I Was Caned At School

@chikki In schools where only boys were subject to CP it's clear the primary motivation was the teachers' sexual gratification. They obviously had non-CP methods of disciplining girls so they could have used those same methods with boys but they chose not too. There is no other explanation that fits the known facts.

@Sharon I disagree with that....it may have been so in a few cases. I think the real reason, and in mixed schools some girls were caned, is that in the 1980's teachers whn they were at school were caned. It proved effective and saw no reason to change a system that had woked for years. Likewise in private all boys schools, their was a tradition of using the cane/birch. Again if it worked, and it did, why change it.

Of course move on to 2010 very few teachers had experiance of being caned at school and so used other methods. Remember back before about 1980's the cane was widely use in the home. You must judge these things in a time frame...the use of the cane was aCCEPTABLE THEN, often by tradition but not now. You cannot say that all those teachers, and by implication parents that used the caned did so from sexual gratification view points.

@chikki Sorry but that hypothesis doesn't fit the facts. If they honestly thought the cane was effective, why did they exempt girls? As you say, if it worked, why change it? If the girls were well behaved despite not being liable to be caned, obviously the cane was not only ineffective, it was probably counter-productive. Again, as you say, in some mixed schools (mine for example) girls were caned so there was obviously no reason for them to be exempt. The cane was also widely used in girls' schools.

In my experience, parents tended to be more egalitarian too so girls were subject to CP in the home, just like their brothers.

It's possible that some teachers used CP for sexual gratification even in schools where boys and girls were both subject to it but it's more likely they believed CP was necessary to maintain discipline. They could not have honestly believed that if they automatically exempted half the students no matter how badly behaved they were.

@Sharon girls in history have always been treated differantly to boys and think this carried on in school. True at home girls did get the cane, but were right back in time were given other punishments, ones that were regarded as not being effective for boys. I think the thinking about cp for girls is just another example of the way girls were not treated the same as boys. When i was a boy it was alright if a girl saw me nude but not if i saw a girl nude. It was alright if girls saw me whacked, including on my bare bottom but not the other way round. Like it or not, not a view people have today, girls were the weaker sex. Boys were looked upon as tougher than girls. As such girls were regarded as not being strong enough to take the cane but boys were tougher and could take a hard caning. As i say the view on girls being weaker than boys has changed but in those days girls were regarded often as more frail.

@chikki The idea that girls were too weak to take a caning was proven nonsense by schools and homes were girls were caned. Teachers must have being exceptionally stupid if they were unaware of those facts. At best it might explain why girls weren't caned but it doesn't explain why boys were. You seem to credit teachers with even less intelligence than I do.

Also, the double standards you mention are all connected to sexual activity so sexual gratification was a factor.

@Sharon I agree and said that i did not believe girls were weaker but society in the 1980's did think this was the case. Girls were not allowed to play football because it was too rough. I think it does explain why girls were not caned and boys were. The cane was thought as too drastic for girls but boys were tougher and needed firmer punishment and the cane provided this.
I cannot agee with you view that double punishment was for sexual pleasure. You are saying that parents actually liked to whack their sons bottom. I just cannot agree with that. They did it because in those days, unlike today, parents thought they had to back the school and that resulted in your bottom being whacked again. It was nothing to o with sexual gratification

@chikki I have to disagree. Female teachers in girls' schools knew girls could take a caning so it's strange that supposedly educated men ignored that evidence. Maybe it offended their silly macho view of themselves.

I didn't say double punishment was for sexual pleasure, I said the double standards were related to sexual activity. Things like it being OK for a girl to see a naked boy but not vice versa.