Saturday, 8 September 2012

Glowing Globes Gazette - Spanktown


                                                   Glowing Globes Gazette

Welcome to a new article from The Glowing Globes Gazette, as you can see the picture has changed, that will happen every so often. This article called ominously enough Spanktown, about a district that decided to change things by use of spankings is from our correspondent Phil. It rather reminds of Clarkstown although I can't think why *giggle*.


Spanktown


Several years ago, the town of Spencerville, (pop. 33,281, as of the last census) city council passed a new law specifically aimed at juvenile criminals.  For non-violent and misdemeanor crimes, upon conviction or guilty pleas, the offender and his/her parents had the choice of incarceration at the local juvenile facility, fines, community service, probation, a combination of some or all of the above, OR judicially supervised corporal punishment.  Such punishment would only be available to offenders under the age of 17.  The fines were steep, and the sentences of incarceration were as long as state law would allow. This was to encourage parents to choose the corporal punishment option.


A corrections officer poses with the recipient of a court ordered punishment.

The offender would be taken to one of several rooms at City Hall set aside for such punishment.  A court representative would read out the charges and the sentence of corporal punishment, and the parent(s) or guardian of the minor in question would formally agree to the sentence and sign a form saying to that effect. Upon formal pronunciation of sentence, the offender would be escorted to a room where a chair was set up for spanking.  Two video cameras were set up to capture the entire punishment on videotape to make sure there was no excessive punishment, and as a record of the punishment.  Several women, formally known as “matrons”, were recruited from municipal employees to serve as spankers.  Women were used exclusively so that there was no suggestion of sexual impropriety with the girls, and because it would increase the embarrassment and humiliation of the boys to be spanked by a woman.  All spankings were given over the knee, with bottoms completely bared.  Children under the age of twelve were spanked only with the hand, although younger offenders were comparatively rare.  Older offenders were spanked with the Matron’s choice of implements, ranging from large, old-fashioned hairbrushes to an assortment of paddles and straps, as well as slippers, shoe soles, rulers, etc.  The Matrons were given a wide amount of latitude, but all punishments were reviewed by a panel of judges and city officials to ensure that they complied with the law and were not too severe (or too lenient).  There was no set numbers of spanks or strokes, just the admonition to administer “a good, old-fashioned spanking.”  Instead, more serious offenses or repeat offenders were punished with more than one spanking, usually a day or two apart, up to a total of ten spankings maximum for any offense.  This was extremely rare, for the spankings were quite thorough and a series of ten, spread out over ten to fifteen days would result in great discomfort to the offender, to say the least.


With a nurse and some of his victims in attendance a bully receives a paddling.

Girls were punished in the same way as boys, although they were less likely to commit more serious offenses or be repeat offenders.  The Matrons spanked as they saw fit, so it was in the offender’s best interest to be as humble as possible and to cooperate readily.  Any resistance would result in more spanks, and physical resistance was met with court personnel physically subduing the offender, who was then restrained and punished.  The Matrons rarely needed such help.  They tended to be somewhat intimidating, although not always physically formidable.  Backtalk, rebellion, swearing or any resistance to the punishment merely resulted in extra severity, and the offenders soon learned better.  Offenders were advised to wear loose clothing, so as to minimize discomfort afterwards.


A local mother takes matters into her own hands and over her lap.

The Matron seated herself and beckoned the offender forward.  The offender was then ordered to drop their trousers if they were wearing them.  Then they were to lie across the Matron’s lap.  Skirts, if worn, were raised and then the underwear was pulled down to the knees of the offender.  Eventually, it was decided to simply have the subjects disrobe completely from the waist down and put on an apron, which had the effect of covering the subject’s front, preserving their modesty, while completely exposing their buttocks for punishment.  The spankee’s ankles were then bound together loosely so as to minimize kicking.  The Matron then used her choice of implements and began the punishment.  Both video cameras were used to record the process from different angles.  Both cameras recorded sound as well.  The spankings were administered at the Matron’s discretion, fast or slow, lecturing in between spanks, etc.  If necessary, the offender was restrained by the Matron, or by court personnel and the offender’s bare buttocks were paddled soundly until the Matron was satisfied that the lesson had been learned. Usually, this meant very red, very sore bottoms and copious tears and sobbing, even begging before the punishment was over. Unofficially, offenders were expected to be spanked until they were crying helplessly and expressing contrition, especially males.


Two officers of the law deal with young girls who have breached decency standards.

Afterwards, the spankees’ bottoms were examined for excessive damage, and the videotapes were given to the court. They were edited into one tape and then entered into the official record.  The editing process was primarily to consolidate the various perspectives of the two cameras as well as to excise any genital exposure. The court kept one copy, and one was given to the parents of the offender. 

Several stills from the punishment were printed; one facial shot, one shot of the bared, spanked bottom and one shot of the offender over the Matron’s knees being spanked were published in a special section of the local newspaper, along with the offender’s name and crime.  Sales and subscriptions of the paper rose dramatically. The photos and information were also uploaded to a special section of the town’s official web site. All residents of the town were given access, via password, to this section; however, all others had to subscribe to the web site to see this special section. There was also a feature on the web site where you could watch the edited video of the spanking. It cost $9.95 a month, check or credit card, and, as the word spread, resulted in thousands of subscriptions. This brought in considerable revenue to the town, so much so that most local fees and taxes were abolished and municipal services were more than adequately funded. All the images were protected from downloading by special software. This led to certain frustration from many of the paid subscribers, but it was still well worth the money to view the site.  The site soon grew so large that it was necessary to purge the older spankings from the site to make room for newer ones. Eventually, newer spankings became rarer and rarer, so not as many of the old ones were purged.


A public punishment in progress.

Juvenile crime dropped dramatically, as the embarrassment and humiliation of virtually everyone in town knowing, and being able to witness some “tough guys” spanking (and crying) and royally reddened bare bottom led to an understandable reluctance to do something that would result in such a punishment. Petty theft, shoplifting and graffiti were virtually non-existent and businesses, especially retail businesses prospered.

After this success, a proposal to establish this same policy in the public school system was floated, much to the dismay of youngsters all over town. It passed overwhelmingly. The American Civil Liberties Union and other civil rights groups promptly filed lawsuits to block it and won. It was decided by an appellate court that the city could not force parents in a public school to allow corporal punishment of their children, but that private schools would face no such prohibition since state law did not forbid it. Several private schools, both religious and secular were promptly chartered, and enrollment soared immediately.

The rules of punishment were similar to municipal ones in these schools, with some variations.  Some offenses had prescribed numbers of spanks, and in the Catholic school, it was decided not to videotape the spankings. Sometimes teachers or principals would administer the punishments, but parents were always encouraged to at least be present and, if they so desired, to give the spankings themselves. All the schools displayed the results of the spankings prominently.  Usually there was a display board in the hallway for Polaroids of spankings and they also videotaped them. As with the municipal court, the tapes were edited and a copy given to the parents. Usually, one was kept by the school administration for the record and one was made available in the school library for viewing by anyone who wanted to see it. Of course, this led to a certain amount of teasing, which led to a certain amount of fighting, which led to more spankings.  Eventually, nearly all students experienced at least one punishment, so no one could lord it over the others, as the record of their own humiliation was readily available for perusal.

The schools also followed the city’s lead and had their own pay web sites, free to parents and employees of the school, and protected by the same anti-downloading software. Subscriptions to these sites also soared and they were eventually consolidated into a group of sites with a single password and payment. The schools realized so much money from this that tuition was slashed to next to nothing. The teachers and other employees were among the best paid in the state and the schools had an abundance of arts, sports and cultural enrichment programs. They were able to fund many scholarships and field trips. Uniforms to the different schools were mandatory and free to the students, although they were expected to take good care of them. Damaging or losing school uniforms, like other school property, resulted in a videotaped bare-bottom spanking. Test scores soared and teacher and employee morale along with it. Soon, Spencerville’s students were among the highest scoring in the state. More than ninety percent of them went on to college and other towns began to take notice.


A young lady gets her paddling from mum at home.

Enrollment in the public school system declined to almost nothing. Because of this, the district consolidated all of its grades into one building. Morale was low as was funding, being based on student enrollment. The ACLU and its allies sued on behalf of the students. The court found that per-pupil spending was on a par with the state average. Student test scores were also at, or even above the state average. This decision was immortalized in an editorial in the local paper entitled “Damning with Faint Praise.” A few diehard liberal parents kept their children in the public school but almost all the kids in town went to one of the private “spanking schools.”

The town then changed the law to allow for the corporal punishment of 17 and 18 year-old offenders. Instead of OTK spankings, they were made to disrobe below the waist and bent over a padded spanking bench and bound into place. A large leather strap made from a police gunbelt was used for the punishment. Each offender was thoroughly strapped on the bare backside until they were bawling like a baby. These punishments were also taped and posted on the web site and in the newspaper. Civil ordinances against juvenile smoking, underage drinking, drug use and other “nuisance crimes” were strictly enforced. Another civil ordinance was passed making it legal for a parent or duly authorized guardian, including nannies, baby-sitters, adult relatives and older siblings to spank misbehaving children under the age of 12 in public, including but not requiring that it be on the bare bottom. Any “appropriate instrument” including, but not limited to hairbrushes, belts, paddles, sandals, and switches were allowed to be utilized in the “just chastisement of any child for any reasonable cause.” It became a common sight in the streets, parks and public places to see children being soundly spanked on their bare bottoms whenever their parents felt they needed it and soon, Spencerville had the most polite, well-behaved children in the state.

A proposal to rename the town “Spanktown” was circulated but was defeated at the polls. It was already informally known as “Spanktown” anyway and many residents wanted to keep the name of Spencerville. Another proposal was prepared to deal with misdemeanor crime by adults with corporal punishment.  It also failed, but it was close. The ACLU vowed another lawsuit.


The town's response to the latest ACLU lawsuit.

A statue of Elijah Spencer, for whom the town was named, stands in the center of a park near City Hall downtown. Many people insist that whenever a misbehaving child is taken over an adult lap for an old-fashioned, pants-down shellacking and everyone stops and gathers around to witness a childishly bared bottom being deservedly reddened by an indignant parental palm or hairbrush, you can actually see the statue of old Elijah smile…

4 comments:

  1. I hope everyone enjoys this and I look forward to more of the pictures being posted.

    Thanks, Aunty.

    Phil

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you that, Phil. I'm sure people will enjoy it, it is well written and about a subject that is near and dear to all our hearts.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well done and terrific lines, and yes somewhat hot, but well done, thank you.

    Love the pics and nice spankings!
    Always
    Ron

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thank you Ron, your appreciation is always gratefully received.

    ReplyDelete