Surveys show that we Spankos are far more opposed to the corporal punishment of children than the population at large. 77% are against the practice as opposed to 35% of adults in general.
We take our stance from the personal knowledge that non-consensual spankings are very unpleasant indeed, and will not condone any form of child abuse.
I think we might have taken the propaganda from the "no-Spanking" brigade hook, line and sinker without bothering to examine the rhetoric that they have brought into play. We are all opposed to abuse, and they shout from the house tops that all spankings are abusive and hitting children is invariably wrong.
There are a number of "single issue" campaigns out there from "No Vaccinations!" through to "Ban Tobacco!" - and they all use pretty much the same tactics: The state personal unsupported opinions as if they were facts, they use bad science to bolster their claims, and they use shame tactics to try to silence any opposition.
As I discussed in the piece "O Canada", independent researchers find that when "conditional spankings" are examined in isolation from other types of corporal punishment, they turn out to be the very best parental method known for removing bad behavior traits from kids. A conditional spanking is one that is administered under control, after due warnings, to the clothed bottom, with the bare hand, for a short duration, for a lapse in some behavioral conduct. That is, one should not spank a child for being bad at some academic topic - but if that child continues to play with matches in reckless manner, then a couple of slaps to the rump might start a change in behavior: one that perhaps saves your house from getting burned down.
In general, conditional spankings tend to be beneficial in their effectiveness - and all others are abusive. I think it behooves us to distinguish between the two, and to accept that conditional spankings can have a positive effect when it comes to discipline. And continue to make it very plain that no child should ever suffer and abusive beating. Regardless of circumstances - never.
Showing posts with label spanking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label spanking. Show all posts
Thursday, June 4, 2015
Tuesday, June 2, 2015
B is for Bondage
Bondage isn't really embedded into the spanko psyche, but (pardon the pun) is often its bed-mate.
The dynamics are very complex: the relationship is consensual but when one partner is tied to a spanking frame, handcuffed to the bed or immobilized by the other partner's personal most enjoyable form of restraint, then both players - to some degree - are pretending that the session has become non-consensual. Even though it really hasn't - not at its heart - both pretend the victim is totally at the whim of the spanker. Why. Because it makes the game far more intense.
There is not one chance in hell that a member of the vanilla community can understand why that works.
So - may I offer a bit of advice? In your tale, by all means have someone incredibly securely bound to be unable resist the upcoming whipping - and since it is just fantasy, you might make her/him really not enjoy the experience - but (particularly if your characters are in a consensual relationship) do not try to explain the "why" of what is going on. Your spanko audience already knows, and your vanilla audience (if they have stayed with your this far into your tale) will never believe you, even if they care to try to understand.
This will save you from taking on an exceedingly difficult writing chore, and improve the readability of your story at the same time. Which cannot be a bad thing.
Now - should you really, really like to propound on why bondage pushes the intensity up a notch get your characters to talk to each other (using realistic dialog) about what is going on. Use their curiosity about each other to unravel the mystery. That way what might be read as personal posturings is turned into part and parcel of the plot, without ever getting you to look as if you are standing on a lecture podium.
The dynamics are very complex: the relationship is consensual but when one partner is tied to a spanking frame, handcuffed to the bed or immobilized by the other partner's personal most enjoyable form of restraint, then both players - to some degree - are pretending that the session has become non-consensual. Even though it really hasn't - not at its heart - both pretend the victim is totally at the whim of the spanker. Why. Because it makes the game far more intense.
There is not one chance in hell that a member of the vanilla community can understand why that works.
So - may I offer a bit of advice? In your tale, by all means have someone incredibly securely bound to be unable resist the upcoming whipping - and since it is just fantasy, you might make her/him really not enjoy the experience - but (particularly if your characters are in a consensual relationship) do not try to explain the "why" of what is going on. Your spanko audience already knows, and your vanilla audience (if they have stayed with your this far into your tale) will never believe you, even if they care to try to understand.
This will save you from taking on an exceedingly difficult writing chore, and improve the readability of your story at the same time. Which cannot be a bad thing.
Now - should you really, really like to propound on why bondage pushes the intensity up a notch get your characters to talk to each other (using realistic dialog) about what is going on. Use their curiosity about each other to unravel the mystery. That way what might be read as personal posturings is turned into part and parcel of the plot, without ever getting you to look as if you are standing on a lecture podium.
Monday, June 1, 2015
A is for Asinine
The word asinine refers to acts that are likened to those of a mule, or ass, than those that relate to the hindquarters. But sometimes some of us get the wrong end of the stick, if you know what I mean.
There is one area of spanking entertainment that stands out as being capable of being as asinine as one could ever imagine: dialogue.
When we write dialogue, it is possible to revamp it and reword it until it rings true - both in how it sounds and what it says. Take a first pass of "You should not do that if you expect me not to smack your naughty little bottom with my finely tooled oaken paddle,' he sneered evilly. With enough rewrites your might get to something like: "You say you're sorry. You expect me to buy that? You expect me to ignore what you've done? By all that is holy, before I'm done, I'll make you howl your regret - but this time as if you mean it!" Yeah - that one probably needs another four or five re-writes to get to where we need to be...Which is without all those horrible cliches.
But we do have the ability to go back and change it as often as change is needed. Sloppy dialog in the market place for written works simply indicates that those who self publish can be very lazy when it comes to crafting good material for readers to enjoy.
But to a pet peeve. Spanking videos. A delight to watch (most of the time). But when it comes to dialog in those videos, we see (hear) three main approaches for the actors: those who say nothing (or very very little), those who make it up as they go along and those who work to scripts.
The "less you say" brigade have a fairly easy time of it: the victim is strapped down for some unstated "crime", is whacked and is released. The only "dialog" is "Ow!" and "Ouch!" as the whacks are delivered.
And by my way of thinking, that works far better than actors who are told to ad lib dialog within the general direction of the plot. I am honestly not making up - one actor wielding a school cane came up with "I did not get to become a leading accountant without knowing the value of firm discipline". (I sort of think that gets to be number one on the list of asinine lines in spanking videos. And why, oh why, do directors think that shouting makes watching more fun? Not only are the lines puerile, they get yelled at the top of one's voice to make them more real.)
There are well scripted and well acted spanking videos out there - but well scripted and well acted costs a lot of money to be spent before anything has been earned. The cost/risk ratio may be irrelevant if you cannot afford the initial cost.
So - if you are going to make a spanking video - do consider the less said the better: if you cannot afford a spanko author to give you well crafted lines.
And if you are a spanko author, do consider making your fees ridiculously small when working with a first time video maker. The enhanced success of the early releases will stand you in very good stead when later releases are planned.
And since the A to Z challenge is also a blog hop - might like to visit this site to a see a fellow author's entry for "A is for ..."
There is one area of spanking entertainment that stands out as being capable of being as asinine as one could ever imagine: dialogue.
When we write dialogue, it is possible to revamp it and reword it until it rings true - both in how it sounds and what it says. Take a first pass of "You should not do that if you expect me not to smack your naughty little bottom with my finely tooled oaken paddle,' he sneered evilly. With enough rewrites your might get to something like: "You say you're sorry. You expect me to buy that? You expect me to ignore what you've done? By all that is holy, before I'm done, I'll make you howl your regret - but this time as if you mean it!" Yeah - that one probably needs another four or five re-writes to get to where we need to be...Which is without all those horrible cliches.
But we do have the ability to go back and change it as often as change is needed. Sloppy dialog in the market place for written works simply indicates that those who self publish can be very lazy when it comes to crafting good material for readers to enjoy.
But to a pet peeve. Spanking videos. A delight to watch (most of the time). But when it comes to dialog in those videos, we see (hear) three main approaches for the actors: those who say nothing (or very very little), those who make it up as they go along and those who work to scripts.
The "less you say" brigade have a fairly easy time of it: the victim is strapped down for some unstated "crime", is whacked and is released. The only "dialog" is "Ow!" and "Ouch!" as the whacks are delivered.
And by my way of thinking, that works far better than actors who are told to ad lib dialog within the general direction of the plot. I am honestly not making up - one actor wielding a school cane came up with "I did not get to become a leading accountant without knowing the value of firm discipline". (I sort of think that gets to be number one on the list of asinine lines in spanking videos. And why, oh why, do directors think that shouting makes watching more fun? Not only are the lines puerile, they get yelled at the top of one's voice to make them more real.)
There are well scripted and well acted spanking videos out there - but well scripted and well acted costs a lot of money to be spent before anything has been earned. The cost/risk ratio may be irrelevant if you cannot afford the initial cost.
So - if you are going to make a spanking video - do consider the less said the better: if you cannot afford a spanko author to give you well crafted lines.
And if you are a spanko author, do consider making your fees ridiculously small when working with a first time video maker. The enhanced success of the early releases will stand you in very good stead when later releases are planned.
And since the A to Z challenge is also a blog hop - might like to visit this site to a see a fellow author's entry for "A is for ..."
Wednesday, May 13, 2015
O Canada!
Canadian parents need to be alerted to the fact that Joyce Murrary (one of their legislators) is campaigning to having spanking banned as a method of disciplining children by their parents. Since it is assessed that over 50% of Canadian parents give their kids an occasional whack, she seems to be swimming against the tide: but she might succeed.
The tactics of the Single Issue Fanatic is to state opinion as if it were fact, quote bad science as if it were holy scripture and use shaming tactics to try to silence the opposition. Here in the US, anti vaccination crazies use these tactics with no avail - but the anti-abortion clique does the same with varying degrees of success: as is witnessed by the number of doctors in Family Practice who get murdered to further the cause.
Back to the chase.
Ms Murray is on record as saying "Shockingly, Section 43 of the Canadian Criminal Code still permits this cruel form of punishment." Which, I think you might agree, is a personal opinion being masqueraded as hard fact. It should be noted that the Canadian Supreme Court did rule it was legal to spank a child aged between 2 and 12 with the open hand - so those poor people do have some friends left in high places..
Ms Murray does have some bad science to back her point of view - which was revealed by a study into 26 "research papers" over the last two decades which all concluded spanking was downright evil. But it was discovered that the underlying data showed that when spankings are conditional, (that is administered caringly and under control), they outperformed every other form of child punishment known to man by a significant degree. The anti-spanking brigade still quote the bad research: which is only accurate when studying abusive physical punishment which is outlawed in every jurisdiction in the world. Prior researchers had blandly assumed that a swat to the rump of a child playing with matches was equal in all respects with a beating with an electric cord whip that sent the victim to the emergency room.
Even so, why am I advocating that should the Canadians stand firm from this unwelcome intrusion into their lives? Well, the best data we have of what happens when a country does outlaw spanking comes from one of the world's most favorite secular nations - Sweden. They banned the practice in 1979, and that gives us the longest window in which to see the progress that has been made.
One of the more noticeable effects is that children under 15 now commit 500% more criminal assaults on younger children than the numbers before the no spanking law was passed. But that could be sheer coincidence, however unlikely. However - and this is the biggie - compared with 700 kids a year in nearby Germany, 20,000 kids are year in Sweden are permanently removed from their homes if a parent should raise a hand to chastise them: and a witness reports it to the authorities. Permanently removing a child from its home is not a cruel and unusual punishment if it is done in the child's best interests: we are assured that bureaucrats are better equipped to make such a distinction.
Now - all together - "Spanking is not child abuse and child abuse does not come by spanking". Please, administrators, learn the difference before you set your thought-crime police on us to make us obey your edicts.
The tactics of the Single Issue Fanatic is to state opinion as if it were fact, quote bad science as if it were holy scripture and use shaming tactics to try to silence the opposition. Here in the US, anti vaccination crazies use these tactics with no avail - but the anti-abortion clique does the same with varying degrees of success: as is witnessed by the number of doctors in Family Practice who get murdered to further the cause.
Back to the chase.
Ms Murray is on record as saying "Shockingly, Section 43 of the Canadian Criminal Code still permits this cruel form of punishment." Which, I think you might agree, is a personal opinion being masqueraded as hard fact. It should be noted that the Canadian Supreme Court did rule it was legal to spank a child aged between 2 and 12 with the open hand - so those poor people do have some friends left in high places..
Ms Murray does have some bad science to back her point of view - which was revealed by a study into 26 "research papers" over the last two decades which all concluded spanking was downright evil. But it was discovered that the underlying data showed that when spankings are conditional, (that is administered caringly and under control), they outperformed every other form of child punishment known to man by a significant degree. The anti-spanking brigade still quote the bad research: which is only accurate when studying abusive physical punishment which is outlawed in every jurisdiction in the world. Prior researchers had blandly assumed that a swat to the rump of a child playing with matches was equal in all respects with a beating with an electric cord whip that sent the victim to the emergency room.
Even so, why am I advocating that should the Canadians stand firm from this unwelcome intrusion into their lives? Well, the best data we have of what happens when a country does outlaw spanking comes from one of the world's most favorite secular nations - Sweden. They banned the practice in 1979, and that gives us the longest window in which to see the progress that has been made.
One of the more noticeable effects is that children under 15 now commit 500% more criminal assaults on younger children than the numbers before the no spanking law was passed. But that could be sheer coincidence, however unlikely. However - and this is the biggie - compared with 700 kids a year in nearby Germany, 20,000 kids are year in Sweden are permanently removed from their homes if a parent should raise a hand to chastise them: and a witness reports it to the authorities. Permanently removing a child from its home is not a cruel and unusual punishment if it is done in the child's best interests: we are assured that bureaucrats are better equipped to make such a distinction.
Now - all together - "Spanking is not child abuse and child abuse does not come by spanking". Please, administrators, learn the difference before you set your thought-crime police on us to make us obey your edicts.
Tuesday, April 28, 2015
The Submission of Emily Marx
There is a sub-world of film making that caters to soft (ish) porn to be shown to late night cable tv audiences who have paid for such titillation, but not as much as those who have paid a subscription to a premium sexploitation channel which - I am told - offers more explicit views of the human anatomy.
As you will be acutely aware, in the spanking genre the mantra is 1) there is going to be a spanking, 2) there is a spanking, 3) there was a spanking - with lots of words and/or video to expand each of those three elements. The mature adult film is not dissimilar - just a different outlook. Which gives it a mantra 1) There is going to be an orgasm 2) There will be an orgasm 3) No - hang on a bit, there really will be an orgasm- honest. 4) There was an orgasm. 5) Lets repeat all of that for those who were not paying attention the last time around.
The plots of Mature Audience films tend to be extremely simplistic of a "Hey, you look cute - let's make out" with the only major variation being the backdrop.
Sometimes a plot tries to explore new grounds.
Which brings us to a Mature Audience film called "The Submission of Emily Marx" currently going the late night rounds of cable tv for those too cheap to pay for a premium sex channel - rather like me.
The driving force behind S of EM is more your mainstream BDSM adherents and - due diligence disclosure - you may know more about the hardcore BDSM scene than I do. In this film, Emily is getting a mild disciplinary paddling in the opening scene (exceedingly chaste and un-erotic) repeated in the closing scene. Between the two extremes, she gets spanked once, and gets a quick belting once. The rest of the time she explores the nature of balls, plugs, wax and ice etc, etc - with a bit of bondage thrown in once for good measure. Being for the Mature Audience viewer, lots of time is given to (almost off screen) oral sex, with a bit of doggy style to show we are in the realms of the more adventurous. And there is a lot of monologue by Emily explaining why such abnormal behavior turns her on so much.
The basis of the plot: if you cannot enjoy a normal sex life, and you crave a supply of orgasms, then become a pervert and accept the consequences of letting some guy do what the hell he wants to do to.
The consensual side of the equation was that Emily was given a BDSM contract before they started, and she had access to a safe word if she wanted to up and off from any more of his perversions.
I have no idea who Jacky St. James (credited as the author) is in real life - but she does use that name on her twitter account - and kudos to her for doing research into what people in a BDSM relationship actually do. But I really wish she had spent more time researching the "why" we do it, and the real life mechanics that happen before and during a relationship, "Your sex life is too mundane? Here, sign this BDSM contract and see how much it improves." might possibly have been used as a successful pick up line once or twice - but surely only as a very rare exception and never as a rule.
If you want to show some aspects of TTTWD, you really need to get your ducks in a row first. Or all you will do will be to alienate the community and be seen as trying to foster the lie to the rest of your audience. The lie? That, without exception, we are narcissists and raving sex perverts.
As you will be acutely aware, in the spanking genre the mantra is 1) there is going to be a spanking, 2) there is a spanking, 3) there was a spanking - with lots of words and/or video to expand each of those three elements. The mature adult film is not dissimilar - just a different outlook. Which gives it a mantra 1) There is going to be an orgasm 2) There will be an orgasm 3) No - hang on a bit, there really will be an orgasm- honest. 4) There was an orgasm. 5) Lets repeat all of that for those who were not paying attention the last time around.
The plots of Mature Audience films tend to be extremely simplistic of a "Hey, you look cute - let's make out" with the only major variation being the backdrop.
Sometimes a plot tries to explore new grounds.
Which brings us to a Mature Audience film called "The Submission of Emily Marx" currently going the late night rounds of cable tv for those too cheap to pay for a premium sex channel - rather like me.
The driving force behind S of EM is more your mainstream BDSM adherents and - due diligence disclosure - you may know more about the hardcore BDSM scene than I do. In this film, Emily is getting a mild disciplinary paddling in the opening scene (exceedingly chaste and un-erotic) repeated in the closing scene. Between the two extremes, she gets spanked once, and gets a quick belting once. The rest of the time she explores the nature of balls, plugs, wax and ice etc, etc - with a bit of bondage thrown in once for good measure. Being for the Mature Audience viewer, lots of time is given to (almost off screen) oral sex, with a bit of doggy style to show we are in the realms of the more adventurous. And there is a lot of monologue by Emily explaining why such abnormal behavior turns her on so much.
The basis of the plot: if you cannot enjoy a normal sex life, and you crave a supply of orgasms, then become a pervert and accept the consequences of letting some guy do what the hell he wants to do to.
The consensual side of the equation was that Emily was given a BDSM contract before they started, and she had access to a safe word if she wanted to up and off from any more of his perversions.
I have no idea who Jacky St. James (credited as the author) is in real life - but she does use that name on her twitter account - and kudos to her for doing research into what people in a BDSM relationship actually do. But I really wish she had spent more time researching the "why" we do it, and the real life mechanics that happen before and during a relationship, "Your sex life is too mundane? Here, sign this BDSM contract and see how much it improves." might possibly have been used as a successful pick up line once or twice - but surely only as a very rare exception and never as a rule.
If you want to show some aspects of TTTWD, you really need to get your ducks in a row first. Or all you will do will be to alienate the community and be seen as trying to foster the lie to the rest of your audience. The lie? That, without exception, we are narcissists and raving sex perverts.
Monday, April 27, 2015
Is it really still a dirty little secret?
A curious case has hit the news media from a town in North East England.
A guy used the internet to make a date with a stranger who after the briefest of briefest meetings claimed she had secretly filmed the spanking she had given him, and please would he lend her (the equivalent of about) $75 not to post it to Facebook?
He did pay up , but made a discrete complaint to the Police. The ensuing court case resulted in her getting a one year prison sentence for blackmail.
I kind of suspect that if all they had done was kiss and cuddle, the blackmail attempt would have been equally successful, with a similar final outcome.
But I have a nagging doubt.
Back in the 60's and 70's the biggest threat to military secrecy in the NATO countries was homosexuality. Not that homosexuals were treacherous cads, but because if the soviets could prove you were of a homosexual persuasion, you would open any safe in order to keep your secret private.
Admittedly, back then, being homosexual was very likely to result in public disgrace and even a prison sentence. By criminalizing a natural condition, the Western alliance handed the Soviet Union a very strong tactical ploy to learn our battle plans, should it ever come to a shooting war.
Through a different mechanism, we spankos have set ourselves up to be very sensitive about our foible. Most of us spent our formative years in the false belief that we were the only spanko in the world, and that the worst thing that could ever happen to us would be for our secret to be revealed to family and friends. Prison was not an option - but maybe a lengthy stay in some mental health institution.
That shared feeling was so strong that surveys suggest that about 80% of us still try to keep our spanko tendencies from all but our very closest and trusted sex partners. And for 20%, even close partners are never told what really turns one of us on.
There is much anecdotal evidence to suggest that the 20% or so who make no secret of the spanking side of their psyche have suffered in any way whatsoever by revealing the fact.
Which suggests that the other 80% of us should not carry what we seem to think is a dirty little secret. It opens us up to blackmail scams, no matter how futile such scams may prove to be in the long term..
Yeah - right. Having made a case why you should go tell everyone your secret, you might point out that I continue to sit behind a nom-de-plume in order to keep my privacy intact. And that is not a case of moral duplicity - it is an admission that I also am still possessed by a need for secrecy that I inherited from our shared false belief; one that persisted and gripped me throughout all my formative years. Irrational fears are the hardest ones to shake off.
We really don't have a dirty little secret - its just that 80% of us still cannot shake off the notion that it is one. May be we should set up an annual "Coming Out" day so that we could continue to help each other to put an end to our fears that we have something to fear. How about July 1st? As a real one, not one of the prank ones that are floating around the internet...
A guy used the internet to make a date with a stranger who after the briefest of briefest meetings claimed she had secretly filmed the spanking she had given him, and please would he lend her (the equivalent of about) $75 not to post it to Facebook?
He did pay up , but made a discrete complaint to the Police. The ensuing court case resulted in her getting a one year prison sentence for blackmail.
I kind of suspect that if all they had done was kiss and cuddle, the blackmail attempt would have been equally successful, with a similar final outcome.
But I have a nagging doubt.
Back in the 60's and 70's the biggest threat to military secrecy in the NATO countries was homosexuality. Not that homosexuals were treacherous cads, but because if the soviets could prove you were of a homosexual persuasion, you would open any safe in order to keep your secret private.
Admittedly, back then, being homosexual was very likely to result in public disgrace and even a prison sentence. By criminalizing a natural condition, the Western alliance handed the Soviet Union a very strong tactical ploy to learn our battle plans, should it ever come to a shooting war.
Through a different mechanism, we spankos have set ourselves up to be very sensitive about our foible. Most of us spent our formative years in the false belief that we were the only spanko in the world, and that the worst thing that could ever happen to us would be for our secret to be revealed to family and friends. Prison was not an option - but maybe a lengthy stay in some mental health institution.
That shared feeling was so strong that surveys suggest that about 80% of us still try to keep our spanko tendencies from all but our very closest and trusted sex partners. And for 20%, even close partners are never told what really turns one of us on.
There is much anecdotal evidence to suggest that the 20% or so who make no secret of the spanking side of their psyche have suffered in any way whatsoever by revealing the fact.
Which suggests that the other 80% of us should not carry what we seem to think is a dirty little secret. It opens us up to blackmail scams, no matter how futile such scams may prove to be in the long term..
Yeah - right. Having made a case why you should go tell everyone your secret, you might point out that I continue to sit behind a nom-de-plume in order to keep my privacy intact. And that is not a case of moral duplicity - it is an admission that I also am still possessed by a need for secrecy that I inherited from our shared false belief; one that persisted and gripped me throughout all my formative years. Irrational fears are the hardest ones to shake off.
We really don't have a dirty little secret - its just that 80% of us still cannot shake off the notion that it is one. May be we should set up an annual "Coming Out" day so that we could continue to help each other to put an end to our fears that we have something to fear. How about July 1st? As a real one, not one of the prank ones that are floating around the internet...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)