As I say, most interesting! You indicate that you were at school in the 1960s, and though you do not actually say so, I assume that you were at school in the UK. You say that you were caned twice, though not explicitly mentioning when, how, or by whom. However your implication is that this was prior to the arrival of the new Headmaster who instigated the ‘caning with trousers down’, or to be more exact, ‘caning on the underpants’ regime. It was escaping a caning under this regime which led to subsequent regrets on your part, regrets you have addressed by seeking to replicate the experience in adult life.

You mention that the caning regime prior to the new Headmaster included caning over pyjamas and caning over games shorts, on occasion without underwear, as well as caning in the more conventional mode , over the trousers. At least two of these options, the pyjamas and the games shorts sans underpants, must have been equivalent in terms of lack of protection, and any consequential additional pain, to the caning mode used by the new Headmaster. You do not say if either of your two canings was in one of these modes, but if that was the case then clearly you did not recognise or accept that equivalency.

Without information other than that contained in your post I would conclude that your rejection of this equivalency was because the new regime represented an extension of the ritual of caning. Instead of arriving for the caning in, and being caned over, garments which in a boarding school at least were routine wear for sections of the day, there was a further significant step in the completion of the caning ritual, the enforced dropping of the trousers prior to then being caned over the underpants.

In the 1960s underpants likely to be worn by schoolboys would probably have afforded at least as much protection to privacy and person as pyjamas or games shorts. However being caned in the latter two did not include having to await and then respond to the command to formally relinquish and remove a layer of one’s mental privacy, and actual padding, during the caning process.

It would be interesting to know if you would indeed accept that this was the reason why you saw your not at all untypical experience of being caned twice at school as incomplete and unsatisfactory, or if you have other explanation. I hope that you’ll chose to comment. In the context it is perhaps also worth considering why the new Headmaster introduced such a regime.

Even in the 1960s schoolboys’ trousers, unlike say the kilts or winter skirts worn by some schoolgirls, were not of a thickness which would make much difference to the pain experienced during a hard caning. Though I have no practical experience of being caned, that point has been made here by people who have. Further, unlike kilts or skirts, even fairly loose trousers do not physically impede the path of the cane to the target area by introducing an air gap when bent over. They stretch fairly tightly over the region to be beaten. So there was no reason to require trousers to be dropped on either of those grounds.

If the persuasions of the new Headmaster were such that he found it enjoyable to witness boys in their underpants I am fairly sure that in a boarding school he could have could have found more than ample opportunity to indulge his predilections without drawing attention to them by introducing dropping of trousers into the caning process. So no reason to require the lowering of trousers there either.

No, the only reason for the innovation has to be an extension of the ritual. And ritual was (still sometimes is in places where it is still used) a vital part of severe, and indeed not so severe, school CP. The shock and awe, the exercise of absolute and irresistible power, the humiliation and submission of the victim by enforced obedience to commands which are clearly not in his or her best interests. At the subconscious, and indeed at the conscious level, those factors often seem to have been almost as important in the punishment process, and the subsequent forgiveness and wiping clean of the slate, as the actual punitive infliction of pain.

Can one experience a feeling of deprivation by not having experienced something which if actually encountered would have almost certainly been unpleasant? Yes, I think one can, especially if in one’s social environment that experience is regarded as something of a rite of passage.

I dabble with climbing. I am an extremely careful climber, and I am very selective as to who I climb with. As a consequence I have never had a serious fall. Serious falls can kill you, and often produce unpleasant injuries, but to many climbers they are a rite of passage. They feature often in pub conversations and the like. As a consequence, though generally logical and sensible, I do slightly regret that I have never had a serious fall. Preferably one where the rope stopped me before hitting anything hard, but fairly long, and with at least some of the protection ripping out. The sort that causes observers to be momentarily horror stricken and is dramatic enough when regaled in the pub to divert the attention of listeners from the fact that it’s your round!

So it is also with school CP. I deliberately and consciously evaded and avoided it when I was at school following an experience early in my schooling and I was never caned. This was in the late 1940s and the 1950s and virtually all the men and many of the women in my generation were caned. Indeed, in retrospect it was certainly a rite of passage, one of life’s markers. So now yes, I do find myself wondering what it would have been like, and I have an interest in details about the many and varied rituals used, and the experiences of others. Much as I like the technical aspects of producing complex posts here and assisting with queries that arise, I really can’t claim that as the sole reason I’m here, though I often try!

Unlike you I haven’t actively sought to make good my perceived loss in adult life. Just as I haven’t rigged a climb so that I could safely but dramatically fall off it, so also I haven’t taken steps to get myself caned, though both things would have been, indeed still would be, very easy. Clearly therefore I haven’t felt quite deprived enough as regards either experience.

But other things also bubble in the subconscious. My one significant school CP experience, when I was a little lad, was at the hands of a young lady teacher. Though admittedly usually at ages somewhat greater than mine at the time, several men who have posted here seem to have found such schoolboy experiences rather more memorable than those where they were punished by male staff. When in light-hearted mode, here and elsewhere, I sometimes seem to find myself in like mind.

I am certainly the most frequent visitor to the cyberspace conference room wherein one of my extremely esteemed lady fellow contributors conducts virtual paddlings of those who misbehave in her threads. (The outstanding post IS on its way Renee, upload to PhotoBucket problems!) Indeed, in one of our jocular Christmas threads I found myself going somewhat beyond the school CP level into the realms of the imaginary judicial!

Is this a result of a suppressed regret at not being caned by an attractive lady teacher when at school? Should I really have sought out a substitute experience in adult life? Would I run my first ever sub six minute mile if such an experience ever presented itself? Who knows? But let’s put it this way, if a future government proposed certain legislation involving ‘gender-transparent judicial corporal correction’ for minor offences (I’m sure that would be the politically correct terminology ) I’d be supporting it. Quite safely too, I’m sure, because I’d probably be exempt by age! Rather more difficult in the admittedly very unlikely event of a female acquaintance stipulating that the only possible way of assuaging some perceived hurt was for me to be in receipt of six of the best! What would I do? Would it influence my decision if the topic of this thread was involved? Well, who knows! </div>
QuoteLikeShare

OzSchoolboy
Apr 19, 2012#3
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

I can only assume that the lowering of the trousers or shorts would have had some kind of sexual excitement for the person administering the punishment, rather than the desire to punish misbehaviour or teach a lesson. In my experiences the cane went right through my shorts and underpants and stung terribly. Like you I have been caned as an adult and I told the person giving me the cane that I would always have butterflies while waiting for my punishment and the person replied that a couple of the men they had dealt with over the years had expressed similar sentiments. For me there was something outside of the thwack of the cane that appealed to me and I can only put that down to the actual ritual rather than the actual sting of the cane.

One of the arguments against corporal punishment is that it can bring about the sexual desire to be spanked or receive other forms of corporal punishment or engage in bondage. It would appear that this is the case for some posters on this message board.
QuoteLikeShare
dominum
1,407
Apr 19, 2012#4
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

As somebody who did administer such punishments on a few occasions as a teacher, let me assure you I got no sexual excitement out of doing so, and that had nothing to do with the reason I administered such punishments. I would have preferred not to do so but it was something that was expected that a senior Master would do on occasion in the school at that time, and I would not have been promoted to what was the most junior of senior Master positions if I had not been willing to do it in those circumstances.

I agree that it does not make any substantial difference to how painful the caning is – I received two canings like this myself as a school boy so I did have direct experience. But I believe the reason it was done in both the school I attended as a child and the school I became a teacher in, was because at the time, use of the cane was so commonplace and so normal for even relatively minor offences, that it was considered important to have some way of making it clear to all concerned that this particular matter was especially serious. When the cane is the normal punishment and even six of the best is routine, you need something more as the nuclear deterrent – and as you can’t easily make a caning more physically severe without risking serious injury (and, in fact, the first time I administered such a caning, it was quite vividly driven home to me that this was a real risk) – it had to be done in some other way. In both my childhood and the early part of my teaching career, this was sometimes done in one of two ways – caning on the bare bottom, or caning in front of an assembly of some sort. The caning wasn’t necessarily any worse physically, but the point made about the seriousness of the offence was quite different.

I certainly couldn’t say no teacher ever got sexual pleasure out of this – I’m certain at some point, some did. But I think most teachers who did it, did it without such concerns being relevant and that was definitely true in my case. I would have preferred not to do it – but I also wanted to continue rising through the ranks and I had to do what my superiors expected me to. As soon as I became senior enough to actually help change the policy, I did help change it – but there were a few years before that where I still had to do what I was told or I would have both harmed my own career and they would have just found somebody else to do it even if I had refused – and frankly, they did deserve severe punishments.
QuoteLikeShare
Another_Lurker
10K
256
Apr 19, 2012#5
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

I am happy to have your more detailed confirmation that it was unlikely that Michael’s Headmaster gained any sexual pleasure in introducing the new aspect of the caning routine, a point I tried to make. Michael himself says that the new Head was ‘was much more concerned about discipline’. In my opinion he was simply trying to make the disciplinary message of the caning more emphatic. As you note he could also have done this by caning in front of a peer group, or the entire school, an alternative extension to the ritual comprising an element of the punishment.

It would be interesting to hear from Michael if indeed the new Headmaster did introduce any form of ‘public’ punishment as his very occasional ‘nuclear deterrent’. It would not surprise me if he did. Speaking purely personally I am fairly sure that I would have regarded this latter, even without any disrobing, as a more serious punishment than having to drop my trousers and receive the same number of strokes over my underpants in the privacy of the Headmaster’s study. That in turn I would have perceived as more serious than the same caning over my trousers, despite the fact that the pain would apparently be similar.

Others may disagree, and I have to speak theoretically because I was never caned at school in any mode. But I don’t think I’d have been untypical in my assigned weightings! Certainly I do remember specific distress that my one significant school punishment was in front of a class of older children (50+ of them in those days ) and that subsequently my teacher made an example of myself, and the other children from my class involved, in front of our own class.

Again as regards the new Head’s motives, back in August 2008 I argued in the Kinky Teachers – maybe not? thread that the misuse of school punishments for sexual gratification by teachers was actually pretty rare. Nothing I’ve seen in the intervening period has convinced me otherwise.</div>
QuoteLikeShare
KKxyz
3,590
53
Apr 19, 2012#6
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

In recent times things have changed (not everywhere) to the detriment of all.
QuoteLikeShare
willyeckaslike
Apr 20, 2012#7
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

Might be considered VERY INTERESTING by some people.

QuoteLikeShare
beanokid
Apr 20, 2012#8
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

dominum
1,407
Apr 21, 2012#9
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

and

Welcome back Dr Dominum ! We have missed your informative and thought-provoking contributions

Well, this is interesting.

As far as I am concerned, I haven’t really been absent from this forum – I just haven’t been posting anywhere near as often. I’m afraid that certain events last year mean I have to be more circumspect than I once was about certain things – certain people doing certain things based on looking into the details of what I have reported here relating to the recent use of corporal punishment in Victorian schools have wound up causing – in some cases, deliberately, in most cases, probably unintentionally – schools some issues. When people who didn’t know about something (in some cases probably deliberately) are suddenly informed of things they didn’t know about, when people and groups who would prefer not to be involved in discussions of certain issues suddenly find themselves being asked direct questions about them – well, in simple terms, after years of feeling I could be open on this forum as long as I stayed within certain parameters without any real problems arising, I realised the climate has changed and I need to be more careful. So I’ve been reading – but may only post in cases where I think I have something significant and important enough to contribute for it to be truly worth having to deal with more potential upset. In the end, my school and the welfare of my students has to come before other considerations, including my freedom to discuss things I’d like to discuss and sometimes feel should be discussed.

And when ‘thought-provoking contributions’ also provoke allegations that innocent people sharing their personal stories or the fruits of their labours are not who they are say they are, and further provoke inquiries and questions of a type we’d prefer were avoided, it makes me even more circumspect.

I will post in cases when there is something I do think I can add to the discussion, a perspective that many won’t have. But for me, this isn’t and can’t be an intellectual or academic exercise or a bit of fun as it can be a lot of other people. I have obligations to do my best to ensure a significantly sized group of people get their best chance in life and everything else has to be secondary to that. Even if it further limits my own ability to participate in a forum I rather enjoy being involved in.
QuoteLikeShare
stephenhutchings
Apr 22, 2012#10
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

There were no trousers down caning at the school i attended,at least i never heard of any and i,m
sure word would have spread very quickly if there had been
The nearest i came was being caned and slippered over gym shorts by the p.e master in a p.e lesson
I suppose it would be the same as being caned/slippered with trousers down as gym shorts were made
from thin material so offered no protection at all,and it hurt like hell,that from personal experience
QuoteLikeShare
Guest
Apr 22, 2012#11
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

Yes, I believe it is to some extent. But what is wrong with that? Or at least what is wrong with the first two?

I do not believe it is either reasonable nor helpful to humiliate a boy in the course of punishing him. But humiliate has a particular meaning – it refers to something fairly extreme. One of the problems in the modern world seems to be that many people don’t seem to understand the concept of ‘degree’. Everything is seen in black and white – the mildest slap is treated as equivalent to the most savage beating. Being mildly embarassed is treated as if it’s equivalent to being utterly mortified. And the fact that when something is taken to extremes it becomes wrong, winds up being used as a reason to oppose things being used in a mild and moderate fashion.

It doesn’t make any sense, but it’s what a lot of people do.

A child who misbehaves should not be humiliated in response to their behaviour but there is nothing wrong in many cases with them being embarassed or ashamed of their behaviour. Indeed, they should be embarassed about their misbehaviour. They should be ashamed of their misbehaviour. These are natural feelings for human beings who have done something they know they shouldn’t have – humiliation goes too far for most purposes.

These feelings are healthy and helpful in moderation – but not if they become extreme. But the fact there are extreme forms, should not mean we don’t make use of the milder forms.

Either he’s mortified by letting another man see his buttocks and penis;

In a boarding school environment – and even more so in a boarding school environment in the past – this should not be a factor.

or he’s humiliated because someone else has got the power to make him expose himself; or he feels reduced in status because he has nothing on and the teacher is clothed;

These two factors are relevant – and except for the word ‘humiliated’ (which, as I’ve said above, goes too far to be accurate in most cases) is probably a large part of the reason these punishments were used, and were effective. But to understand why, I’d phrase them a little differently – it reminded the boy that he under the control and influence of the person punishing him. That he did have to comply with the punishment being imposed. That if he could not control himself, other people did have the power and the right to exert control over him. Is this humiliating? It shouldn’t be – not in a healthy environment, and not if the boy has a normal psychological makeup – although it may be, as I said earlier, embarassing on some level.

or because an office or classroom (as opposed to a gang shower) is a place where it isn’t normal to be naked. A lot of people might say that, even if a smacked arse is an appropriate punishment for a naughty boy, this kind of thing amounts to sexual humiliation and should never be used.

Whether it’s “sexual humiliation” or not (and I agree that should never be used) will depend largely on context. You’ve anticipated part of what I have to say about this (referring to environments where nudity is common), and I’ve quoted it below, but I’m separating this out to comment here, because I think it’s a lot more complex than whether or not nudity is commonplace. An environment can be one where it is absolutely routine for boys to be naked – and could still be a sexually humiliating environment, if, for example, it’s an environment where they know there is a teacher who has inappropriate behaviours and attitudes towards boys, or if it’s an environment where older boys tease younger boys about their appearance, etc. There are all sorts of situations which can make an environment where nudity is problematic.

And in any of those situations, a form of punishment that could exacerbate the problems of that particular environment probably shouldn’t be used.

But in environments where those things aren’t a problem – why should problems that exist elsewhere be allowed to infect practices in environments where there aren’t any problems. All that does is spread the contagion further and further away. It winds up harming more people.

But Dr D would, I am sure, say that in boys boarding schools, communal dorms, group showers, medicals and skinny dipping are so common that boys don’t particularly mind other people seeing them naked — their used to it.

What I would actually say is more like if boys are in an environment where nudity is a normal part of life (and that is true in most boarding schools and used to be even more true and is often true in non-boarding environments as well – boarding houses in schools are now fairly likely to have individual showers and a fair degree of privacy – while gang showers and changing en masse may still be occurring in the sports areas of the school) and if it really doesn’t seem to bother them, it’s not something they should be made to feel that they should be worried about it. If, for any reason, boys are uncomfortable with the situation (beyond an initial acclimitisation period, anyway) things might have to be done differently. My point is, boys should not be made to feel this is a problem if they don’t believe it is – but if they decide for themselves that it is a problem, people should be looking into why, and perhaps something needs to be done about that (sometimes nothing more than talking about it – sometimes more than that).

If that’s right, then pulling your pants down doesn’t particular make the caning worse. So what on earth is the point of it?

As I said, a lot of it is symbolic – pure and simple. Symbols do have value – if a boy knows this is a worse punishment, he will see it as a worse punishment. But also – a lot of what goes on is belief. As an adult, looking back on my experiences, I don’t believe that the bare bottom canings I received were significantly more painful than the others I received (well, the one where I got eight strokes was – but the two extra strokes were what made it worse) – but at the time I absolutely believed that being made to take my trousers and underpants down would make things much more painful. There was also the fact that everybody knew that not all canings were identical – a Master could cane hard or less hard. If he was making you pull down your trousers, obviously he was planning to do everything he possibly could to make this one hurt.
QuoteLikeShare
KKxyz
3,590
53
Apr 24, 2012#15
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

Getting caned might be very embarrassing without in anyway causing humiliation, depending on how the caning is received.
QuoteLikeShare
beanokid
Apr 24, 2012#16
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

Somewhere along the line, society has decided that children should have more privacy now than they used to. There should be a compelling reason for that privacy to be violated in any significant way. The only situation in which a teacher in a modern school should be able to require a student to be nude are those relating to health, safety, and hygiene – certainly not in a punishment situation. And students should be aware of their rights in this regard, and properly object if those rights are violated. We’re talking about a significant intrusion here – the case for such an intrustion would have to be extremely strong – so strong that I can’t think of a valid case in a modern context.

But even though I believe most boys would not want this to happen, and should not be forced to experience it, I don’t believe most boys would find it humiliating in a decent environment. Embarassing – possibly.

There are occasions in a school when teachers might see students undressed – supervising changing for sport, showers, etc. In a boarding situation, it is even more likely. It should not be humiliating, it really shouldn’t be embarassing either. It should just be part of what happens. But schools also need to make sure that nothing untoward happens, of course. And not have it happen anymore often than it needs to.
QuoteLikeShare
beanokid
Apr 24, 2012#18
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

So the reason for making them do it was to make the whacking hurt more.

But being whacked with your pants down doesn’t make the whacking hurt more.

Ah, but the boys THINK it will, so the experience is more scary over all.

Is that a fair summary?
QuoteLikeShare

JennyBr
1,776
2
Apr 24, 2012#19
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

You make some excellent points in your post of April 20 2012 @ 10:19 PM

Symbolism is a significant factor in CP, or any punishment for that matter. Being sent to the Head. was seen as more serious than being punished by a teacher – even if the Head imposed a lesser punishment.

I know, from personal experience, that a severe slippering could be more painful than a moderate caning. Nevertheless, regardless of the severity of either, the slipper was invariably seen as a less serious punishment than the cane. This was emphasized in those schools where, for a given offence, boys would be caned but girls would “only get the slipper”.

Possibly the least severe punishment I ever received was four strokes of the cane for flashing my boobs to some boys (I related the incident here.) Despite the punishment being no more than a token, not one of us considered we’d been let off. We didn’t even get much of a lecture, just the “inappropriate behaviour, blah, blah, blah…..” We’d been caned so it was a serious punishment, made so solely by the symbolism.

In England, in many schools teachers used the slipper and only Headteachers used the cane. That gave a clear distinction between “everyday” and “serious” punishments. In Scotland, that distinction wasn’t as clear because both teachers and Headteachers used the tawse – although Headteachers tended to use a heavier one. Being sent the the Head. was still seen as more serious though.

The combination of factors involved is very complex. I recently posted the following to another forum –

Add in the other common school punishments such as “telling off”, detention and lines then put them in order of increasing severity (in terms of pain). Next try putting them in increasing order of “seriousness” and then in order of “undesirability” (from a recipient’s point of view). I suspect the extremes would be the same in all three but, in the middle, the orders would differ.

At my school, we were always caned or slippered over our skirts (unless they were too short when we bent over) but, in some schools girls had to lift their skirts to be caned or slippered. This was often for purely practical reasons as a skirt can significantly impede a cane or slipper. It was not likely to have been done to humiliate the girl because, in co-ed schools, this would usually be in private. The increased pain and embarrassment of exposing her underwear was mitigated, to some extent, by her not suffering the embarrassment of being punished in front of the class. Trousers do not significantly impede a cane so making boys (or girls) take their trousers down to be caned was not for practical reasons.

That fact that boys or girls might be used to teachers seeing them naked would not lessen the humiliation they might feel at being required to remove clothing to be caned. The situations are completely different. The humiliation doesn’t come from their nakedness, it comes from being treated with contempt. Men have told me that they felt humiliated when they were slippered in front of a mixed sex class because, being a sexist school, girls were exempt. Other women have told me that they felt humiliated at being let off because “you’re only a girl” – especially if an equally guilty boy were punished.

You said –

You’re probably right with those particular examples but suppose the Head. kept a “special cane” for use only in exceptional cases. It needn’t be any different from the “everyday” cane in effect, just a different colour would do. The fact that it was only used rarely would give it a special significance. I saw getting the slipper as just “one of those things” – especially with some teachers. Even quite minor misbehaviour would result in a slippering. To get the cane however, we had to do something very serious (at least in the Head’s. eyes) so it had a special significance. Now, suppose “six of the best” was a common punishment for even minor matters. Simply getting the cane wouldn’t carry much significance but getting the “special cane” would. Just as giving my friends and me the cane for the boob flashing incident signified the seriousness of the offence, getting the “special cane” would signify an exceptional punishment.

QuoteLikeShare
de Wolf
Apr 24, 2012#20
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

I presume the few canings you referred to on the bare, were in private? If this were so, who would be the wiser had the student been caned over clothes?

You would have us believe your forthcoming promotions would have been hampered, had you not conformed to an unwritten rule of caning a student on the bare buttocks?

On the very few occasions I’ve read of a teacher who has used CP on a student, on the bare, I always view it with suspicion, because in my opinion it is completely unnecessary. A caning can be just as effective over clothes, and believe me I know from actual experience.
QuoteLikeShare
Branctus
Apr 27, 2012#21
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

It is good to see you still posting occasionally. You certainly put to shame SIR JOHN and myself, who were recently debating who was the ‘oldest inhabitant’ of this estimable Forum. For the benefit of our more recent recruits George was born on 10 December 1916, so is now nearly 95½ and still posting! For those unfamiliar with it, his series on the duties of a war time Headmaster is a historical document which should not be missed:

<div style=”padding-left:40px;padding-right:20px;”>
war time head…introduction

</li>
wartime heads…to morning break

</li>
wartime heads…break to lunch

</li>
Lunch to end of school

</li>
last part of the day</li>
</div>
Whilst I can throw no light on the effects of a cane, whether over trousers (patched or otherwise), over underpants, or on the bare, I can certainly confirm George’s comments regarding the thick heavy material used for school trousers in the post-war period and the fact that in those days patching was frequently resorted to rather than replacement. Post war, and into the 1950s, times were hard!</div>
QuoteLikeShare
pyjamaboy
43
Jun 05, 2012#26
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

One wonders if he could, then why he didn’t do this previously? Or was this method an easier option?
QuoteLikeShare
George
Jun 06, 2012#28
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

George
QuoteLikeShare
de Wolf
Jun 09, 2012#29
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

If you had been used to using the cane/slipper, then suddenly this form of chastisement was taken from you, how would you have then managed?

Another point I’d like to make is if your use of CP was effective, why did you have to use it to the extent you did? It obviously didn’t work for you.
QuoteLikeShare
george
Jun 09, 2012#30
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

Not being given the cane in my pants had a lasting effect on me and I really regretted that I had not received this type of caning. Consequently as an adult I have had to arrange to pay visits to have canings sometimes bare but often with pants or even navy gym knickers being worn. I must say that the headmaster’s punishment or lack of it has been a lasting memory, but has given me an enjoyable adult pleasure.
Click to expand…
I will answer your three points. Firstly, one cannot compare modern day youth with the youth of the 1950’s. To say how I would have dealt with them in the 1950’s is a question that cannot be answered, as the problems and social conditions are not the same. In the 1950’s pupils were not so violent, on drugs and with society going mad giving them so much protection that they cannot even be told off. Most problems today come from the 15/16 year olds…in the 1950’s they would not have caused problems as they would have left school. As to the younger ones, unlike today teachers and the police were very much respected and children would not dare answer them back for fear of a whacking from their parents if they found out as well as a thrashing from the person concerned. if modern day youths were put back into the 1950 era,with the views of the 1950’s prevailing both in pupils and society i would not have hesitated in taking trousers and pants down and caning their bottoms.
As to the point of what I would have done if cp had been done away with overnight is hard to say. Something would have to be put in its place. It is because things that were introduced to replace cp have slowly been removed under the title of “human rights” or “abuse” that discipline is now so poor in school.I think if it had been abolished in 1950 I, sand most teachers would have left teaching as discipline would have broken down. As we moved to 1985 things changed. Class sizes were much smaller, its easier to control 24 pupils without cp than 55. Attitudes of parents had changed and with it pupils expectations of teachers. In 1985 more parents were using other sanctions such as grounding, household duties and loss of pocket money to punish there pupils expected teachers to use such things as detention rather than the cane. However in the 1950 era and before, and parent who was dealing with a naughty child would, in 99% of cases, gave the childs bottom a sound whacking. The same was expected at school. If a child broke the rules both other pupils and the childs parents would expect the cane to be used. if it was not used it was regarded as not punishing the child.
True, some may feel that I used the cane a lot but it must be put into context of both the 1950 era and the area of the school. In the war years, it was not the local children that were mostly caned but the evacuquees who may only be staying for three or four weeks before being moved on. Often these were ill disciplined and needed a couple of encounters with the cane to learn that at this school rules had to be obeyed and if they were not punishment was swift and hard. You had just got them settled and they were moved on, and so the process started again.
In the 1950’s the population settled down but my area was hardle effected by a lot of cheap homes being built to house those from badly bombed areas, that had been moved into this tempory accommodation so that these inner city areas could be rebuilt. These familes were often large and the boys had been use to doing as they liked at home, in the streets and at school. All of a sudden they had to do as they were told as the local people would not tolerate their conduct. Again these people only stayed for a couple of years while re-building was going on, and all the time more of these prefab/temporay homes were being built. If one thinks about it, if the school had only 650 pupils (I could look up the actual numbers)and each pupil was only caned once in the school over a full four year stay this amounted to four canings a week). The trouble is those in the prefab buildings were only around for a couple of years and it was these boys that took most of the canings. They needed to feel the sting of the cane two or three times across their bare bottoms before the message was learnt that their misconduct was not going to be tolerated. Also during this period outsides often reported pupils to the school for misconduct outside school hours….yes….the school did have powers over pupils out of school hours and over school holidays. People reported these boys to the school, as they felt it was a waste of time seeing their parents as they hardy did anything, and did not want to envolve the police. Such offences were stealing sweets from the sweet shop or throwing mud at washing or playing on the railway. The local shopkeepers rather report boys to me, if from my school, to give them six swift ones on the bottom with the cane, often in their presence. Society rerquired me to do this, and I have not doubt if I had not law and order would have become a major problem. It was effective, but the trouble was boys often needed to feel it two or three times over a period of time before they started to understand they had to behave. just as they started to understand they were moved into the new housing, out of area, and a new group had to be taught, so the caning started again. The cane certain kept the situation under controland in my view and more importantly the views of the local people it did work.
I could provide an answer tghat goes on for pages as to how it changed as time moved on and would be happy to do so if it is of any interest or indeed answer any other points.

George
QuoteLikeShare
Another_Lurker
10K
256
Jun 09, 2012#31
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

I understand the basis of the question you are putting to George. It is an argument often posited by anti-CP contributors here, and while I think it rests on a false premise I can see why it is used.

However, there is a simple response to it. You will I am sure be aware that a large and increasing number of children in today’s liberal UK state school regimes fail to reach even the most basic standards of literacy and numeracy, something which is giving rise to admitted official concern and is causing us to fall behind on international rankings of educational attainment.

Well that wasn’t the case in George’s day, and it wasn’t the case not long afterwards when I was at school. And why not? Simply because the strict school corporal punishment based disciple then used took up very little time but was extremely effective! It left teachers free to teach properly instead of wasting an inordinate amount of their time seeking and employing ineffective non-corporal methods to deal with the troublemakers instead of attending to the education of the rest of their charges.</div>
QuoteLikeShare
KKxyz
3,590
53
Jun 09, 2012#32
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

QuoteLikeShare
Carl
Jun 10, 2012#34
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

Thanks for your message! I have two questions I hope you want to reply to. The first is: why didn’t the shopkeepers administer the canings themselves? And the second is: was it necessary now and the to punish the pupils with two trashings (one administered by the shopkeeper and one by you?

Kind regards,
Carl
QuoteLikeShare
de Wolf
Jun 11, 2012#35
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

I don’t come into the category of the anti-caning brigade, more of the last resort ideology. It isn’t always black and white, where bad behaviour is involved. Sometimes there is a deep seated psychological problem, and a caning could have a reverse effect.

The Government must have been listening to you, because they are proposing to improve spelling and grammar in primary schools. Also teaching a second language.

It was often the case where children were given CP for failing to achieve a required test result for either a spelling or maths test. If a child struggles with one, or both of these subjects, but tries hard, it would be totally wrong to use CP in these circumstances, do you not agree?
QuoteLikeShare
Another_Lurker
10K
256
Jun 13, 2012#36
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

Hmm, so I’ve categorised you wrongly as regards your attitude to CP. The better we get to know each other the more we find how little divides us. I am put in mind of a comment by once prolific contributor Mimi here.

I’m sure that I don’t have to tell you that I am fully in agreement with a return to concentration on the three Rs. When you get to the point where a certificate in ‘Nail Technology’ (that’s finger and toe nails, not the useful sort adjusted with Birmingham screwdrivers) is regarded as the equivalent of two good passes in academic GCSEs something is badly wrong, and it is doing our international standing no good at all.

BUT it never has been and never will be right to punish children, by CP or any other means, because they can’t do any school subject, academic or otherwise, very well. It was wrong to slipper boys who couldn’t do gym to save their lives, which happened to some of my fellow pupils at secondary school, though happily not to me, but it could have done. It is usually equally wrong, as appears to be the case in some surreptitiously shot cell-phone videos from Asian countries, to corporeally punish children for failure in academic tests.

However, in the latter case the technique certainly seems to produce results, the countries concerned come pretty near the top of the educational attainments league table and are extremely competitive economically. And there are circumstances where the punishment would be appropriate, at least in my opinion. If a pupil is perfectly capable of scoring well in tests or examinations, but doesn’t do so because of laziness or some other factor entirely under their own control, then punishment, corporal punishment if it fits the bill, seems to me perfectly reasonable.

When I stopped working and bombed in my mock A-levels despite having been predicted excellent results, if the Headmaster had caned me in the resulting interview instead of using what were probably in my case even more devastating tactics, he’d have been perfectly justified.</div>
QuoteLikeShare
Norman
Jun 24, 2012#37
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

1. To eliminate differences caused by the wearing of different weight and style clothing.

2. To allow the target to be better seen and more accurately targeted.

3. To allow any wounding to be monitored and the severity of the caning to be adjusted if required.

4. To expand the range of possible punishments and to allow especially egregious offences to be dealt with.
QuoteLikeShare
george
Jun 27, 2012#44
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

About UK school CP, they say:

“Pants-down” punishment, not unknown in some private schools, was unheard of in the state sector. Even if it was not explicitly forbidden anywhere, the authorities probably would not have tolerated it. The only known exception is that gym/PE teachers, at any rate in some boys’ secondary schools, would occasionally mete out slipperings in the changing room, where recipients might happen to be in a state of undress at the crucial moment

http://www.corpun.com/counuks.htm

QuoteLikeShare
Lotta_Nonsense
374
Jul 03, 2012#46
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

As he rightly points out, Colin Farrell’s corpun.com assures us that ‘pants down’ punishments were unknown in UK state schools – outside a gym environment in which the pupil was already undressed.

What corpun.com is saying is that, despite their extensive and ongoing research, they are unable to find a single occasion upon which any UK state pupil was disciplined in a headmaster’s office without the protection of his trousers.

Clearly, Colin Farrell and George are very much at odds.

QuoteLikeShare
Guest
Jul 03, 2012#47
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

Changes of head lead to updating of paperwork to reflect modern practice. Even when our school finally abolished the cane , i believe although it was announced , the written rules took a few years to update!
QuoteLikeShare
George
Jul 04, 2012#48
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

Not being given the cane in my pants had a lasting effect on me and I really regretted that I had not received this type of caning. Consequently as an adult I have had to arrange to pay visits to have canings sometimes bare but often with pants or even navy gym knickers being worn. I must say that the headmaster’s punishment or lack of it has been a lasting memory, but has given me an enjoyable adult pleasure.
Click to expand…
Firstly I would like to stress that I think Colin Farrells site is first class and gives a good insight into corporal punishment. However, to say that this gives the complete picture is not true. On his site he states, and parts quoted here “Pants-down” punishment, not unknown in some private schools, was unheard of in the state sector. Even if it was not explicitly forbidden anywhere, the authorities probably would not have tolerated it. The only known exception is that gym/PE teachers, at any rate in some boys’ secondary schools, would occasionally mete out slipperings in the changing room, where recipients might happen to be in a state of undress at the crucial moment. It was a mild example of what Americans call “locker-room culture”, an often semi-jocular experience in an often somewhat “macho” atmosphere. (To a cynical young audience today, this will no doubt sound like what is inevitably nowadays called “abuse”, but it felt perfectly reasonable in the context of the time.)
Does not give a true picture. I have never said corporal punishment on the bare bottom in state schools was common, what I am saying it did in a tiny number. The above refers to changing room slipperings, which gives the impression that no boy was asked to pull his shorts or pants down and bend over to have the slipper across his bare bottom. The implication is that this never occurred, and the only time that a bare bottom was whacked was, if for some reason, he was already undressed. The word happen implies they had just come out of the shower for example and not actually made to bare their bottom. I could quote many cases, but the one most members will know is in the book Last Resort published by STOPP. Here, a long account, backed by many boys (so STOPP says) where a whole class of 13/14 year olds were marched into the gym in the next PE lesson following a complaint from a student teacher. The punishment is described We had to step forward in turn and lower our shorts for two of the slipper on the bare backside. Boys were not excepted to take their shorts down until it was their turn to be whacked and could pull them up again directly afterwards. In practice most boys remained naked from the start to finish of the slipperings. Away from the gym you would have done something about it. These may not be the exact words but are close. My point is that either STOPP made up this story, boys got together and made it up or this sweeping statement suggesting boys were never told to take shorts down and be slippered on the bare bottom is just not true in 100% of cases.
CF has started to do a lot more research into English schools, but these rely on information in the media or people contacting him. MOST ARE ONLY PUBLISHED WHEN PROOF CAN BE FOUND.. Some of this information is taken from Friends Re United and question marks need placing against a lot of it as well as the Experience Site. CF puts most info from the Re-United site on his site, as one person confirms the other, and is very much the norm. However, if a post, may be just one, and is not confirmed by other pupils, stares they got it on the bare bottom it is not included. Rightly so, as it cannot be proved. That does not in all cases mean that the person was lying or it did not take place, only that it cannot be backed. I wonder how CF will deal with the slippering case quoted above, and many of the other statements, that if you have real research motives can be accessed, but not reproduced,CF does state that some LEA, not many clearly stated that the cane only be used on the hands or clothed buttocks. This can also indicate that these LEA felt the need to include this clause as in some LEA areas the cane was being used bare, and did not want it in their area. If it was not taking place bare in some cases why did they feel this regulation needed adding.
PLEASE READ NEW TOPIC MOVING THE GOAL POSTS
QuoteLikeShare
Lotta_Nonsense
374
Jul 04, 2012#49
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

If, on my Porkie Pie Scale, I were to score all the posts ever made on SCP from 1 (the truth) to 100 (the most outrageous load of twaddle any human mind has ever attempted to pass off as the truth), I would at all times during the last several years have scored your professional life story a resounding 100 which would have meant I considered it about as far from the truth as it was possible to be.

However, a few days ago things changed considerably.

With the advent of ‘Adam’ and his tales of rural Tasmania, I have had to revise my scale in order to keep things in perspective.

You are still at 100 and every other pre-Adam post remains in its previous position, while Adam’s story sits at position 9,999.

So you see, George. Relatively speaking, you’re now almost credible.
QuoteLikeShare
george
Jul 04, 2012#50
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

If your offence was serious you would be pretty sure it would mean having to take your trousers down.What I remember most is the gravity of the occasion, knees knocking, heart pounding and hands sweaty.If your offence was serious you would at least be pretty sure before going to the study that it would mean a trousers down caning. After a brief lecture you heard the dreaded order to take your trousers down and heard the Head say something like he intended you to feel this properly. It was the awful embarrassment of the occasion and the exposure of your underwear in front of the fully dressed Head and the feeling of vulnerability that stays with me. Looking down at the floor to see my trousers in a heap round my ankles and then bending over the punishment stool head out of sight one side and bottom horribly exposed and raised high the other.

I don’t think there was much difference in the pain level, to me it always felt as if my bottom was naked, so intense was the bite of the cane, the little cotton pants did nothing at all to protect me except I suppose my modesty. The deep weals on my buttocks seemed the same as with trousers up. I can only think that the experience left a lasting impression and the wish to behave better to avoid such a hellish indignity again.

Strangely I never bore any grudges for this, it was usually a fair cop. Weirdly I now feel the need to revisit this traumatic experience and back in school shorts still hear the command to take my trousers down and be caned hard across the tight seat of my underpants. Now I admit is is very exciting, yet still fearful and afterwards sexually arousing.

My old HM did not I think derive any pleasure from seeing boys bend over in their little schoolboy pants for the cane, but who knows?
QuoteLikeShare
Pensioner James
Aug 31, 2012#52
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

I was attending Secondary school at the time and would be about 13 years old (circa 1952/3).

The lady had been my class teacher at Junior school and was quite friendly with my mother. She was still teaching at the Junior school and I was told to report to her after school. There was no lecture. She just instructed me to lower my trousers and underpants and bend over a desk. I did as I was told – you didn’t argue with teachers in those days – then she whacked my backside very firmly with a belt.

I recall the whole episode as being over very quickly and a tearful experience – my tears of course. I should add that the lady was, at least to me, elderly, probably in her fifties.

I wonder if any other forum poster was sent to a teacher by a parent.
QuoteLikeShare
c.farrell
Sep 03, 2012#53
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

George has spotted that my site does indeed recycle a Friends Reunited anecodate about bare-bottom punishment in a state school. The individual FR anecdotes are not meant to be taken as gospel, only to give a general overall picture. Readers are expected to treat purely anecdotal evidence with some reserve. People do misremember things, and sometimes people make stuff up (though I would not think Friends Reunited a very likely forum for making stuff up).

None the less, when I wrote that pants-down punishments were “unheard of” (in the state sector in relatively modern times), I should perhaps have written “almost unheard of”, and I will amend the text accordingly.
QuoteLikeShare
John Day
Sep 17, 2012#54
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

Colin Farrell wrote (in part):

Are you saying that pants-down punishments were common or just that it was practiced at your school when you were there? Please, what decade was that?

QuoteLikeShare
Tom
Dec 29, 2012#57
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

Not being given the cane in my pants had a lasting effect on me and I really regretted that I had not received this type of caning. Consequently as an adult I have had to arrange to pay visits to have canings sometimes bare but often with pants or even navy gym knickers being worn. I must say that the headmaster’s punishment or lack of it has been a lasting memory, but has given me an enjoyable adult pleasure.
Click to expand…
I think that canings with trousers down were rare in state schools. In primary school I heard about, but did not see, a boy punished by a (female) teacher who took his trousers down and hand-spanked him on his underpants. In secondary school I only knew of one instance, and that involved me, and it was completely my own fault. I remember it all too well.
It was spring or early summer 1965, I was 14 and in my third year in secondary school. I had been teased during school dinners and had reacted by throwing a beaker of water at one of my tormentors(it missed). At the end of lunch time the teacher supervising told me to report to the headmasters office at the end of school. When I did I was told that the headmaster was out, and I should report to him the following morning at break time. I had already suffered an afternoon of torture, and this continued for the rest of the day. I had never been caned in secondary school, but everyone said it really hurt. I had a well-deserved reputation as a wimp (though I dont think we had that word then) and I was terrified at the prospect of being caned. That evening I decided that I would give myself extra protection to the rear, and would wear two pairs of underpants to school in the morning. But I would not tell my mother. She had brought me up on her own after my father died when I was very small (I was an only child). She was a kind and loving mother, but strong minded and with high principles, and she would not approve of what I was doing. Usually her word was Law!
In the morning when I came to get dressed for school I got an extra pair of underpants out. I wore white trunks (the interlock/soft cotton sort).It was Mum who chose my underwear, not me, and I was extremely embarrassed by it. The boys in the changing room often made fun of me, the class wimp, for wearing these knickers and I hated taking my trousers down in front of anyone. But in my present predicament they had the great advantage of covering more of my bottom than other styles would. At that time I usually tucked my shirt into my underpants (another wimpish thing to do!), but I thought about it and decided to reduce the risk of detection by wearing one pair under my shirt tail and tucking my shirt into the top pair. Because I was deep in thought about this I did not notice my mother put her head around the door. She immediately demanded an explanation for the extra pair of pants, but I didnt have one that I could give her. She guessed, and asked if I was expecting to get the cane that day. I admitted that I was. She was angry with me and told me to put the extra pair back, and said I was not to think about doing any such thing. I obeyed her then, but just before I left for school I nipped back into my bedroom and hurriedly put on the second pair of underpants again, and also put a couple of handkerchiefs in place for good measure. As I was going out Mum challenged me and said she thought I had put the extra underpants on again. She said I was not to do it, and would regret it if I did. I denied it, and (a sign of my desperation for padding) I left quickly saying I was late.
After a nervous morning I reported to the headmasters office. My contrition over my misbehaviour got me nowhere. The headmaster went to his cupboard and brought out the cane. He said he was going to give me three. I then had a shock as he asked me how many pairs of underpants I was wearing. I was not prepared for this and did not know what to say, but without waiting for an answer the headmaster went next door to his secretarys office and called in the teacher who had reported me. I was told to take my blazer off and take my trousers down. The game was up, and the extra underpants and the handkerchiefs were discovered. I had to stand there, extremely embarrassed, in my underpants and receive a lecture which I could not concentrate on until the headmaster brought it to an end by telling me how my deceit had come to light. My mother had spoken to a woman who worked as a dinner lady at the school and asked her to pass on her suspicions. The dinner lady told the school secretary, who told the headmaster. He had called in the other teacher to act as his witness. He said it showed how well teamwork worked. He then said that another member of his team would be involved. I expected someone else to come through the door, but instead he said that now his cane had some work to do. He picked it up and told me to bend over. My trousers and one pair of trunks were around my ankles, and I felt my vest and shirt tail being folded back well out of the target area. So instead of my plan to present a well-padded backside, my only protection would be a single pair of underpants.
The cane did its work very effectively. I got four strokes rather than the original three. He said the extra one was for lying to my mother and disobeying her (I thought this should be something between me and her, but I was in no position to argue!). The caning was extremely painful and made me cry. Later that day I was given a letter to take home to Mum, it explained what had happened. She approved, except that she said she would have taken both pairs of underpants down!
As a footnote, about a year later I was in trouble for an argument which got out of hand with two boys in the year below me. The three of us were sent to the headmaster. The cane came out again, we would get four each. The other boys went first (that was the first and only time I saw the cane used on other boys bottoms, it would have been a thrill if I had not been in the queue). Then, before I bent over the headmaster said he remembered what I had tried to do before and told me to remove my blazer and take my trousers down so he could check for any padding. He took his time over this, even making a note in his punishment book whilst my trousers were down, and I could not help noticing the pained expressions of the other boys turn to sly smirks as they looked at me standing there in my wimps knickers waiting for the cane. In the end I was caned with trousers in place and shirt tail safely tucked into my trunks. Comparisons are difficult, but I think that caning was physically just as painful as the trousers down caning of the previous year. I am sorry to say that it made me cry again. The worst thing about my trousers down caning was the humiliation of it all.

QuoteLikeShare
Another_Lurker
10K
256
Jun 01, 2013#67
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

I fear that various factors may have caused your interesting contribution to be initially overlooked. I think it may be your first post here. If so, may I please say a personal welcome to the Forum.

In view of your attempt to mitigate the effects of a caning punishment by donning two pairs of underpants you may be interested in this earlier thread on that subject. In the 4th post contributor nowuknow relates how a schoolmate who tried this trick first suffered your fate of being caned over a single layer of underpants, but then got his ‘bonus’ strokes for the attempted deception on the bare.

I would think that by the mid 1960s both caning on the bare and caning of boys on underpants only (as distinct from over PE shorts) were quite rare, so your Mother’s action may have given you a fairly unique experience. I am sure you greatly appreciated this at the time.

At the end of your post you confirm the general consensus, which seems to be that for normal trousers and underpants the difference between one or two layers has little effect on the pain.

I note the disappearance of blank lines between paragraphs and apostrophes in your post, which I suspect you prepared in a word processor, possibly MS Word or similar and then pasted into the posting window. This is an unfortunate consequence of the way the Network54 user interface works. Inter-paragraph blank lines and the default word processor apostrophe and quotes symbols are both ‘eaten’ by the Network54 posting interface under certain circumstances.

I hope that you will find other topics on which you wish to contribute and that you will post here again. If you do, you may find it helpful to consult this post by my greatly esteemed fellow contributor Alan Turing, which deals with some of the ways of circumventing the blank lines, apostrophes, quotes problem.

If you are using MS Windows I most strongly endorse his suggestion of using Wordpad if you wish to prepare posts other than in the posting window. With a large post it is certainly wise to do this. If you have any questions on this or other matters just ask in a thread and someone is sure to pick up your query.</div>
QuoteLikeShare
de Wolf
Jun 03, 2013#68
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

QuoteLikeShare
Another_Lurker
10K
256
Jun 03, 2013#69
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

Oh dear, if you haven’t had your complimentary copy yet I guess it means you’re not getting one. I wonder why? </div>
QuoteLikeShare
Guest
Jun 04, 2013#70
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

Should should a tome exist,I suspect De Wolf wouldn’t be able to find it in Waterstones, and where he might find it. it is probably in the backroom in a plain brown wrapper, so as not to attract attention from Mr. Plod and the OP squad!
QuoteLikeShare
de Wolf
Jun 04, 2013#71
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

The delay on my copy of George’s autobiography is probably due to the signed limited edition I’m receiving.
QuoteLikeShare
Another_Lurker
10K
256
Jun 04, 2013#72
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

Surely you cannot be suggesting that in the 1940s, when George tells us he was a headmaster, it would have been illegal to do what George tells us he did, in a Church School and a Private School, not in a State School, and that as a consequence any published account of such things would now fall foul of the law?

Blimey, I’d better look out! I’ve mentioned my classmate who I believe to have been caned bare-bottomed at his prep school several times here, and that was in the 1950s, rather later than George’s accounts. </div>
QuoteLikeShare
Jim
May 31, 2014#73
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

I don’t believe the cane ever stopped me doing anything. I was once caned quite severely for wetting my pants in detention because the master refused to allow me to go to the toilet. It did nothing whatsoever to prevent me wetting myself in a traffic hold-up some years later! Being caned for smoking did not stop me smoking.

I think many teachers were turned on by boys bottoms in underpants, in just the same way I began to get turned on by dropping my trousers for the humiliation of the public beating. Quite a few boys hands disapeared below their desks as the punishment took place. Overall I think it was an overrated form of punishment.
QuoteLikeShare
Guest
Oct 21, 2014#74
I went to a boarding school in the 1960s. There was a reasonable amount of CP for that era. Some housemasters used the cane but not that frequently and generally for disobediance, such as being rude, lying, failing to do house jobs properly and other offences. These were given over the trousers at various times usually after breakfast. Sometimes one was caned at bedtime and this would be in ones pyjamas. Four strokes was normal. One master made you change into your games shorts and there was always a discussion as to whether one should wear underpants beneath the shorts or not! Most other CP was done by prefects who were allowed to use a hairbrush and this was principally for talking after lights out which resulted in four strokes in your pyjamas which was quite a painful experience. I received the hairbrush several times and the cane twice, once for lying and it taught me to be careful what I say to people!

Correction that Corrects (vintage 1925 spanking manual)

Six of the Best & Those who Received it

same old same old

Salvation Army Spanker Martin Howe

SCP

Why I support the use of the paddle

Enterprise High School

Southern Education

Affiliate disclaimer

We would like to disclose that this website may contain affiliate links,

Affiliate disclaimer

This means that if you click on a product link and make a purchase, we may earn a commission.

Affiliate disclaimer

This commission comes at no additional cost to you.

Affiliate disclaimer

As an ebay Partner Network Associate, We earn from qualifying purchases.

Affiliate disclaimer

We would like to disclose that this website may contain affiliate links,

Affiliate disclaimer

This means that if you click on a product link and make a purchase, we may earn a commission.

Affiliate disclaimer

This commission comes at no additional cost to you.

Affiliate disclaimer

As an ebay Partner Network Associate, We earn from qualifying purchases.

Log in with your credentials

Forgot your details?