Why Do Feminists Turn A Blind Eye . . .

[Suburbanite]

So... you are advocating genocide?

[Man Against Time]

Imagine someone bending your wife or girlfriend over a desk and painfully whacking her ass with a board. Brutal or not brutal? (Guess the jury's still out on scalding someone's ass.)

No, it would not be brutal. It would be, as I said fourty-seven times though, sexual and I would therefore object. But to object because it is Brutal is absolutely laughable and pathetic. Any kind of pain that is only intense for a second or two is NOT BRUTAL.

[culebrero]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Man Against Time,)
But to object because it is Brutal is absolutely laughable and pathetic. Any kind of pain that is only intense for a second or two is NOT BRUTAL.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

I don't think such fleeting pain intensity is typical of paddling. Besides, what's the duration of intensity for pain caused by a steam burn? Or a cattle prod?

[Man Against Time]

Steam burns hurt for days...

And you are not addressing the issue here- the practice of paddling the presented haunches of submissive young women is, DUH, very sexual. Just picture it. Try and deny that it is sexual. If you want to argue it should be done away with because of the introduction of a very sexual element, wonderful, but dont try and cry to people that the girls are victims of brutality. That is stupid and misdirected.

[culebrero]

Steam burns hurt for days...

Well sure, but is there intense pain for that long, recalling the more exact basis on which you judged paddling?

And you are not addressing the issue here- the practice of paddling the presented haunches of submissive young women is, DUH, very sexual.

Speaking of DUH, did you even read the post I began this thread with? Here's an excerpt for you:

[color=blue]"At this time, thanks largely to the efforts of such organizations as yours, nowhere in the U.S. are employers legally permitted to demand sexual favors in exchange for job security or advancement. In the public school systems of 23 states, however, thinly disguised sexual favors can be, and are being, coerced from students with impunity. According to the most conservative estimates, legal beatings of schoolchildren number about 1/3 million incidents per year, and many of those beatings are inflicted by adult males on underage females (though even 18-year-old women are not exempt from being paddled). It is often with threats to these girls’ academic standing—and by extension, their prospects for college admission—that these men prevail on them to 'assume the position.'"[/color]

[Man Against Time]

If that is your objection, be a man about it and stop beating this ridiculous "Brutality" drum.

[culebrero]

Here's a news flash for you, tough guy: It's possible to have more than one objection to the same thing.

[Man Against Time]

Which is an irrelevant point when your second objection is ludicrous garbage.

[culebrero]

Yeah, yeah . . . can you tell us the duration of intense pain from steam burns or can't you?

[Man Against Time]

...days.

[culebrero]

Especially given your apparently liberal definition of "intense pain," I don't know how you figure paddling produces only a few seconds of it by comparison.

Consider also that the paddle was invented for use on slaves, so it had to be fairly effective at inducing pain. Granted, the severity of those punishments were on an extreme level, but I think even moderate paddling of slaves would be seen by most as brutal.

[Friedrich]

Both of the incidents described in the first post in this thread seem entirely inappropriate, to me, and should result in the adult male getting his ass kicked.

The point is not whether he, or I, or most males, would be likely to get an "erection" from glimpsing an attractive young woman's butt in a "tight" uniform or anything else, but the issue of consent and capacity to consent; and also the issues surrounding the nature of the act for which such consent is sought and its setting.

No minor is capable of consenting to sex -- and paddling a person's butt in such circumstances, whether the paddler knows it or not, is inherently a sexual act -- but perhaps no employee under such coercive circumstances is capable of consenting either. Even more clearly in a case where consent has not been sought or obtained and the act has been done anyway, in a violative and forcible manner, it seems obvious to me that it is wrong. More than "discipline" is at issue here: for instance, the psychological health of a person, power-relations in society, the scope and limits of educational authority ... and lots of other things too.

As a matter of principle: 1) You don't put your hands on someone without that person's consent; 2) You don't "hit" people; unsolicited and unpermitted contact with the person of another is always, ALWAYs wrong -- except as an act of self-defense where no other option is available and then only such "reasonable" use of force is permissible as will end the immediate threat to the person acting in self-defense. 3) Violence is never, NEVER an appropriate means of punishment in a school or any other social setting.

I am surprised that anyone finds this a difficult issue. It concerns all of us, not just feminists, that people -- ALL people -- should feel physically safe in public instuitutions, especially schools.

[Comrade]

I know that here, back when I was in Jr High, a kid was mouthing off fairly strongly, had tossed a desk over, had threatened the teacher, you know, a typical temper tamtrum by an MTV kid; the teacher rapped him with a yard stick.

She was immediately fired.

[james?]

I didn't read this whole topic, but are you guys serious?!!?!? If a teacher at my school even screamed at a student to the point where the student was seriously uncomfortable, his or her job would be at serious risk.

If you are honest in saying that 23 states allow paddling in school, that just... blows my mind. I mean, there's tons and tons of people who believe teachers don't have enough authority in disciplining kids, but it's just rediculous that something like this would legally go on ever, let alone today. Minnesota must be very, very, very different from some other U.S. states.

[DarkRose33]

I don't think that anyone should ever have the right to even touch me if I don't want them to. That principal was hammered into my head from the time I was able to speak. Young people are very impressionable and I think that this practice might lead to confusion in their minds about weather or not authority figures are there to protect them or just hurt them.

I don't think that getting hit in the ass alone is "brutal" but the emotional trauma for a child could be significant. I am not afraid of violence...it has its uses, but one thig I can never endorse is the use of violence against those who are defenseless. I.E. Children

I think that if any school official even touched my child I would have that person by the hair with their face repeatedly meeting my fist. The discipline of my children is MINE. If they have a problem they come to me.

[Mia]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (james?,)
I didn't read this whole topic, but are you guys serious?!!?!? If a teacher at my school even screamed at a student to the point where the student was seriously uncomfortable, his or her job would be at serious risk.

If you are honest in saying that 23 states allow paddling in school, that just... blows my mind. I mean, there's tons and tons of people who believe teachers don't have enough authority in disciplining kids, but it's just rediculous that something like this would legally go on ever, let alone today. Minnesota must be very, very, very different from some other U.S. states.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>


They allowed paddling to occur in my high school. For boys only. They thought it was dangerous for a girl because of her reproductive system (?)

This actually pissed me off - boys had the choice of paddling or detention. I would have preferred the short-term pain to my whole Saturday in detention! (The paddlings were really nothing, according to the boys).

[MASTERPEEVE]

Despite how one may feel about paddling, it IS legal in some places, and one has to assume that it's legal there because the majority of people are comfortable with it.

Also, if paddling is to be admissable for males then it should be just as admissable for females. If the fear is of it being "sexually-oriented", then get a member of the same sex to do the paddling (let's assume for a moment that we're not talking about a homosexual child, which is a different thread entirely).
-Chris

i say whup the crap out of the child

these days they say there are other forms of punishment

but if the eminem generation is any example id rather have corporeal punishment again

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Friedrich,)
Both of the incidents described in the first post in this thread seem entirely inappropriate, to me, and should result in the adult male getting his ass kicked.

The point is not whether he, or I, or most males, would be likely to get an "erection" from glimpsing an attractive young woman's butt in a "tight" uniform or anything else, but the issue of consent and capacity to consent; and also the issues surrounding the nature of the act for which such consent is sought and its setting.

No minor is capable of consenting to sex -- and paddling a person's butt in such circumstances, whether the paddler knows it or not, is inherently a sexual act -- but perhaps no employee under such coercive circumstances is capable of consenting either. Even more clearly in a case where consent has not been sought or obtained and the act has been done anyway, in a violative and forcible manner, it seems obvious to me that it is wrong. More than "discipline" is at issue here: for instance, the psychological health of a person, power-relations in society, the scope and limits of educational authority ... and lots of other things too.

As a matter of principle: 1) You don't put your hands on someone without that person's consent; 2) You don't "hit" people; unsolicited and unpermitted contact with the person of another is always, ALWAYs wrong -- except as an act of self-defense where no other option is available and then only such "reasonable" use of force is permissible as will end the immediate threat to the person acting in self-defense. 3) Violence is never, NEVER an appropriate means of punishment in a school or any other social setting.

I am surprised that anyone finds this a difficult issue. It concerns all of us, not just feminists, that people -- ALL people -- should feel physically safe in public instuitutions, especially schools.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

and as a matter of principles students shouldnt disrespect adults
odd how that works neh?

[culebrero]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mia,)
They allowed paddling to occur in my high school. For boys only. They thought it was dangerous for a girl because of her reproductive system (?)
<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

That's not entirely unfounded. A young woman who testified before the U.S. Senate back in 1984 had been paddled while she was menstruating and hemorrhaged for two days after until estrogen treatment stopped the bleeding. More recently another girl "bled vaginally for the next 23 days" after a single swat, according to her mother. "The doctors feared her uterus was knocked out of place. They determined finally it was the shock from such a hard blow, and her body just didn't know how to react."

And while the odds of this are slimmer, it's also conceivable that paddling could induce miscarriage in a student with early-stage pregnancy who's not showing and maybe not yet aware herself.