Hello, Iansallos,
Thank you so much.
I enjoyed your account of your mother commenting disapprovingly about the Helton incident, having read about it in a Sunday newspaper. Do you think it was the Helston incident that sparked your interest in SCP?
Oh, my, I would have been beside myself with regret had I not kept that newspaper article. Problem would have been, I was nine when Helston happened. Think of all those years keeping the newspaper hidden from parents. I have been caught out before!!!!!
I’m unsure how old you were at the time, but I never actually saw any newspaper, and never learned about it until about 1978-1980 circa. I think had I seen the article at nine years old, it would have had an effect on me. I had a bit of a school phobia and I feared going up to secondary school. I think reading of such a thing would have made worse that fear. But at the same time, it would have excited me. I was no stranger to games of ‘schools’ with the girlies up my road, as long as I played ‘headmaster!!!’
Thank you, again, Iansallos
Paul.
QuoteLikeShare
Another_Lurker
10K
256
Unread postApr 15, 2020#12
Hello Paul et al,
The reason the sneak was let off was claimed to be down to the tenets of the Moral Re-Armament movement, of which both Mr Guise and Ms Smith were allegedly members. I posted on this a couple of times in a previous lengthy thread on the Helston Grammar punishments to be found here. My source was in fact the first post in that thread, the ‘Rawhide Advert’. I’m sure I don’t need to say that ‘Rawhide’ would not qualify as a reliable academic source!
I think Moral Re-Armament is is still around in the form of something called ‘Initiatives of Change’. Do we have any adherents thereof please, and if so do the movement’s principles throw any light on why the other boy was let off as well?
QuoteLikeShare
lansallos
145
11
Unread postApr 15, 2020#13
Hi Paul,
No my interest started a few years before that so I was always on the look-out for mentions of cp. The Guise incident was the best I recall. I was surprised to learn he lived near Porthleven as I visit there occasionally and have even walked down to Loe bar so may have passed by Dolphin Cottage. According to Zoopla it is currently valued at £700k. I wonder what Mr Guise would think of that. I also wonder if current owners are aware of the previous famous inhabitant. I will certainly pay more attention on my next visit.
QuoteLikeShare
Sir John 2
548
71
Unread postApr 15, 2020#14
Hi Another Lurker,
Thanks for the link to the previous thread. I enjoyed reading that again. Especially some of the comments of past contributors such as Lotta. I think there will always be a mixed opinion as to whether this much discussed incident was a one off or not. Whilst Mr Mc Cleery’s address to the court strongly infers that CP had previously been administered , the post at #13 relating to Mary Hale’s memories of Helston clearly states that the normal punishment was filling in forms. However since Mary was one of the actual recipients in the incident, it may be a question of “we all agree to never refer to the spankings we received”
No doubt each of us will believe what we want to believe.
QuoteLikeShare
stujos
219
20
Unread postApr 15, 2020#15
Thanks for your kind words Paul. I read the forum regularly, but feel I should contribute more. Maybe this lockdown will encourage me!
I still don’t really understand why the boy had to report the incident at all. They were only necking, so had nothing really to be ashamed of. If it had been me, I’d have done anything to avoid it becoming public, just gone home with a smug expression on my face! Perhaps he was a little peeved because his girl refused to go “all the way!” In the depths of my memory, I seem to recall that the foursome were actually discovered by the janitor, so perhaps the lad thought it prudent to “own up” before it came out anyway. In that case, they could have just denied anything improper took place, which in reality was the case.
QuoteLikeShare
bripuk
399
29
Unread postApr 15, 2020#16
….or perhaps he knew that if the incident was reported she would receive a severe dose of corporal punishment on her backside. Unlikely but you never know.
QuoteLikeShare
Another_Lurker
10K
256
Unread postApr 15, 2020#17
Hello bripuk,
bripuk wrote:
….or perhaps he knew that if the incident was reported she would receive a severe dose of corporal punishment on her backside.
Egad Sir! Surely you cannot be suggesting that any young English gentleman would behave in such a caddish manner! ????
QuoteLikeShare
bripuk
399
29
Unread postApr 16, 2020#18
Your absolutely right A_L it would be unthinkable. BTW you didn’t attend a school in the southern part of Cornwall in the 1950s?
QuoteLikeShare
marathon8
291
23
Unread postApr 16, 2020#19
Hello, members,
It’s Paul:
Thank you all for your contributions to this thread.
The issue of the boy who reported the incident to Mr. Guise has been raised by many of you, and indeed during my many conversations down the years with fellow SCP enthusiasts.
Reports suggest that the boy was consumed by guilt and that’s why he went to see Mr. Guise to confess and I assume, say sorry. For we know that was the rule of the school. Repent and show remorse and you were not punished. Fine. I have no issue with Mr. Guise setting such a school rule.
However, my thinking is, the boy going along to Mr. Guise was nothing to do with guilt. I agree with other contributors that he was likely to be known by the caretaker, a Mr. Hepworth, was it, and thus he reported to Mr. Guise to save his own neck (or buttocks).
‘Ah, nice one,……PAL!’
‘You save your own bacon and never mind the rest of us! Great!’
But it still takes us back to the other lad. He never went to see Mr. Guise. Yet, he wasn’t punished. And just look at the way the two girls were punished. Therefore, it is why I feel Mr. Guise was a ‘spanker.’ No! Perhaps ‘spanker’ is too crude a word to bestow upon a revered gentleman such as Mr. Guise. Perhaps a man who held a discreet interest in smacking the bottoms of females. Then, with just a few months before his retirement, an opportunity presented itself. And as I said a few days back, he would have got away with it had the less punished girl not been caught crying by her parents.
Thank you, all.
Paul.
QuoteLikeShare
Unread postApr 16, 2020#20
Hello, all
Going back to the two boys, it says in The Cornishman newspaper report, regarding why the boys were not punished, the following:
‘In his plea to the Bench, Mr. Hutchison said Mr. Guise had announced his intention to retire before these events occurred. Of the fact that the boys had not been punished, he said it was a rule of the school that anyone who owned up to a breach of the rules would not be punished. One of the boys had done this and accordingly was not punished. He had learned from him the name of the other boy, but he did not feel himself at liberty to use this and he had no independent witness as to the other boy’s name. If he had learned the name from an independent source the boy would certainly have been punished.
‘
Do we accept that? Yes? No?
Regarding male headmasters punishing girls in the county is says:
Mr. Wood said: “Mr. Guise must have known he had broken the education regulations that the headmaster is not the right one to punish girls. He was well aware of that fact. In the first girl’s case there had been a very merciless beating. The second one was not nearly so severe, but it had an even greater effect on its recipient. The punishment inflicted by Mr. Guise and Mrs. Smith was clearly excessive.”
Paul.
QuoteLikeShare
marathon8
291
23
Unread postApr 16, 2020#21
Hello, A.L,
I hope you are keeping well during these most difficult of times.
Yes, I recall coming across ‘Rawhide’ many years ago and reading their embellishment of the facts about the Helston incident. I was perhaps a tad greener than I am today. But it was nice to have a read, so thank you.
Thank you, also, for the other link you sent from prior threads here about Helston. I enjoyed having a read, and it was good to see that so many valid points were raised
More coming up…..
Paul.
QuoteLikeShare
Unread postApr 16, 2020#22
Again, Hello, A.L,
Reading through the link you sent regarding members’ thoughts on Helston, the discussion relating to Mary Hale’s FR posts brought back memories.
I do have both of her FR posts and member notes in my collection.
I must admit at the time I saw the posts, my eyes almost bulged from the sockets and my heart raced. I read the posts and her notes over and over.
The question I kept asking myself surrounded the issue of whether this genuinely Mary Hale or was it a fake: maybe a ‘fisherman’ in the guise (No pun) of Mary in the hope of attracting respondents to either glean information or enjoy the thrill of folk writing to ask questions. But I concluded that it really was Mary Hale.
‘The Discipline Card’ was interesting, whereby a pupil wrote out the statement that she quoted. A very tedious, drawn-out punishment that I would guess was administered for low level classroom misdemeanours such as talking in class or inattention. Or maybe running in the corridor. The school rule was six of these and the pupil ‘progressed ‘ to the next stage which was the ‘work conduct card.’ Not quite sure what this exactly is? Maybe some form of written imposition, or again, did pupils have to copy out the wording to the card, which may well have been longer? Or maybe it’s where the pupil had to get the signature of each teacher with whom he or she had a lesson to say the pupil’s behaviour in the lesson was good (or bad), and this would be handed in at the end of each school day. (Like a conduct card. My school used this).
I think you’d have to be a bit of trying pupil to manage a collection of six discipline cards. Well, it seems that Mary Hale did!!! So I wonder if she was a bit of a naughty girl? Yes? No? What do we think? Was Mary the main character who led the other three pupils in the necking incident? And maybe her naughtiness in getting six discipline cards this led her to being a tad adventurous in sixth form and eventually a meeting with the brush transpired!
I note the wording of the discipline card read as follows:
‘Discipline is a means by which we are trained in honesty and straight dealing, clean living and clean thinking, and the habit of giving the best of ourselves.’
Mary suggests that the aforementioned punishments were an attempt by Mr Guise’s to, ‘morally re-arm the school.’
She goes on to mention a book in the library that was a bible for the ‘Moral Re-Armament’ movement. It’s title was, ‘When the Kissing Had to Stop.’ How very apt in Marry’s case, to the point that one of our members from the 2004 thread found something a little odd about that!
If one cares to read her FR member notes she seems a bit of an adventurous free spirited live wire!. She was a teacher for a while, got married twice, had only one child. Never returned to teaching but instead worked for Carrick District Council. Then after early retirement she became secretary for Cornwall Area British Caravanners Club, as well as having a love for hedgehogs and writing children’s stories.
In the 2004 posts I note that ‘Nero’ suggested that our member, Lombard and Wallis, should write to Mary Hale at FR. Dare i tell you all that I actually did just that very thing. Of course I never mentioned the punishment, nor the Helston School. I think I may have taken the angle of her interesting life and asked about the caravaners club. I believe she liked canoeing, too, and I may have mentioned that. Sadly, I never got a reply!!! I wonder if she read between the lines and well knew why I’d really contacted her????. I guess so.
On a final note, I see that Mr, Guise wasn’t keen on Mary Hale’s English teacher, Mr. Allen. He regarded him as a ‘subversive influence .’
The matter of Mr. Guise retiring to Eastbourne is eating at me a tad. The next time I’m due in Eastbourne is late October. I think it will be pretty clear what shall occupy my mind during my stay!
Thank you.
Paul.
QuoteLikeShare
Another_Lurker
10K
256
Unread postApr 16, 2020#23
Hello Paul,
I am fine thank you. But I am relatively well situated. For me the only problems are that I can’t mix with my preferred company in my preferred locations. Otherwise, now that the shops are back to normal as regards stock, life is relatively easy. Round here the police appear to be acting sensibly with none of the excessively authoritarian behaviour marring some areas for which sadly they’ll pay the price when this is over. I certainly don’t lack for things to keep me occupied and modern communications make it easy to keep in touch.
A young friend aged 12 has instructed me over the ‘phone how to make Whatsapp video calls and is now training me in the use of ‘stickies’. How would I ever cope with all this modern electronic wizardry without the nation’s pre-teens! And it’s children I feel really sorry for. How on earth can we expect them to deal with lock-down? Fortunately many appear to be a great deal more resilient than we might expect.
In your contribution #20 you quoted from ‘The Cornishman’ newspaper:
In his plea to the Bench, Mr. Hutchison said Mr. Guise had announced his intention to retire before these events occurred. Of the fact that the boys had not been punished, he said it was a rule of the school that anyone who owned up to a breach of the rules would not be punished. One of the boys had done this and accordingly was not punished. He had learned from him the name of the other boy, but he did not feel himself at liberty to use this and he had no independent witness as to the other boy’s name. If he had learned the name from an independent source the boy would certainly have been punished.
Regarding which you asked:
Do we accept that? Yes? No?
Well no, at least not very readily in my case! Surely the caretaker must have mentioned events in the green room to someone in the school’s hierarchy. As a member of the school staff that would have been his duty. Even if he didn’t presumably the boy who spoke to Mr Guise would have mentioned the caretaker’s intervention so Mr Guise could have spoken to that worthy and asked about the incident.
It is of course possible that Mr Guise or another member of staff spoke to the caretaker but that he didn’t know the names of all those involved so that Mr Guise did indeed lack independent verification of the second boy’s identity. But goodness me, given an identification and regarding the incident as sufficiently serious to do what Mr Guise and Mrs Smith did to the girls, how many other heads of schools or teachers would have done as Mr Guise did and failed to punish the other boy? I doubt that our fellow contributors can think of many from their own school experience.
As it happens though I can think of one from my own experience. The male teacher who severely slippered my female classmate in PT towards the end of our last year in junior school. That slippering was, as I’ve described here in the past, marked by a great deal of ritual. The unfortunate girl was required to pull her gym knickers up tight, to bend over just so to the teacher’s exact requirements, knees straight, fingers exactly on toes, and then given four very hard strokes of the slipper. Do we, I wonder note any similarities to Mr Guise’s actions?
But there are more similarities! The girl was slippered for talking to me. Talking wasn’t allowed in PT even though most teachers would have turned a blind eye. The teacher concerned saw the incident and chose to punish for it, but only one of the parties involved. It takes at least two for a conversation, but I didn’t have to pull my PT shorts up tight and touch my toes alongside my female classmate. Like the second boy in the Helston incident, though my identity and crime were clearly known, I got off Scot-free. The male teacher, who was substituting in the temporary absence of our normal female class teacher, and who was only at the school for a short period, wasn’t in the least interested in whacking the juvenile Another_Lurker’s bottom.
However all the evidence seems to point to the fact that the said male teacher was very much intent on whacking the bottom of the prettiest girl in the class. A status which the juvenile Another_Lurker most definitely lacked by reason of gender but which my slippered female classmate could certainly lay claim to. And I fear that in the absence of evidence to the contrary I must conclude that, at least in the notorious Helston Grammar School incident under discussion here, Mr Guise was motivated by considerations basically very similar to those of Mr W, the probably kinky teacher who slippered my classmate some ten years earlier, in 1954.
Even leaving aside the fact that he didn’t punish me there were several aberrant aspects to Mr W’s slippering of my classmate. Amoungst others the prior pulling up tight of gym knickers, the insistence on a specific posture, which she had some difficulty in attaining, and the fact that she was specifically required to tun round and bend over back to the watching class. I don’t think I am being unfair to Mr W in attributing ulterior motives to the punishment. I hope I’m not being unfair to Mr Guise.
With regard to your above most interesting contribution #22, you wrote:
In the 2004 posts I note that ‘Nero’ suggested that our member, Lombard and Wallis, should write to Mary Hale at FR. Dare i tell you all that I actually did just that very thing.
And despite misgivings expressed by Lotta Nonsense so did Lombard and Wallis, according to their response to Nero which is to be found here. Doesn’t look as though they got a reply either though. BTW, Nero, one of our once very interesting and informative former contributors, still logs in. I’ve spotted him several times, including 05:30 ish today. Can’t remember what far flung shore he was logging in from though, the little flag won’t come to mind. If you read this Nero, the occasional comment on whatever topic happens to take your fancy would be much appreciated by those like me who remember the good old days!
QuoteLikeShare
neilmc32
172
25
Unread postApr 17, 2020#24
I think that accounts where two pupils one male and one female, were misbehaving together and only the girl was physically punished must be EXTREMELY rare – in fact, the only ones I’ve ever heard of are in this thread! On the other hand, accounts of the opposite where only the boy was physically punished, either because CP was banned for females or the teacher showed favouritism, are ten a penny. What Guise did would have been no big deal in a boys’ boarding school and he’d be reminisced of favourably today by the kind of men who were brought up in such environments.
QuoteLikeShare
marathon8
291
23
Unread postApr 17, 2020#25
Hello, A.L,
Thank you, and it’s good to hear that you well and comfortable.
I think you had better send your young my friend to me!! I accept nowadays that as I grow older, I’m progressively falling further and further behind with technology.
You and I seem to be at one with reference to Mr. Guise’s reasoning for not punishing the other boy. ‘No independent witness,’ he had said. Well, did he have one for the girls? I don’t where he did. We know that Mr Hepworth, the caretaker, didn’t submit the names of any of the four pupils that rehearsed for the play in the green room. All he did was to mention that pupils were in the room, which must have been an hour after school had finished. The caretaker said exactly that in his statement. The boy who confessed his guilt must have named the two girls, as well as the other boy. I’m afraid to say Mr. Guise’s excuses are lightweight and utterly questionable.
Ah, yes, the incident from your junior schooldays. I recall that you mentioned this before. I question why the girl’s parents didn’t lodge a complaint about this, unless, of course, the girl kept the matter from her parents. But even if she had, she would have had friends in that lesson who would have spoken to their parents, who then, might have known the girl’s parents.
I thought it a harsh punishment for a girl of ten or eleven years old, and the tightening of the girl’s gym knickers was highly suspicious and quite alarming, coupled with her being the prettiest girl in the class. As you say, it takes two to talk, and thus, the young, inattentive chatterbox, A.L, should have taken the same. However, the more favourable decision should have been to give the both of you a good talking to.
This chap was not fit to teach at a school in any generation and luckily for you and your fellow pupils, his tenure at the school was brief.
I missed the fact that Nero did contact Mary Hale. And she never replied to him either. That tells me two things:
A) That she read between the lines and knew what our motives were.
B) And, she may have recognised these because she had been inundated by ‘fishermen’ like Nero and me, all trying to find out more about the Helston Incident.
Thank you, A.L,
Paul.
QuoteLikeShare
Unread postApr 17, 2020#26
Hello, Neil,
It’s Paul:
Good to hear from you.
Of course, you are quite right. It was usual for girls to be let of off, or at worse, get a demerit or detention, while the boys got a whacking.
Look at the case at my school, where some clot put chewing gum on young Miss. Smith’s chair and she sat in it! I have mentioned this before on here. It upset me because Miss. Smith was a lovely, kind, young English teacher who gave me a lot of attention and encouragement.
Off she tearfully went to the headmaster, who thunderously returned to the class with his neck almost hanging over his collar. He went nuts! But what did he do? Sent the girls home and us boys got kept in until he found out who it was. Err, well, he didn’t find out who it was. Despite three or so attempts in handing us each a piece of paper to either write ‘yes’ or ‘no,’ and our name, no bugger owned up!
Please tell me, Neil, how he thought he knew it was not a girl who put gum on Miss. Smith’s char? My father was not at best pleased with my school!
Thanks, Neil
Paul.
QuoteLikeShare
Unread postApr 17, 2020#27
Hello, Stujos,
Thank you.
It was because it was a rule of the school, laid down by Mr, Guise, that if you went to him and confessed your misdemeanour and showed remorse, you were not punished. So the boy took full advantage of that and dropped the others in it, shall we say……..‘Nice bloke!’
Hello, Iansallos,
Ah, so like me you started young!!!!. Oh, if boyhood had not brought it out, it would have come out in my early adult life. The school phobia I had in my early years might have brought it out early. In my teenage years, the thought of smacking girl’s bottoms was never far from my mind. And like you, I was always on the lookout for SCP incidents
Not sure I can scrap the 700K together to buy Dolphin Cottage!
Hi Sir John 2,
I hope things are good.
For me I think this was a one off, certainly the extent of it.
Perhaps the issue of SCP for girls was discussed regularly between Mr. Guise and Mrs. Smith because they disagreed. It’s clear that Mr Guise well knew that he shouldn’t be punishing girls himself, according to the county regulations.
Maybe he might have whacked the odd girl, by more usual methods of SCP, but who knows? But not to the severity and humiliation level of this incident.
Thank you, Sir John.
Keep posting.
Paul.
QuoteLikeShare
Another_Lurker
10K
256
Unread postApr 17, 2020#28
Helloneilmc32 and Paul,
Would that I could convince myself that I am as unique as neilmc32 supposes. I don’t really have that many lifetime gold stars against my name and it would be good to have achieved something totally exceptional! ????
But seriously, as I said, I didn’t think many people here would recall a case where a girl and a boy were both culpable but only the girl was punished, because I couldn’t recall any further accounts here, and it is the sort of thing contributors would be likely to comment on. But I have no doubt that it sometimes happened where teachers whose deviant punitive impulses inclined to girls were operating in a mixed school. I don’t suppose it happened often, but I’d be very surprised if the unknown boy at Helston Grammar School and I were the only instances within UK living memory.
Some may recall our self-confessed ex-teacher and keen whacker of bent-over schoolgirls JJ. Now I am aware that JJ might have been a complete fake, but I’ve seen no evidence of that and at the time I thought he might be real. JJ said that amoung the ‘rules’ he followed were never to punish a girl hard enough to go beyond her limits, and to punish roughly as many boys as girls to avoid arousing suspicion. In commenting on the slippering of my female classmate here in the past I’ve said that the teacher might have been doing a JJ. Indeed if JJ was real and had been the teacher concerned I suspect the outcome might have been very similar.
I had I think better mention points I’ve covered here in the past but didn’t mention in my post #23 above because, quite simply my posts tend to be far too long anyway. A hang-over from my job, where when writing reports accurate and comprehensive detail was far more important than brevity.
Paul wrote:
I question why the girl’s parents didn’t lodge a complaint about this, unless, of course, the girl kept the matter from her parents. But even if she had, she would have had friends in that lesson who would have spoken to their parents, who then, might have known the girl’s parents.
I thought it a harsh punishment for a girl of ten or eleven years old,
Age first: Both the girl and I were almost 12. Like a few other pupils in the class we had both been affected by our date of birth and 11+ examination entry requirements which I’ve explained in other posts and we’d both had to spend two years in the top class of junior school. The incident happened almost at the end of our final term there.
The girl came from a fairly affluent family, big house on the outskirts of town. As well as her age, greater affluence was probably one of the factors contributing to her comeliness relative to other girls in the class. Post WWII deprivation was still rampant in our little corner of England. But affluent or poor, I doubt her parents would have complained even if she told them, which quite possibly she didn’t. This was 1954. In that era and in that community parents were highly supportive of the school. The headmaster and almost all the teachers lived locally and were pillars of the community. Most parents would favour the account of another adult, whether or not they were a teacher, over that of a child.
The school CP regime was pretty even handed generally. Yes, less girls offended than boys, but when they did it was smacks, slipper etc. in the primary school and the cane on the bottom in the associated senior school, just like the boys. Although the punishment meted out to my classmate was very severe and reduced her to tears and even though it had elements which were distinctly non-standard, I doubt if any of the class mentioned it to their parents, and as already noted I doubt if the girl did either. What parents wanted to hear of then was academic success which might get their offspring a better life than they’d had. That was good. Being punished at school however wasn’t good, and was best kept to oneself if possible least there be further consequences at home.
However aberrant and sexually motivated his actions were, the male teacher who slippered my classmate would have known he was on pretty safe ground. As I’ve described in previous accounts the school was full to overflowing and our class was outstationed in a public building a short distance away which was otherwise largely empty during the day. He was the only adult on the premises, no classroom assistants in those far off days, and although the punishment actually took place outside behind the building, it wasn’t overlooked.
He would have known that his actions were unlikely to be communicated to parents, or indeed to other school staff. Like JJ, he was careful not to go beyond his victim’s limits. Yes he made her cry, but tears in response to the slipper were not unusual. Yes he made the punishment highly embarrassing for her, but he didn’t impose the more extreme variants of knicker readjustment favoured by Smith and Guise. Being punished in front of the class was no big deal. In that primary school all punishments were in front of the class.
If challenged he could even have come up with a ready answer as to why he didn’t punish me too. He could have said that he didn’t see me talking. When my classmate turned to speak to me I’d scarcely had chance to give much of a reply before to my alarm the teacher pounced. I was a very nervous little lad and by the time I’d recovered my composure my classmate was in front of the class standing hands on head while the teacher procured a slipper. I could then have stepped forward saying “I am equally guilty sir, if you slipper A***** you should slipper me too” but I didn’t. Should I have done? I really don’t know, what would anyone else here have done? In retrospect I’m pretty sure nothing could have saved my classmate.
QuoteLikeShare
lansallos
145
11
Unread postApr 18, 2020#29
Guise’s actions are perplexing. I guess we will never be able to understand why he delivered such an unusual form of SCP. It was the method he adopted that was his downfall. Assuming he found handing out SCP to females erotic, and there is no doubt in my mind that he did, he could have elected to cane all four of them. He could have dealt with the two boys first and sent them on their way before getting his deputy to lift the girls skirts and then cane them. I have no doubt he would have got away with that even if the parents complained by claiming that the punishment had to be equal. Although not common, on a few occasions teachers did lift girls skirts to cane them, and they did get away with it.
Paul – I too will not be buying Dolphin cottage but I will certainly be keeping an eye out for it next time I am down that way – obviously not anytime soon I fear!
QuoteLikeShare
Sir John 2
548
71
Unread postApr 18, 2020#30
Hi Paul
Referring to your post #8 . I was interested to note that, like myself and no doubt many other, you had endeavoured to calculate the likely number of whacks 17 year old Miss Wells and 18 year old Miss Hale received. As regards Miss Wells I concur with you that the first 2 of the 4 sessions probably comprised a dozen whacks each from Guise and Smith . I presume that you are basing this her statement that she gave up counting after the 7th Whack and 12 being the next “logical” number . However, I strongly suspect that the young lady probably got slightly more than the further 2 dozen you estimate during the second session if the detailed The Cornishman report is considered reliable. Unfortunately the obviously tough bottomed Miss Wells appears to have taken her spanking too stoicly and quietly for Guise who took this as an indication that she was not sorry enough and carried on to excess . Although the girl admitted that she bruised easily, the area of severe bruising on the buttocks (approx 6ins by7ins on the right buttock and 6ins by 5ins on the left buttock) is possibly indicative of more than 24 whacks on each cheek) . I also strongly suspect that Miss Wells was a fit and slim 17year old and the target area was not that large
As regards the spanking of Miss Hale who seems to have been quite vocal, your calculation is probably correct. Mrs Smith admits to giving her 6 swats ,possibly less hard than she struck Miss Wells, and she says Guise hit her several time . The girl herself states Guise’s OTK spanking hurt much more than Smith’s and she cried our several times. This was probably her salvation and probably caused Guise to stop before he originally intended to. Mrs Smith actually claims that this punishment was quite reasonable in that it was not severe or long. I suspect that this was probably correct but both she and Guise should have known their pupil better and been more aware of the profound psychological effect even a moderate corporal punishment session would have had upon her.
I am well acquainted with a teacher (later a deputy head) ,now well into his 90’s, whose amusing anecdotes I have previously referred to my posts. One of his strong beliefs was getting to know your kids and how they change as they progress thru school and life . When corporal punishment was allowed he had had no objection to its reasonable use but claimed it was of no use what so ever unless the recipient (male or female) accepted ,grudgingly or otherwise, that it was justified and deserved and a better alternative to other punishments available.
In the case of Miss Wells I think Guise got it right . I note with interest that it is stated that she had no hesitation in agreeing to be spanked by both Guise and Smith .Such willingness surely indicates that this was not a step into the unknown and a first ever spanking. I suspect from his knowledge of the girl (she had been a pupil for 6/7 years and had perhaps had previously received some form of SCP) he thought that there was a good chance she would agree to his suggestion so I think he approached her first ,even though she was the younger girl.
I find it interesting that whilst there have been some inferences that Guise would normally cane the boys and Smith would use the clothes brush on the girls, the clothes brush was actually kept in a cupboard in Guise’s office and not (logicly) in Smith’s. It seemed also to be the practice for the recipient to ritualisticly collect it from the cupboard and return it there after use. The Cornishman refers to Mary Hale collecting the clothes brush from Mr Guise’s cupboard where it had been returned by Gillian Wells
Having given the young Miss Wells an exceptionally thorough and sound spanking in the morning,Guise then had to obviously persuade, later in the day, the not so willing Miss Hales to also accept a similar punishment to avoid the complications arising from dealing with each girl differently. Especially as regards “avoiding the publicity” . Despite her voiced objection as to being spanked by him he goes ahead without recognising the danger signs of the emotional effect this might have. Wanting to see your Priest is a pretty strong after effect! This of course was a huge problem. However I am fairly confident that if he had been dealing with 2 girls both with the same disposition as Gillian Wells non of us would probably have ever heard of the Helston incident.
So can we infer what the possible character differences were between Gillian and Mary from the very limited information available .Possibly but some conjecture is necessary We know Gillian had a much tougher bottom . To remain relatively silent during such a vigorous paddling must have taken some doing . We can infer that this might be due to a better exersise and out door activity. My own experience is that some girls who are keen horse riders tend to have resilient butts and this has also been true of keen hockey players and other sporty girls. It might be relevant to note that Mary thought it necessary to wear a pantie girdle under her gym shorts presumably to keep her tummy flat whilst Gillian did not need it. Perhaps indicative that Gillian was in better physical shape and more outgoing.. It is also possible that the girls choice of underwear indicates Gillian’s more liberal attitude . She wore normal underwear while Mary wore regulation navy blue gym shorts. The bottom line (excuse pun) is of course that Gillian has the mental and physical ability (rightly or wrongly) to take a bare bottom spanking from her headmaster without too much concern and Mary definitely does not..
Result downfall of Mr Guise
Another Lurker
I read with interest of your concern that you feel that you should have possibly,as a matter of conscience, volunteered your bottom for similar sacrifice following the slippering of your 11 year old female classmate. This has guiltily reminded me of a similar incident where a 16 year old schoolgirl asked to be caned because she was equally responsible for an incident which resulted in myself and another being caned. I will endeavour to conclude that story soon although it is far from straightforward. When you eventually read the post you will understand.
Of course in that instance the young lady in question was, or was fast becoming, a fully fledged spanko with fantasies of being spanked by real authoritarian figures. I would not wish to throw any dispersions on the innocent mind of a 11 year old Another Lurker. by suggesting that there might be any similarities . However I cannot help but wonder if you would have been having deeper regrets now about not volunteering had the teacher concerned been a comely maiden of less than 30 summers.
QuoteLikeShare
marathon8
291
23
Unread postApr 18, 2020#31
Hello, A.L,
Thank you.
Oh, yes, I recall ‘JJ.’ I found his posts telling of his brief time at a secondary school most interesting. So much so that I typed most out his thoughts, including the incidents and stored them in my file headed, ‘Unconfirmed SCP incidents.’ Because, simply, it was his word, only, and what he said was indeed unconfirmed. A claimed set of R/L incidents. It was enjoyable having him as part of our group.
If you recall, he witnessed two incidents early during his time at the school of which, one in particular, where he felt that the male teacher had overstepped the mark. The school in which he taught permitted girls to be slippered but not caned, if I recall. It allowed male staff to slipper girls, and apparently most did. The slipper was administered to girls’ buttocks, only, by both female and male staff.
Thus, his passion for slipperings was sparked, initially, by being in the staff room on break when a girl came in and approached a male teacher, who then took the girl into a small side room within the staff room, leaving the door open. ‘JJ’ witnessed the teacher slipper the girl, who I think bent over with hands on the seat of a chair. I’m unsure without looking, but I think it was three whacks, over the skirt. (It was not permitted to raise a girl’s skirt- He did say had he been empowered to do so, he would have). He was struck by how hard the teacher hit the girl.
The second incident was quite over the top and one I wouldn’t imagine would be tolerated within any LEA or at any state school. ‘JJ’ was in a reception area that housed some kind of an exhibition. Two pupils, a boy and a girl, had apparently been fooling around in there, at a time when they should not have been there. The member of staff who managed the exhibition caught them, and the two pupils got one hell of a telling off. I can’t recall how the suddenly teacher acquired the slipper, but with absolute anger he made the boy bend over and gave him a sever whacking, then repeated it on the girl who cried like crazy. I cannot recall how many whacks, but I do recall ‘JJ’ saying they were darn hard.
So from there he started slippering girls that he taught, asking them to remain behind. He always did it in the privacy of his empty classroom, once the rest of the class had been dismissed. The first girl was a little upset about his decision to slipper, and as it was his first, he gave her just two moderate whacks. One thing he seemed to do was make girls bend over to touch her md-shin area, I think, with bottom facing him, a little before he was due to punish them. Then after looking at their bottoms for a bit and how far the skirt had ridden up, he would get up and whack them.
The second girl he slippered got a bit uptight with him. I think it was three and she grunted out angrily at each whack. He actually slippered this girl twice. Risky with her being an uptight kind of girl?
When the spring weather came, the girls would switch to summer uniform of short gingham dresses and he found a way of getting glimpses of their knickers. He did this by putting his hand on the girls’ lower backs and then craftily ease it up a tad. This coupled with making girls bend over a little further down. So it was bingo, knickers seen.
There was a girl there whom he wanted to desperately slipper. He didn’t teach this girl, who he said was pretty. But he never found an excuse to punish her and he later termed her as ‘the one who got away.’
I found it odd that he would never say how old these girls were. He was asked by members, but refused to say. He also didn’t name the school or location. I think I understand that
Yes, he used his common sense, by gaining a repute for slippering boys in equal numbers, if not more, and yes, he took care not to exceed the regulations
After a short while he quit teaching. I think if you are doing well, and getting to slipper all these girls, why would you qui? It was the golden nugget, was it not!.
Me? No, I never believed a word of it, but added it to my unconfirmed list, just in case I was proved wrong!
And then I’m utterly certain that, having been challenged/questioned by members a little, he actually admitted it was all nonsense. A.L., we spoke about the ‘JJ’ posts before and I’m sure you said that ‘JJ’ was not the person to say that, but another chap who claimed to be a teacher.
But seriously, what darn ex-teacher would seriously join a SCP forum like ours, full of folk of who have a keen interest in SCP, at varying levels, from various angles, and start blurting out that you had done this and that. If you had been lucky enough to have slippered a plethora of girls in a school, you wouldn’t do that if you had any common sense. You might join to lurk or maybe join in, but not disclose a teaching career, least of all that you enjoyed slippering girls. You’d be a sitting duck if your tongue ran away with you.
When I first got myself an internet connection, the web was full of website forums like ours, but not as good, and all of them were full of ex-teachers claiming this and claiming that, both British and American. I was a tad greener then now.
As I say, I loved the entertaining posts he added, and he spoke sensibly about SCP. Probably high time I moved it from my ‘Unconfirmed SCP’ file into my ‘fiction’ file.
A.L, thank you for explaining the incident at your school in more detail. It was an absorbing read.
As I was typing my thoughts yesterday, I suddenly became conscious that in 1954, society and values were very different. Family life was different. Schools were most certainly different. From the excellent story you tell, it was almost, and I say ‘almost’ with uncertainty, as if a teacher such this one could get away with quite a bit. As you say, tight-knit community where parents supported the school and lived among many of the staff.
But there still would have been regulations, and I bet those were surely broken with the manner in which this was administered, and in front of a mixed PE class, too. Asking a girl to tighten her PE knickers, with boys looking on, surely would not be sanctioned. One only has to look at ‘Corpun’ from SCP incidents from many years back, to see that even then, SCP was well regulated.
Was the girl a friend of yours, or a girl you got on well with, especially being the same age. Did you share common interests?
I thank you for an informative, enjoyable read
More later……
Paul
QuoteLikeShare
Another_Lurker
10K
256
Unread postApr 18, 2020#32
Hello Sir John 2,
Although you did not say what you would have done, ???? regarding my dilemma as to whether I should have drawn my own part in the affair to the attention of the teacher who slippered my female classmate you observed that:
I cannot help but wonder if you would have been having deeper regrets now about not volunteering had the teacher concerned been a comely maiden of less than 30 summers.
You are probably right about the ‘now’ bit. I’ve noted here several times that in real life if approached by a female bearing a punitive implement I’d make every effort to rapidly absent myself from the scene! But one has to keep one’s attitudes flexible, and comely and under 30 ……………. Hmm, perhaps if I could put the clock back but retain my present personality I might just step forward!
After all it is probably reasonable to assume that with a young lady slipperer there’d be none of that ritual stuff! I could have impressed her with my ability to touch my toes while keeping my knees straight, one of my very few physical achievements at that time. And when I’d been slippered by a male teacher the previous year (albeit only one or two strokes, I really can’t recall) it wasn’t that bad. ‘Course things might have gone badly wrong. Lady teachers of that era were much addicted to leg smacking and the PT shorts we boys wore were not only shorter but also rather more loosely cut in the leg than school short trousers! ????
I look forward with interest to your account regarding the case you mention where a 16 year old schoolgirl asked to be caned because she was equally responsible for an incident which resulted in yourself and another being caned.
QuoteLikeShare
Unread postApr 19, 2020#33
Hello Paul,
Just a few points if I may please. Where on earth would we be if we both immediately understood and agreed with one another’s posts! ????
First former contributor JJ, dedicated slipperer of schoolgirls. For those interested the thread in which the vast majority of his contributions were made is to be found here. As far as I am aware his final contribution to the Forum was this one. Please note, no confession of deception or other indication of fakery. He just simply stopped posting. I remember this well, because a couple of rather silly contributors, at least one of whom later defected to the ‘Not-so-private’ Forum, accused me of forcing JJ out. They clearly hadn’t been paying attention. Yes JJ and I did have a minor spat, but we’d since kissed and made up.
Of JJ you wrote:
Me? No, I never believed a word of it, but added it to my unconfirmed list, just in case I was proved wrong!
And then I’m utterly certain that, having been challenged/questioned by members a little, he actually admitted it was all nonsense. A.L., we spoke about the ‘JJ’ posts before and I’m sure you said that ‘JJ’ was not the person to say that, but another chap who claimed to be a teacher.
You are obviously entitled to your own opinion on JJ and whether his accounts were invented. He could indeed have been a fake, but as I noted in my post #28 earlier in the thread I’ve seen no evidence for that and at the time, although fakery was probably my main interest in those days, I took him as genuine. If you can locate the ‘admission of nonsense’ post by JJ that you’ve mentioned on various occasions I shall be more than happy to admit that I was wrong, but I don’t think you will be able to.
I think you are confusing JJ with JTS aka John T Simpson MA, High school Teacher and later High School administrator Alabama aka (in my very firm opinion at least) Prof.n, retired English academic, much valued by me as an opponent in this Forum, and now deceased. The aka list should really continue for quite a few more lines, because Prof.n was a man of many parts! At least two of them manifest here were female: A hard paddling female AP in a Southern US high school and a retired female deputy head who had wielded the cane (hand and bottom, she favoured topping and tailing for really naughty girls) at a prestigious Grammar School for Girls in Northern England.
JTS introduced himself here with a disgraceful account of thrashing a girl in a hallway with a one inch thick paddle so hard that her cries of pain were audible to the whole school. This was at a time when the Forum was already fracturing and accusations of child abuse and worse were being thrown about by some disruptive elements. It was clear that the writer hoped that prominent members would write ‘great stuff, more please!’, thus betraying the abusive nature of the Forum. In fact most regular contributors expressed horror and disgust at the post. Various people were suspicious of JTS from the start, and while I was one of them I confess that others, including American Way were ahead of me.
Eventually a regular contributor who wished to remain anonymous (thank you Belgian Detective) tipped me off off-Forum that JTS had misquoted a common French expression in a rather unusual way. Although this expression had often been used here the misquote had been done before in the Forum by only one person, none other than Prof.n who I suspected of being JTS.
Directly challenged about the intended effects of his opening post by KK, JTS admitted the deception, and his anti-SCP stance, in this post. He denied being Prof.n, but I remain convinced that he was.
Back now to JJ, where you also observed:
But seriously, what darn ex-teacher would seriously join a SCP forum like ours, full of folk of who have a keen interest in SCP, at varying levels, from various angles, and start blurting out that you had done this and that. If you had been lucky enough to have slippered a plethora of girls in a school, you wouldn’t do that if you had any common sense. You might join to lurk or maybe join in, but not disclose a teaching career, least of all that you enjoyed slippering girls. You’d be a sitting duck if your tongue ran away with you.
You may in fact have hit the nail on the head. If JJ was genuine it was indeed rather silly of him to post here. But we all do silly things at times and JJ may have been no exception. His abrupt departure came after he’d mentioned ongoing correspondence with another teacher he’d known who he suspected was something of a spanko. My suspicion is that he realised that between that correspondence and what he’d posted here he might have blown his cover if the other teacher also read this Forum, and had therefore decided to heed the widely disseminated advice that when you’re in a hole you should stop digging or, as in this case, posting!
You queried the slippering of my female classmate and my relationship with her as follows:
But there still would have been regulations, and I bet those were surely broken with the manner in which this was administered, and in front of a mixed PE class, too. Asking a girl to tighten her PE knickers, with boys looking on, surely would not be sanctioned. One only has to look at ‘Corpun’ from SCP incidents from many years back, to see that even then, SCP was well regulated.
Was the girl a friend of yours, or a girl you got on well with, especially being the same age. Did you share common interests?
The school was a Church School and thus outwith much LEA regulation. In the associated senior school the SCP regime was robust for both boys and girls. Note that this was anyway Nottinghamshire, where from time to time the Local Authority was quite keen on CP! See this report from as late as 1980 on the excellent Corpun.Com site and remember where the Rodney School, caning boys and girls from the late 1940s, was situated! ???? In the junior school the cane wasn’t used at that time but both boys and girls were sometimes slippered. I certainly hadn’t seen the tightening of the knickers before, but then I’d never seen anyone slippered actually in PT either. As noted in the previous post, the teacher could be pretty certain that he was not likely to be challenged over the matter.
As I’ve previously written here the girl and I had shared a two person hard wooden tip-up seat desk for most of our first year in the top class. We had fallen out slightly when she felt I had let the side down by getting myself slippered. People in the back row weren’t supposed to get slippered, academic competition was their destiny! At the time of her slippering we no longer shared a desk but friendly relations prevailed again.
Did we share common interests? Yes, we both wanted to be top of the class. I won, both years.
QuoteLikeShare
2015holyfamilypenguin
4,320
69
Unread postApr 19, 2020#34
I agree that it was prof n. You were ahead of my on his other ruse. I have completely forgiven you. Kind of guy I am.
QuoteLikeShare
Another_Lurker
10K
256
Unread postApr 19, 2020#35
Thank you American Way, forgiveness is much appreciated by a transgressor like me!
For the benefit of newer readers by ‘other ruse’ I think American Way is referring to the case of Debbie112, the alleged bend ’em over on the balance bench and give ’em hard licks black female AP in a Southern US High School who was operated here by a male English retired academic who liked to ensure that he had plenty of opportunities to post! Debbie112’s main thread is to be found here. Those puzzled by the fact that it appears to have been opened by someone called ‘Guest’ will need to know that in some circumstances if you don’t log into the Forum for a period you forfeit your chosen identity and become mere ‘Guest’ in the contributor identity column. Alas I am not yet clear exactly what those circumstances are.
I advised on the start up of the Debbie112 thread under the impression that it was being operated by an actual black female AP in a Southern US High School, an acquaintance of the male English retired academic, who had traveled widely in the Southern US and held a visiting post in a college there. A regular opponent of mine here, we had off-Forum communication and I had reason to believe that he did have such an acquaintance.
Alas even when it became obvious to me that the posts were being written directly by the retired academic himself I kept silent on the matter. I did this for what seemed to me good reason. The Forum was going through a thin patch as regards posts but several regular contributors were enjoying themselves in the Debbie112 threads and much relevant and non-fictional material was emerging. The truth about Debbie112 became all too obvious when the retired academic died and the posts ceased. I have already apologised for what was undoubtedly a wrong decision. I now do so again.
Of course it is possible that by ‘other ruse’ American Way means MM. Another creation of our male English retired academic MM was allegedly the recently retired Headmistress of a large West Midlands comprehensive school who early in her career had been a deputy head and authorised caner at a prestigious grammar school for girls in the North of England. MM’s main thread is to be found here. The story I had off-Forum (I can’t recall if it came up in the threads) was that MM had moved into an apartment near to that of our male English retired academic and he’d persuaded her to post. Why did I keep believing that sort of stuff? Possibly because he really was a superb opponent in an argument and I like arguments.
Many people twigged that MM was fake before I was convinced. Along the way I even gave semi-serious consideration to having a trip up North to meet the retired academic and at the same time take advantage of an offer by MM to show me how a proper school caning was conducted. I was from time to time urged by others here to break my duck on that essential field of knowledge and the trip North seemed to present a rather jolly solution. However MM, who had allegedly been presented with and retained one of the canes she’d wielded in the course of her career, specified that single layer gym shorts only would be required and I havered. And then the truth was out.
Doubtless the retired academic would have thought it a huge joke. However I might have got a good meal out of it. He was a noted bon viveur and apparently an excellent cook. As with Debbie112 I have apologised before for any misleading information I was party to over MM and do so again.
QuoteLikeShare
neilmc32
172
25
Unread postApr 19, 2020#36
Actually MM’s thread was rather a good one, it wasn’t unduly salacious or extreme and seemed to elicit responses from genuine females who either wanted to share their own experiences or express horror at the whole idea. Unless there are NEVER any females posting in this forum, just men who wish to spice up their deviance by adopting female personas, as LottaNonsense used to suggest. I’ve probably been successfully “had” by MM and others but I like to think my credulity was in some cases well-founded.
QuoteLikeShare
Another_Lurker
10K
256
Unread postApr 19, 2020#37
Hello neilmc32,
If you were, as you put it, ‘had’ by MM you are certainly not alone. As noted in my post above I considered getting an introduction to the sharp end of the school cane from ‘her’. And had I gone when the invitation was first extended I would have expected a genuine ‘her’. A strict but quite amusing retired schoolmistress.
This Forum has hosted at least two extremely talented fakers of characters. One of them was behind MM. Personally, although in times past I’ve had a reputation for trying to ‘out’ fakes here, I’m not totally opposed to fiction. Possibly we are of the same mind on this. As in the case of both MM and Debbie112, it can promote and elicit useful and informative material quite outwith any fictional aspects.
I have posted fiction here on occasion. When I’ve done so anyone taking it as other than fiction must have been an idiot. It was certainly not my intention that anyone should take it as real. If I haven’t actually said it was fiction its context made its nature clear. I have very mixed feelings about and don’t usually tolerate those who go to great lengths to present their fiction as genuine if I can identify them. But, as noted, if they’re very good at it much good may come of it.
There have however in my opinion been several absolutely genuine interesting and informative female contributors. One on which I seem to recall that we agree was Jenny. Another I would cite was Eva. A lady whose pseudonyms I have regretfully forgotten also impressed me. She had been subjected to a very severe and totally unjustified caning for alleged bullying. Even Dorothy, whose status in the judiciary never became totally clear to me and whose virtual ‘school’, operated in another Form I was very sad to miss ???? was I think a genuine female. There have been many others. My apologies to those I have not mentioned.
Almost all those female contributors I recall as most certainly genuine have been subjected to allegations of fakery by somebody, often Lotta Nonsense whom you mention. Was Lotta female? Personally I think she probably was, but I am in a minority of those who have expressed an opinion on the subject!
QuoteLikeShare
AlanTuringBletchley
626
73
Unread postApr 20, 2020#38
I’d just like to say that I have reason to agree with Another_Lurker about Eva.
QuoteLikeShare
WWT
Unread postApr 21, 2020#39
AlanTuringBletchley wrote: ↑Apr 20, 2020
I’d just like to say that I have reason to agree with Another_Lurker about Eva.
It’s been a long time since we’ve heard from you – welcome back!
QuoteLikeShare
marathon8
291
23
Unread postApr 21, 2020#40
Hello, A.L,
I hope I find you well.
Thank you for your responses and for clearing up the points I raised on both ‘JJ’ and your experience at junior school. The school experience of yours was indeed most pleasurable to read.
Firstly with reference to JJ.’ Thank you for the link to his final post of 2009. I don’t recall seeing that particular one.
But now, if, as it seems, that ‘JJ’ didn’t say that his slippering adventures were fiction, then who in hell did? I do recall it well. I remember slumping in the very leather office chair I sit in now,….heartbroken, A.L, ….HEARTBROKEN!!!!! LOL!!!
I do recall ‘JJ’ quite often being challenged and the spats, but I’m not attributing those to you, solely. But that’s what I enjoy about you, A.L, and many others here, too: that is, generating the debate. Without discussion and questioning, we have nothing! And with the kind of information ‘JJ’ was feeding us, it is going to attract debate! We did have some pretty ferocious folk around at that time, but in the main it was all good fun.
I have not taken the time to go through all of ‘JJ’s posts, as I want to move on with other topics, but I did try the link you kindly sent regarding ‘JTS.’ But I’m getting ‘Error 502.’ No matter at all, for I guess I could have muddled the pair.
That you agree with me that it’d be foolhardy for a teacher to post on a forum such as ours, trumpeting about slippering conquests, is the key to this in reality. I don’t think one would find too many teachers doing that, and for me, it is one of the main drivers for my disbelieving the claims. Secondly, it is the style in which ‘JJ’ describes the slipperings. He writes in a way to excite the reader, rather as I do when I write fiction.
So, to move on to your experience at junior school. It is of coincidence that in the same year you watched the girl get the slipper, I found a little snippet on the excellent Corpun website relating to 1954. It was a set of guidelines warning male teachers not to punish girls. I shall post it at some point.
Ah, so like Bacons, a church school within an education authority but not under the SCP guidelines. As at Bacons, that makes quite a difference!
Indeed, yes, regarding Nottinghamshire, and of course, Leicestershire, both appeared to be a haven for dealing with schoolgirls and those in children’s homes I have a copy of the link relating to the 1980 caned girl in the social services home (I have a file saved that is headed ‘Council Homes.’). Thank you for linking the piece. I recall my reaction when the aforementioned caning hit the newspapers. Disbelief was the first.
Briefly changing the subject, if I may, why, why, why was it not advisable to strike girls’ on the buttocks in state schools? (And if we go back to my STOPP books, many state, ‘On the hands, only’). Yet, by contrast it was a regulation in both the Leicestershire and Nottinghamshire CCs that all canings, including on girls, must be upon the buttocks. I quote here from what Nottinghamshire CC said in the ‘Newark Advertiser, Nottinghamshire, 5 November 1977.’ The sub- headline says:
‘Caning on the behind favoured’
It goes on to say:
‘They say the only type of corporal punishment that should be allowed is up to six strokes of the light cane on the buttocks, over normal daily clothes.’
Then:
‘It is recommended that only the head, or an officer in charge, would be allowed to use the cane. Girls may be beaten only by a senior female member of staff in the presence of the head or officer in charge.’
Then we had ‘The Times’ reporting on homes elsewhere and the matter off Leicestershire was mentioned:
The Times 20 May 1981
‘Caning of girls ‘worse than in last century.
It says:
‘But the policy of allowing girls to be caned was confirmed in Leicestershire last month. The county’s regulations state that such caning must be on the buttocks, whereas the previous approved school rules allowed girls to be caned on the hand only.’
Amazing! You really would be hard pressed to find a state school, or indeed an LEA that makes such a comment regarding girls. Please don’t think that I’m trying to suggest that it never happened. My goodness! This very thread concerns one such chappy and one such incident.
Back to your experience, A.L:
The girl in questions sounds like she had a robust personality. A born leader? I found it interesting that she admonished you for letting the side down by getting yourself slippered. Slightly some egg on her face for then getting it herself!! Now who has let the side down?
A lovely story, A.L.
Thank you for sharing.
Best wishes,
Paul.
QuoteLikeShare
marathon8
291
23
Unread postApr 21, 2020#41
Hello, Sir. John,
Thank you for your detailed response.
Yes, I did calculate the spanks on the first set as twelve, from when the girl said she lost count at seven. Likewise, with you, she did say that it hurt a lot more the second time and Mr. Guise it harder than Mrs. Smith. Indeed much of it caused by her stoicism. I thought maybe 48 spanks, circa. But, my goodness, that is a hell of a beating. With a foot long brush, too, on bare skin. It must have terrible. The second girl also said Mr. Guise’s punishment hurt more.
Ah, yes, your elderly friend who was once a deputy head. You enlightened us regarding him once before, along with his humour. I concur with his point that SCP is less effective if the pupil in question does not accept that it was fair and justified. Now in his nineties, this gentleman never caned any girls, if I recall. Unless I’m wrong, of course!
I, like you, wonder about the brush being kept in Mr. Guise’s office. Surely if the story claimed by ‘Rawhide’ is even remotely true, that Mrs. Smith spanked girls regularly with the brush, that is the older ones, why indeed not keep it in her own office? Unless it was all part of the ritual to go fetch it from Mr. Guise’s office. But, my tongue runs away with me. I don’t believe such a thing happened, because if it had, I’m sure that during all the publicity when this incident first came to public attention, some girls, both former and present at that time, would have come forward, especially if the punishments had been over the top in intensity or humiliation. Rawhide claimed Mrs. Smith took down girls’ knickers. I would strongly dismiss that.
The brush might have been in Mr. Guise’s office for an entirely innocent reason: simply for Mr. Guise to brush down his suit on arrival to school each day! Why not?
Thank you, ‘Sir John.
Hello, Iansallos,
Have you beaten me to the purchase of Dolphin Cottage yet? Having said that, whatever Mr. Guise purchased in Eastbourne would have been worth a mint, too, today. It is on that issue that I could kick myself for not moving there on the two occasions I almost did.
The Helston spanking is a wonderful incident to debate. (I’m sure the two recipients of the brush that day would likely disagree!).
There are so many unanswered questions to debate. But, the years are passing rapidly and as you point out, it’s unlikely we will ever know. Even the two girls would be around 74 years old now
I agree with you that he found spanking girls bottoms in that manner erotic.
Thank you, Iansallos.
Paul.
QuoteLikeShare
Another_Lurker
10K
256
Unread postApr 22, 2020#42
Hello Paul,
I am sorry to hear that the ‘JTS’ post I linked didn’t work at the time. A 502 access error, or at least the one notified by Tapatalk’s ‘gatekeeper’ Cloudflare, is usually just an indication that Tapatalk is too busy at that particular moment to deliver the information you want. Tapatalk servers seem to operate on their data transmission limits a fair amount of the time. Generally, unless there is a big problem, a re-try a little later will succeed. Anyway, here is the post concerned:
jts00.png (100.84KiB)
Sadly we shall have to agree to disagree on JJ. But if you ever do locate the post you believe you recall where he admitted deception please do note its whereabouts and post it.
You mentioned a 1954 item regarding the caning of schoolgirls by males on the excellent Corpun.Com site. I don’t want to rain on your parade, but I presume this article is the one you mean. Note that it only applies to Somerset. I suspect that the actual regulations passed by Somerset CC would have referred to corporal punishment rather than the cane. The media does tend to use ‘cane’ in this context even when it is perfectly obvious that some other punitive implement is involved.
Caning in Community Homes ( I think that’s what they are called). Yes, I too was astounded when I saw that 4 November 1980 copy of the Sun A lunchtime excursion from work to a pub on the outskirts of Derby. It had innumerable little rooms, and on the table in the one we chose was the paper open at the relevant page. I was so engrossed that I must have come close to betraying my interest in CP to my colleagues. Now that would have caused a sensation in those days when I was viewed as austere and authoritarian! One or two young ladies on the shift might have revised their behaviour though! ????
You query how Nottingham and Leicester came to cane girls on the bottom. Well quite simply regulations for that sort of thing were set by the local authorities, just like in state schools. And the attitude to CP of the persons comprising the group in power in the various authorities varied widely. At the time of the 1980 Nottinghamshire incident the leader of Nottinghamshire County Council was quoted as saying:
I believe in cane ’em and birch ’em. If girls ask for punishment they should get it. There are too many do-gooders in this world.
‘Nuff said I think! That is why I become quite frustrated when contributors here assume that what happened in their area happened everywhere in all schools. Some even talk about national regulations about six stroke maximums and similar nonsense. No such thing! Essentially the only national laws on the subject until the question of abolition arose were those relating to degree of harm. Best not actually kill ’em!
You wrote of my slippered classmate:
The girl in questions sounds like she had a robust personality. A born leader? I found it interesting that she admonished you for letting the side down by getting yourself slippered.
There were a robust and competitive group in the top half of that class. I was probably the quietest and most withdrawn. Teachers paired girls and boys in a desk because they supposed that girls would exert a civilising influence on boys. They probably weren’t mistaken, but some boys needed civilising more than others! I looked the girl up on the ‘former pupils’ website of her grammar school a few years ago. She’d done just fine, happy marriage, family, travelled around the world a bit with husband’s career, retired to the south west and lecturing at the University of the Third Age. I was quite impressed with the latter until I found that you don’t actually need a PhD! ????
QuoteLikeShare
marathon8
291
23
Unread postApr 22, 2020#43
Hello, A.L,
I hope things are good on this wonderfully bright day.
A short time ago, I popped to the local convenience shop for some milk. Err, I’m sorry to say that I did forget and went the wrong way!!! I shall report to Miss. Lisa Best immediately.
Coupled with the 502 error message, I noticed that while attempting to add my post that had the Wiltshire regulations with it, the system was quite slow. I had to make three attempts. In fact, at one point, I lost my text and had to type it again. Not a problem. It happens.
I don’t think you and I are too far apart regarding the claims of ‘JJ.’ We both agree that it would be unwise for a teacher to post messages on a forum such as ours claiming incidents of SCP. We also agree such an occurrence would be unlikely. For example, let us imagine for a moment that Mr. Guise had got away with the Helston incident, that Colin West went through his career undetected, that Wilfred Ing and others at Bacons, never received the publicity. Do we really think that any of the aforesaid would have joined our group to blurt out their amazing achievements?
And as I said my other reason surrounds the style of writing. I’m not sure about you, but long before the wonders of the internet, I read lots of articles in various CP mags, where someone claimed to be an ex- teacher and made similar claims.
But Yes! Enough said. You, too, are entitled to your views, which I wholeheartedly respect.
Thank you for enclosing the post that I was unable to access. I don’t think I ever got involved in any of that debate. I was more of a ‘lurker’ come ‘fisherman’ in those days. I did chuckle at the mention of a certain chap called A.L. To accuse you of being likely not to take up the challenge! Heaven forbid, man!!!
Yes, that is the same 1954 Somerset CC cutting that I Intended to send. Thank you. I may still do so on behalf of others who do not access your link. I found it of great interest and one I had forgotten I had. It‘s celloptaped in an old scrapbook of mine that dates back to the 1970’s. The book is now very fragile, practically falling to pieces, and the newspaper cutting, which I believe I got from the national newspaper library in Colindale, is almost done for! That’s why I type things out or photograph them. Somerset revised their SCP regulations in 1967 (see attachment). The statement that ‘The Daily Mail’ quotes from Somerset CC about the inappropriateness of caning girls was still apparent, word for word, in the 1967 guidelines. Which is why I said regarding the Kathleen Marsh 1962 incident in Wiltshire that the regulations from 1962 would unlikely differ too much to the revised 1970 guidelines.
I was tickled pink by your telling me about the excursion to the pub one lunchtime, to see the open page of The Sun regarding the caned girl at the council home. My word, I have been in such a position so many times! Your tale heartened me, greatly.
You say the council home for children regulations were laid down by the local authorities of Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire (as per everywhere). That is correct. But what puzzles me is why buttock caning for girls didn’t apply in the schools!! (??). What is the difference between schoolgirls and girls in the council homes? The CC decreed that ‘on the buttocks’ was the proper place, for both boys and girls. Why not in the schools? (And yes, that ‘cane ‘em birch ‘em’ quote by the council leader was an utter classic!! God, did I get some mileage out of THAT back in the day! WOW!
Again, if council home girls are caned on the buttocks in those aforesaid council districts, then why not its schoolgirls? ……Ahhhhh, but, wait!…….Hark!…… I refer to my STOPP book, ‘The Guide to LEA Regulations’…… and the issue of Leicestershire has come up before….. It is quite telling, is it not, that Leicestershire had no SCP regulations!! Thus, what is to stop a girl from being asked to ‘touch her toes’ in a state school run by the council? So lomg as its ‘moderate and reasonable.’ It says for Leicestershire: ‘Corporal punishment is at the discretion of the headteacher.’ And that s all.
And of course Leicestershire was the county where lots of schoolgirls were slippered on the buttocks around 1980/81.
Very interesting, especially when you tie it in with the council homes
I have enclosed the Nottinghamshire regulations. As you shall see there is only a token reference to girls. And of course in that very area we had Rodney School, albeit a private school.
The plot thickens!
I agree with you regarding folk thinking that just because a certain set of guidelines applied in their area, or that local schools took the decision to use SCP rarely, it was the same nationwide. And of course, correct, there was never any national regulations other than ‘reasonable and moderate.’ What I shall say is that many of these regulations were quite generic, but not all.
Thank you, A.L
Off to see Miss. Best…………………..
‘OWCH!!!
Paul
IMG_1568AA.jpg (128.34KiB)
IMG_1567aa.jpg (128.9KiB)
QuoteLikeShare
stujos
219
20
Unread postApr 23, 2020#44
I have wondered over the years whether Miss Wells was somewhat “into” spanking, or at least was not unaccustomed to it. She maybe got it home. Obviously we don’t know exactly what went on, or the timescale, but it seems she agreed to the second resort, a spanking, almost too readily. Perhaps she thought it wouldn’t be too bad, no worse than she got from her parents. And, even though it was a long and fairly severe whacking, it is not clear that she was that upset by it. She apparently didn’t show too much emotion, to the extent that Mr Guise felt she needed more smacks. We are not told that she complained to anyone after, nor was that troubled by it, unlike Miss Hales.