Burnley Grammar School

Christopher C on 18th August 2022 at 18:51

I posed a question which I think was quite legitimate. Do you want to ban that when it doesn't suit the narrtive of abuse is everywhere?

Comment by: Christopher C on 18th August 2022 at 18:51
It's often not WHAT you say but HOW you say it Paul.

For me constant personal attacks undermine anyone's case, factual or not.


^^^^^^THIS ABOVE^^^^^^

Paul J on 18th August 2022 at 12:32
Has Andy said anything that wasn't true? It all looks quite accurate to me. I'm not sure your post is anything other than faux outrage about nothing.


In one word - plenty.

Faux outrage - that comes only from he who you're defending.

It's often not WHAT you say but HOW you say it Paul.

For me constant personal attacks undermine anyone's case, factual or not.

Kris on 17th August 2022 at 22:32

Has Andy said anything that wasn't true? It all looks quite accurate to me. I'm not sure your post is anything other than faux outrage about nothing.

I can't believe he's still at it. Now just picking fault with people for the sheer thrill and enjoyment of it.

When you start pedantic nitpicking at a 77 year old man (Gerald) who clearly wrote his own views and experience you show yourself up for what you're really all about.

Ged on 17th August 2022 at 08:33

BBC South Today is running a series of reports from their archive during August, one piece per night, that's where the Bognor Cane Company will have come from.

Gerald on 17th August 2022 at 17:53
You forgot to add the 'in my experience' line to your post because your post wasn't univeral and others had different experiences.

Tanya on 17th August 2022 at 18:17
You are of course free to wonder but others have recounted experiences of their own punishments, none has said anything about their mother being the subject of any beating but please, fantasise away, Alan will be very greatful for your ramblings.

James M on 17th August 2022 at 20:06
Corporal punishment of children is not an option these days so your question has no basis in reality. In times past, plenty of boys particularly were subject to corporal punishment, parents in the main laid down rules and consequences so it would not have been anything but the expected consequence of misbehaviour.

What a great question you pose Tanya. It makes you think what those kind of excessive corporal punishment teachers might have been like in the private home with their own. I think it was probably far easier to cane other people's boys, and a few girls no doubt.

Also, did some of these teachers really use it to maximum force they could muster at times?

That was also a decent summary from Gerald of his 50s upbringing. Broadly agree. A father that actively chose to strike a cane at his children deserves no respect whatsoever.

Would anybody on here be prepared to admit they would have felt okay doing so to their own son or daughter?

Comment by: Matthew on 16th August 2022 at 12:37
Reading about how the fathers of some posters subjected them to violence made me wonder if those fathers ever subjected their wives to violence.


Imagine being such a pathetic specimen of a man that you beat your wife and used corporal punishment on your children.

These teachers of olden times who brought out the cane against other people's kids in school - I wonder if many of them did the same back in their own family homes against their own kids?

A cane is a cane to me and I've plenty in the shed that I've used over the years for this and that around the place. They always make a very distictive sound if you swish them rapidly through the air.

But this talk of Bognor Cane Company has made me wonder if there were manufacturers of canes who actually made them specifically for schools in the past and to a spec designed purely as a punishment tool and nothing else, or whether a cane is just a cane whether you stick it in the garden or swipe it across somebody.

I was born back in 1945 and left school back in 1960 when I was only 15 years old. I was never caned in any of the schools I attended, either through luck or because I tended to knuckle down and get on with things. But at home I could give my parents plenty to chastise me about and both my parents would occasionally smack me, although I don't think they did this after I was about 11.

I had a large group of friends and although one or two of them did receive corporal school punishment I know of none who did so at home, other than with a firm hand. Once I saw a best friend given a major smacking right in front of me by his mother, I forget why now. She had no hesitation doing so while I looked on.

To me there is a major difference between corporal school punishment which was an ever present hazard in the 1950's even for well behaved boys who could fall foul very easily, and corporal punishment in the home by parents, in this case using a cane.

Whilst I fully accept there will have been some parents who used this method of chastisement I do think it is worth saying that it should not be considered the norm. I would have found it appalling if my parents had been caning me at home over anything I had got up to they didn't like. I would have felt the same if I had known it was happening to any of my friends. Fathers caning their children, and it would never be the mother would it, just the men caning the sons, is something to me that says you must be failing as a parent if you have to resort to such means.

I would be deeply suspicious of any father who thought the best way to deal with his childrens behaviour was to bring a cane out against them on a regular basis. No father should wish to do that to his child. When I grew up it would not have been seen as something generally used at home.

The fact is that there are people out there who have used this method of chastisement and taken an element of pleasure out of inflicting it. At my school in the late 1950's we had one Maths teacher, Mr Kitsinger, who had a reputation around the school for his relish with his cane or sending boys to the headmaster for it. It was said that he used it with a smirk or soemtimes a smile and would even whistle to himself while doing it in a side room partitioned adjacent to his maths classroom. I wouldn't know because I managed to escape such a fate. A boy at the desk next to mine received this for his constant inability to grasp doing long division at one point and told me he smiled broadly at him after he had punished him. It was a common observation.

We see so much nowadays about the mis treatment of children by their parents, never a week seems to go by. I have no doubt that when I grew up there would have been fathers out there who chose the use of a cane not just to bring their child into line or as a quick chastisement but for a more abusive ongoing relationship. A genuinely good father in the 1950's who was still incredibly strict with high standards and could keep his child in line would never have chosen to cane a son.

I respected my parents and knew how to behave and what would happen if I didn't. A quick smack here and there was expected, almost always instant and on the spur of the moment and could hurt, even through clothing. Caning is more premeditated. If my father had left an actual cane lying about the house ready and waiting for use against me and had actually done so in the manner a school would administer it I very much doubt I would have held him in the same respectful high esteem.

I wasn't taking too much notice but one evening recently meaning within the last month, there was reference to the Bognor Cane Company on BBC South Today. I don't know why the feature was on but there was archive footage of manufacturing including forming the familiar crooked handle and the canes being boxed up for delivery. I would guess it was of 1960's vintage.

This was obviously quite a big business when the cane was present in schools and homes. There were certainly canes present both at school and at home for me in the 1970s.

"Truth Seeker" - I am damned if I do, and damned if I don't. If I don't respond, I am giving in to one especially rancorous poster and if I do I am attention seeking.

I have always felt that things that are said, apparently seriously, need to be taken seriously, and I maintain that - certainly 40 years ago, it would have been unthinkable that a father from my background and area would have sent his son to a shop to buy a cane to inflict corporal punishment on him. It certainly didn't happen in East London. I am not saying that it didn't happen between the wars, say, but I find it incredible to think this happened during my lifetime. As I said most punishments - usually administered with a hand or fist was spontaneous. Any man who did behave in such a manner, and then insist that the son remove his trousers and underpants, was, I would say, at best, a discipline fetishist, with unhealthy and obsessive thoughts about discipline, or - at worst - a dirty old man - like the then-owner of the Bognor Cane Company who even published a magazine "advising" parents on how to "discipline" their children into going to bed at a time he considered suitable etc. Interesting that though he threatend legal action, he never took it - I assume he had a very wise and astute solicitor. That seems to have been a magazine designed to appeal to perverts. I assume such magazines today might be available on the top shelf of some newsagents, or available through some outlets, who undertake to send it in a plain sealed envelope, but to suggest it was a serious magazine, is to suggest that Harry Potter stories are based on reality. . It would not be the sort of publication found in the reading room of a public library. It sounds very niche and very specialist, and so very grubby..

I have to say, frankly and unapologetically, that anybody who regards such behaviour as normal, or even amusing has a very warped mind.

We had two teachers who enjoyed using the cane - one of them clearly gained a great deal of satisfaction out of using the cane - I assume he had a very squalid life, probably a hen-pecked husband at home, who got his own back by terrorising young boys at work. The banning of caning in state schools in 1989 must have been a great blow to his morale.

We should be grateful such uncivilised behaviour is illegal today, and it is a concern that there are still people who would like to see it return.

I also have to say that I am sure a great deal of the memories recounted on many of these pages are fictional. At best, they remind you of the "Four Yorkshiremen" sketch, at worst, they sound like the synopsis for a very seedy film.

Treating children as objects for the gratification of adults is, and always has been, disgusting, like people who inflict cruelty on animals, and they should have been bought to book.

Alan has the most remarkable quality of becoming the centre of attention on this thread and the subject himself. Quite a quality, how does he manage it. I should imagine Alan you must have had the same qualities as a schoolboy with all that it obviously must have brought upon you.

What was your prime motivation for your initial comments on here and what is your prime motivation for continuing to do so considering the kind of feedback you receive?

Giles writing something far too highbrow for the level of discussion that this forum sometimes sinks to with a few on here. No wonder it has largely been ignored. The level of comment is certainly not at Ph.D level calibre, although I found it interesting and it made me think a few thoughts I'd not previously considered.

Reading about how the fathers of some posters subjected them to violence made me wonder if those fathers ever subjected their wives to violence.

Oh Dear ... Oh Dear, Oh Dear, Oh Dear ...

Alan:
My post (15/08 @ 11.22 followed someone referring to the 'Bognor Cane Company' - a 'strange' name so I googled it and got the URL that I posted. I did not read the article - I have more important things to do - and I still haven't read it other than a very quick glance.

You took my initials and posted straight after them - to me (& others) that connects me to those comments. That is not so - I merely provided information and let other people make of it what they will.

However you do say:
'when a group of clearly decent teachers complained about his questionable magazine'.
Glancing, and I stress only glancing, I came up with this, from an item in 'The Times':
BEGINS 'What is more, Family View, a copy of which I have obtained, is about as lurid as the Radio Times, and the females pictured therein are about as undressed as the average underground train traveller in summer.
I was, in short, not shocked by it -- and neither will anyone else be. Family View, which never sold more than 100 copies, has been defunct since January last year.'ENDS

You must have seen the above - it was immediately after the sentence you quoted.

(Thinks - Alan: in your young days did you never look at 'Health & Efficiency' or even buy some 'naughty' underwear?)

I do check sources - especially the ones to relating to Youtube clips - URLs have been posted with wrong descriptions and comments about filmmakers which might be considered 'legally questionable'.

I'm surprised you didn't find something to comment about in this:

Some friends and I sometimes reminisce about our younger days - 'corner shops', etc., come up in conversation but, as far as I can recall, nobody has ever mentioned canes - not even the guy who had a tough upbringing in 1950s & 60s Glasgow.

I think that, like others, I wasn't in a minority in not been beaten as I grew up. I do, though, have a very faint recollection that a neighbour may have had and used a 'switch'.

And with that - time for lunch ...

T

Alan on 15th August 2022 at 05:49

Like others, I find your post utterly offensive.

I chose to recount some details of my memories growing up and because they don't fit with your view of how things were or indeed should have been you have the audacity to suggest I am some sort of pervert. You are insulting and disgusting.

I can now see clearly why others are calling you out on a day by day basis and I'll add my voice to those who would suggest you take your problems elsewhere and stop posting here.

Andrew.

Reading between the lines I am prepared to hazard an educated guess that you probably rather liked your teacher that did that to you and she probably quite liked you. Am I close on that?

I very much liked the resolution to that and the sense of it all. Nowadays she would simply be fired or suspended pending an internal investigation. On balance I'll take the '77 style of sorting things out.

Alan, can you give me 5 examples of what you consider the top five most abusive individual things that happened to you at school and by whom. Genuine interest.

I was once slapped across the face very hard by my female form teacher, a lady of about 40 when she was in a tetchy mood and a I made a comment about it being her time of the month. She really went for me with an unexpected slap. I was shocked at the time but class found it funny. I was 15. She then said sorry at the end of the lesson and even rang my mother at home to say what she did as my face was rather flushed one side. Mum thought I deserved it. No big drama in the end. I actually find it very amusing looking back (1977) and see it for what it was in the moment. I would not dream of feeling abused. Just another part of the spectrum of 1970's school life in a regular everyday school.

I may also be one of those rare beasts who loved most PE and had no issue with shirt loss and having a naked communal shower literally held no bother whatever and felt fine and was something I never worried about for one moment at all about, although I know one or two friends felt very different. But that's all fine either way isn't it.

TimH on 15th August 2022 at 17:31

Don't worry, you're not alone, Alan will find abuse everywhere, he's obsessed and preoccupied by it.

Alan on 15th August 2022 at 19:11

Because you are now being called out by far more than me because of your views, you want the thread terminated? I say no to that, just leave everyone else to get on with it and stay away. That's the best solution.

Tim H: I wasn't dragging you into anything. I was just referencing you as the source of the articles. People are getting a little over-sensitive on here - perhaps it was time this thread was put to bed with all the venom being generated. "Andy" would have to find a new hobby to replace trolling me!

Alan:
I'm not sure why my name is being brought into this ... I merely posted the link to some articles published over 40 years ago.

Some friends and I sometimes reminisce about our younger days - 'corner shops', etc., come up in conversation but, as far as I can recall, nobody has ever mentioned canes - not even the guy who had a tough upbringing in 1950s & 60s Glasgow.

I think that, like others, I wasn't in a minority in not been beaten as I grew up. I do, though, have a very faint recollection that a neighbour may have had and used a 'switch'.

Alan - please don't get me involved in your arguments - I more important things to think about.

Robbie - I pretty much agree with earlier comments today. I haven't forgotten I need to reply to an earlier post of yours.

Tim H: A quote from one of the newspaper articles from the man who ran the "Bognor Cane Company", when a group of clearly decent teachers complained about his questionable magazine:

"Mr Huntingdon, aged 53, who is growing crosser by the minute, told me: "I am taking legal advice. What they have said is utter unmitigated rubbish. They seem to want to get hold of any stick to beat me."

Well, I thought that was what he wanted....

Alan on 15th August 2022 at 05:49

Oh dear, here we go again attempting to focus some real memories as disingenuous while failing to call out, but why would he the posts he either made or sponsored:

Stephen Breech on 14th August 2022 at 16:50

Paul H on 12th August 2022 at 13:26

Alan on 11th August 2022 at 20:30

Paul H on 11th August 2022 at 15:06

Stephen Breech on 11th August 2022 at 00:59


If your post doesn't meet Alan's view of the world as clearly:

Ben on 13th August 2022 at 16:36

Pete on 14th August 2022 at 17:45

Did not because Alan's experience was apparently different then you must be some sort of fantasist posting for some sort of ulterior motive when indeed the prime villain of the peace on that score is Alan himself.

Look let’s be clear here, just as most schools were not and are not riven with bad people wishing to do any harm or abuse in any of its forms, the majority, certainly over recent times write on here with real memories and opinions. Yes there is a minority that do not and some of the fetish minded types try to angle things very subtly but they’ve mostly been called out lately I think and fool nobody but themselves.

We don’t need to overblow the school abuse issue or the daft fetishers who come here into a bigger ratio than they actually are. There have been some brilliant teachers, of PE as well, and there have been some very good posts on here recently too and I would agree a marked improvement in the overall quality and range of content which increases the turnover of memories.

As long as the memories are real I don’t think it matters they are not related to Burnley itself.

Mention is made of the 'Bognor Cane Company': https://www.corpun.com/uksc8104.htm

I agree with Nathan, too. Just recently, for example, we have had stories of boys sent by their fathers to buy canes, inevitably ending up with a "bare bottom" caning. Perhaps in Victorian times, or perhaps in rarified upper-class homes, but speaking s a working class lad, I never knew one boy punished by his dad in this way. Yes in moments of annoyance or temper you would get a wallop, but it was spontaneous, and done with the hand, it wasn't pre-planned and regimented as has been suggested here. Who's the daddy? - there do seem to be some discipline fetishists here.

I’m a millennial male and I’ve always been interested in the sociology of clothing and nudity and would like to, at some point, study the topic as a Ph.D. student in sociology. Anyway, in reading the myriad of comments and posts about these topics received, there's always amusement about the rationale behind a particular practice that’s near-universal among guys of my generation: the “towel dance”. Among commenters, who I assume skewed towards the Baby Boomer and Silent generations, the consensus was that millennials (and probably zoomers as well) do the towel dance “because they’re insecure about their penis size”. This never sat right with me because never once growing up did I hear anyone express insecurity about that. But that might just be because people don’t say out loud what they’re insecure about. That’s how insecurities work. There was, however, a lot of insecurity about sexual orientation. Accusations would provoke emphatic denials, the word “gay” became a pejorative, and yes, the f-slur was sometimes used. But even though millennials may be more insecure about penis size than previous generations, I believe that the norm change precipitates the insecurity, not the other way around. Here’s how that happens:

1. Default towards inoffensiveness
Generally speaking, when people don’t know what the norms are, people will default to doing that which is least likely to offend others. For example, many gyms have no policy on whether working out shirtless is acceptable. But because you’re guaranteed to not offend anyone if you do wear a shirt, but might offend someone if you go shirtless, the default choice is to wear a shirt.
2. Trend towards conformity
Rather than tolerating increasingly diverse behaviors as acceptable, people tend to settle upon only one or a few behaviors that are acceptable that everyone must conform to. If a default is established, behavior will increasingly conform to the default. Continuing on the gym example, people will default to wearing a shirt until everyone wears a shirt all the time and becomes the only acceptable way to dress.
3. Establishment of a new decency standard
This step, particular to clothing standards, happens after the norm is established. Deviations from the norm gain a sexual meaning and when the norm is broken it becomes an act of indecency. “Indecency” meaning thrusting one’s sexuality on non-consenting people. To further elaborate, the “indecent act” ends up saying something about both the person committing the act as well as those subject to it. To continue the gym analogy again, for men who are insecure about their sexual orientation, they’ll see a shirtless patron as gay and indecent. Gay because the person is in view of other male patrons and indecent because of the sexual meaning that style of dress acquired. For the insecure person, they become afraid that the mere sight of the shirtless patron “makes them gay”, so they become offended.

For the towel dance, what happened, was all three of these steps. Step 1: Between “bearing it all” and the “towel dance”, you won’t offend anyone by doing the towel dance, so it becomes the inoffensive default. Step 2: After several years, it becomes THE way to change in a locker room. Step 3: Then, with everyone behaving this way in the locker room, “bearing it all” becomes sexualized and indecent. So when someone “bears it all” they’re seen as being sexual towards the other male patrons and is therefor “gay” and behaving indecently.

But what about penis size? I think we get a sense of what’s normal through experience. While not happening on a conscious level, I think there’s a part of our brains that builds a statistical model of what about a person’s body is normal. It’s the reason we can tell the difference between something that’s at the far ends of normal and an actual medical abnormality. So when the norm changes and deprives us of this information, we end up getting our sense of “normal” from other sources, like porn, which definitely are not normal. While it sounds reasonable that simply telling kids in a health/sex education class what normal is, that’s just not how our brains work. So despite telling teenagres that they’re normal, they don’t believe it because it’s not what they’re seeing “in their everyday life” (porn). All of this to say, the norm change is what led to the insecurity about penis size, and the norm change reflects insecurity about sexual orientation and decency. There’s a quote by Alejandro Jodorowsky that describes this phenomena perfectly: “Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness."

I am in full agreement with Nathan Hind.

I am also in full agreement with Colchester "Codswallop" Colin.

And to answer Claire - it's that B&W gym photo effect.

Interesting how the other Burnley page has only had 11 comments, compared with the more than 4000 here!