Spankophiles - born or made?

Any topics that do not fit under the other forums.
Forum rules
* Nothing involving children!
* Be nice.
* Please keep to the forum subject. If you have an idea for a new forum, please send a PM to web-ed.
web-ed
Site Admin
Posts: 3341
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 5:30 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Contact:

Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by web-ed »

There's a saying in baseball: good hitters are born, not made. And if you were to ask most spankos about the origin of the fetish, they would give the same answer - they were born that way. I myself have heard this claimed many times at (spanking) parties. Several years ago, I worked out a fairly comprehensive theory explaining many of the whys of adult spanking, including the origin of spanking desires, but I've never committed it to paper and posted it in the Articles section as I thought I would have by now.

Mostly this is due to the press of time - as it is, I have to write and code almost all the site's pages, which is a job in itself, without researching, writing, revising, and annotating what would have to be a series of articles. And yet, I also know that my conclusions will be greeted with a wide chorus of denunciation - not something to look forward to. Soon, though, I really should tackle this project, which brings us to the subject of this topic.

Rather than answer it now, I'd like to throw the subject open for discussion. Then, after everyone who wants to has had his say, I'll add my own conclusions, sort of as a prelude to the longer work to follow. So what do you think, fellow spankos - are we born, or made?
-- Web-Ed
jimc
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 12:10 am

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by jimc »

I would say born most assuredly. I know i became aware of my spanking fascination at a very young age (4 or 5) and since i was that age it is very hard i would say to have an experience that would make you a spanko. So i say born (hard-wired if you will) and i seemed to actually know more about spanking than i should. While i do admit that i was a child of the electronic baby-sitter the tv and there were many spanking shows i do not seem to remember them until later (I remember Public Deb # 1 as being one of my 1st excitement at there being a spanking on tv and i grew up watching i love lucy, i married joan, and of course cartoons that always seemed to have spankings ( Popeye seemed to have a lot (popeye spanking seahag, seahag spanking alice the goon, etc). I also say born because it seems that i am the only member of my family to have the spanking gene and we had similar experiences so i do not think our experiences shaped us.
Jim
web-ed
Site Admin
Posts: 3341
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 5:30 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Contact:

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by web-ed »

Thanks to Jim for contributing his recollections. I was hoping for a some more responses, but since we haven't had them, let me "volunteer" some folks who participated in one of Bonnie's (My Bottom Smarts) Sunday Brunches to share their thoughts. Bonnie hadn't intended to turn the discussion into the "born or made" question, but it wound up there anyway.

Richard Windsor:
The question I have always pondered is whether spanking is a learned behaviour or genetic? I know that isn't the answer you seek, but I believe that spanking interest is genetic and can only be enhanced by environment.

Nalgas Rositas: I think the whole spanking "kink" is something that you are just born with.

Michael: I certainly grew up in a culture of corporal punishment in the UK. My schooldays (1965-73) were ones where the teachers took a slipper to you and the head and deputy head caned you for more serious infractions. Even the prefects could slipper you in their prefects' room. I trace my keen interest in spanking back to those events and then to a spanking I received from an Aunt (for being rude) and one from a female cousin at the age of 13 when she was about 15.

Our Bottoms Burn: I think you have the spanking gene or not. If you do, it can be enhanced by environment. It makes sense to me that if an implement was in common use around you in your formative years, it could become a favorite as an adult.

R Humphries: I agree that we are probably born with a genetic inclination towards spanking.

Jim: I cannot for the life of me see how a kink for spanking could be "genetic" (Could be my MmedSci getting in the way).

I'll add my own thoughts in the next few days.
-- Web-Ed
web-ed
Site Admin
Posts: 3341
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 5:30 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Contact:

Preliminary Thoughts on the "born or made" Question

Post by web-ed »

Based on what I have read on the web and heard at spanking parties, there is a clear consensus that spankos are born that way. However, while I do not question the veracity of anyone who claims that his spanking interest is “hard-wired”, even in the absence of a comprehensive theory to the contrary (which I have, although I will not present it here), for several reasons their notion of a hard-wired spanking desire is very unlikely.

First, although many such persons maintain in good faith that they “have always been that way”, we must bear in mind that most people do not have clear memories of events which occurred before the age of five or six – and there is plenty of time before then for the spanking interest to have developed. If that’s what happens, most spankos would believe they had always been that way even though it wasn’t true. Therefore, based on an individual’s recollection alone, no safe conclusion can be reached either way.

Second, as remarked by "Jim" during Bonnie's discussion, it is hard to understand just exactly how or why such a “hard-wired” interest would come into being. Granted, it’s not easy to explain any “instinctive” behavior – in everyday use, we often claim some animal or human behavior is instinctive, but the scientist must recognize that attempting to explain a behavior as “instinct” really explains nothing. We can’t really explain how the beaver is able to construct dams, although we can understand how this behavior contributes to the animal’s survival. This brings us to the third point:

Even if we were to concede that the spanking interest could arise in a few individuals spontaneously, we would then face the problem of its persistence in the face of the strong penalties that would be exacted upon it by the forces of natural selection (i.e., evolutionary biology). To see this, consider that successful reproduction, or the passing on of an organism’s DNA, is the yardstick by which evolutionary success is measured. He who leaves the most descendants wins the evolutionary sweepstakes. Human sexual behavior must have evolved along these lines (and, of course, reached its present stage of development before the time that human beings could practice birth control and thus separate sex from reproduction). “Hard-wired” behavior, whether sexual or not, must be heritable. Under such conditions, aberrant sexual behavior (defined as any behavior that does not lead to reproduction) would be punished by the individual’s leaving fewer (or no) descendants. We would therefore expect any kind of genetically-induced sexual deviancy to diminish over a span of time.

An obvious example, which is offered without the intent of creating needless controversy, is homosexuality. Since homosexual acts cannot lead to reproduction, if homosexuality were hard-wired in the brain and therefore heritable, the homosexual proportion of any population would decrease over time to some minimum value (not necessarily zero – a point which requires further consideration). Some years ago, the theory was advanced that a smaller than usual cluster of neurons in one section of the brain was the cause of homosexuality, but significantly, this theory could not be supported by any convincing evidence.

The same is true of spanking: at the very least, its use as other than light foreplay tends to act as a diversion of the sexual energy from reproduction – not completely, of course, as most spankos retain a considerable interest in regular intercourse – but it’s enough to cause trouble. This is especially true with males who may drive away prospective mates by trying to spank them – something that has actually happened more than a few times. This should be no surprise, since something very similar has been observed many times in the animal kingdom. Males whose courtship behavior fails to impress the female are left without a mate. I have seen this myself with drakes (male ducks) who display toward the wrong species of female, which is functionally equivalent to deviant behavior. (By the way, the cause of this behavior is known not to be inborn). And then there is the more extreme example of the male Black Widow spider – if his courtship technique is found wanting, he’s liable to find himself dead very quickly.

The point here is that deviant sexual behavior leads to problems in finding a mate. We should therefore expect the proportion of spankos in the general population to decrease over time to some small minimum value. There are three possible lines of objection to this theory that I can see:

1. The proportion of spankos (like that of homosexuals) in the population may be so low as to have actually reached the theoretical minimum value.
2. The fact that male spankos will have trouble finding a mate does not necessarily mean that females will also. Females have a greater choice of mates and can therefore afford to be choosy. Males are less discriminating and will probably put up with all kinds of weird behavior in the female as long as they can mate with her eventually. Again, I’m not trying to be deliberately provocative or offensive, but it is perfectly true and in fact I did observe this once myself in the case of a young, attractive, female who got what she wanted (spanking) from young men by luring them on with sex. (Although not relevant to the present discussion, I should disclose that when I found out about this, I spanked her myself for her shameless conduct!).
3. There could be some kind of offsetting benefit for spankos, for instance the difficulty in finding a compatible mate could be compensated for by such a union producing more offspring. There is, however, no clear theory as to how this might work, nor any observations in support of this idea.

I will have to address objections 1 & 2 in a future article.
-- Web-Ed
jimc
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 12:10 am

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by jimc »

I still think "hard-wired" is the most accurate description given that there are so many lurkers in the fetish scene and while i admit that your evidence is compelling i think that degrees of intrest do vary with exposure. I tend to think any deviant behaviour is also more of a sustained choice (after all what person would willingly want to be ostracised) and it is far easier to say ("I yam what i yam!") than to want to be treated for it or like any addiction deny its existance. Most humans can supress desires, but that does not mean that they are not there and carry over generation to generation even though they did not express intrest in it. My thought on my intrest is my degree of knowledge after i reconized at the early age that i should not of known about it and i tend to think that unless you were exposed to it in your formative years (that argument does not really hold water for me because if your parents show no intrest in your fetish when you are older how would you be exposed to it and yes there are stories aplenty of supressed memories that could be explained as exposure, but it could also be a false memory that you created to explain your kink if you will.) I think i was born with the spanking gene and i think that those that share it are the ones that acknowledge it is there and those that deny it choose to supress it for whatever reason.
Jim
daneldorado

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by daneldorado »

web-ed, I am in awe of your learned commentary on this topic. You state, for example, that:

Even if we were to concede that the spanking interest could arise in a few individuals spontaneously, we would then face the problem of its persistence in the face of the strong penalties that would be exacted upon it by the forces of natural selection (i.e., evolutionary biology).... “Hard-wired” behavior, whether sexual or not, must be heritable. Under such conditions, aberrant sexual behavior (defined as any behavior that does not lead to reproduction) would be punished by the individual’s leaving fewer (or no) descendants. We would therefore expect any kind of genetically-induced sexual deviancy to diminish over a span of time.


and also:

[D]eviant sexual behavior leads to problems in finding a mate. We should therefore expect the proportion of spankos in the general population to decrease over time to some small minimum value.

Unfortunately, I am not erudite enough to comment meaningfully on your thesis. But it does raise a question that I've had for some time. Perhaps, with your deep background in the spanking interest, you can answer this question.

To wit: Is the number of spankos (that is, persons who are deeply interested in spanking or being spanked, as a sexual fetish) increasing or decreasing?

My observations tell me that there are more places to find spanking material today, than there ever have been in my lifetime. There is definitely more mention of spanking in the public media, particularly on television and on the Internet.

I've considered myself "hard-wired" for most of my life. (I spanked my first girl at age 15!)

But the general media -- movies, television, newspapers -- almost never displayed any spanking material. I knew that there had been spanking scenes in movies made in the 1940s and to some extent the 1950s, but by the 1970s there were NO spankings in American movies. (Well, there was one: a totally non-erotic father-daughter scene in "Nashville Girl") My personal life was in order: I was happily married, with three beautiful children. But in my heart of hearts, I missed seeing those spanking scenes that I knew existed in such early films as Kiss Me Kate (1953) and Blue Hawaii (1962).

Then, almost all at once, I discovered there was a spanking "scene" -- groups of people who enjoyed spanking and being spanked, and beckoned others to join them. Around 1980, I discovered the Super-8mm films turned out by Nu-West, and subsequently their VHS tapes. Other companies cropped up, companies with names like Shadow Lane, Cal-Arts, and Raven Hill. Then, when the Internet revolution hit, suddenly there were dozens of these companies, some of them reaching across the Atlantic Ocean to recruit new members.

Today, we have entire web-sites devoted exclusively to spanking. (This is one of them.) Not only that, but television and the movies have rediscovered the spanking genre, and are using it frequently and unapologetically. You already know most of the newer films that have shown sexy spankings, but just to illustrate their abundance, consider Love Crimes (1992), Live Nude Girls (1995), Secretary (2002), Adrift in Manhattan (2007), and on television, "Weeds" (2008) and "Bored to Death" (2010).

I know, I know, there are many others. But I'll name these to point out the enormous availability of this type of scene today, as opposed to, say, 1975. Know how many mainstream spanking scenes there were in 1975? None, that's how many. (N.B.: I'm speaking of U.S. films only; I do know that some foreign films -- a few -- did showcase some spankings. Today, a lot more of them do.)

So. So my question to you is, are there more spankos around today than ever before? Or are we just going through another "phase?" And if your answer is that yes, there are more spankos today, how much longer do you think this beautiful phenomenon will continue?

Cheers,
Dan
web-ed
Site Admin
Posts: 3341
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 5:30 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Contact:

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by web-ed »

Dan, your question is a most difficult one (and I thank you for your kind comments). Long have I wished that there were reliable statistics on just how many of us there are, but as far as I know, there have not been any studies that focused exclusively on spanking (there have been some more generic studies done on BDSM). It sure would be fun to commission a nation-wide poll on the subject, wouldn't it? "Now then, sir, question #1: do you enjoy spanking women?"

The upsurge in depictions of spankings in movies and television might indicate either that spankos are increasing as a proportion of the general population, or only that adult spanking is more acceptable in society than it was thirty or more years ago. (The rise of the internet is a slightly different phenomenon, and I’ll come back to it in a minute). To determine which, we would have to commission that survey (which would be the most scientific approach, but prohibitively expensive), or examine the relative likelihood of each in turn, which I’ll now attempt.

If the proportion of spankos in the population is increasing, there would have to be some reason for this, and I can think of none. Returning for a moment to the original question I posed in starting this topic, let’s consider the possibilities. If spankos are born, then the proportion should be constant; if made (as I believe), then it would vary depending on the factors involved in creating spankos in the first place. I can’t present in detail my theory on how spankos are created here because it’s too long, but one obvious factor is the prevalence of spanking, i.e. how much spanking people are exposed to from early childhood through adolescence. If anything, spanking seems to be less commonplace in the home and school than it was forty or more years ago, so it’s hard to see this as causing any increase. As a matter of fact, if spanking is becoming much less commonplace, my theory suggests that the proportion of spankos should decrease at least somewhat over time, and the failure to observe any such decrease over time could prove a problem for the theory.

That leaves the other alternative, that adult spanking is more widely accepted than in the past. Since popular culture generally reflects society's current attitudes, this seems more likely to me. I would hazard a further guess that this greater acceptance is the result of an “anything goes” attitude toward alternative expressions of sexuality rather than from an increase in understanding of the spanking scene specifically. Again, the most obvious example of this is homosexuality, which is more acceptable now than it was forty years ago.

I’ve gone on a long time, but I guess I should at least touch upon the internet phenomenon. The great availability of spanking-related materials on the web is certainly a boon to us all, but it is probably not as good an indicator of where society stands on spanking as are movies and T.V. The reason is that these latter are commercial mass-media and must therefore appeal to a broad cross-section of society. The internet on the other hand can be more compartmentalized, with niche marketing becoming practical because of the low overhead of running a pay site (compared to producing say a T.V. series), and also because many spanking-themed sites are free (blogs, CSR, etc.).

I would also point out that female spankos have both benefited more from the internet than males and also contributed proportionately more of the new (post-internet) spanking material. The reason for this is suggested by your recollection of the scene as it was circa 1980: you mentioned Nu-West, the early pioneer in super-8 mm. spanking films. But think of what we had to go through to get ahold of those films or the spanking mags of that time! We either had to send away for Nu-West’s catalogue by mail, or go to “adult” bookstores to pick up Slap Shots, Spanked and Subdued, and other titles I can’t even remember any more.

Not many women would be comfortable having a spanking catalogue delivered to their front door, and no women at all were ever seen in the Chicago adult bookstores I used to frequent in search of spanking stuff. On the production side, the only women I can think of who were involved were Eve Howard, who took over editing the Lyndon spanking line (using the alias Lizzie Bennett!) before she started Shadow Lane with Tony Elka, and then Janice Gold a little later.

The internet changed all that. Instead of having to brave the atmosphere in adult bookstores (horny guys looking for porn, not to mention that some of the neighborhoods involved were not exactly safe for women at night), women could now safely view spanking stories, pictures, and (later) movies in the privacy of their own homes. On the production side, they were now free to contribute spanking stories, start blogs, and eventually form their own production companies (Jennifer Brooks, Chelsea Pfeiffer, Clare Fonda), something they could not have done when you had to deal with pornography distributors who were a seedy lot and sometimes involved with the mob.
Eve Howard, a true female pioneer in the realm of spanking erotica.
Eve Howard, a true female pioneer in the realm of spanking erotica.
eve_amsterdam_2007.jpg (43.16 KiB) Viewed 8452 times
In summary, my conclusions are:
(1) The proportion of spankos in the general population is probably largely unchanged from what it was years ago.
(2) The increased appearance of spanking as subject matter in popular media is the result of the greater acceptance of “alternative lifestyles” by the general public.
(3) The internet has increased the availability of spanking material by making it easier for men and possible for women to act as both producers and consumers. The influx of women seems to me a particularly significant factor.
(4) We will probably see a continued increase in the amount of spanking material available to us for the next few years, but eventually I think a plateau will be reached. This is a subject for another day.

Another 1500 words, just like that! I hope you’re not sorry you asked the question…!
-- Web-Ed
jimc
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 12:10 am

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by jimc »

intresting commentary on the spanking scene. Was censorship a result of the spankings or a by-product of overall censorship and spanking was in some ways a way around some censorship rules (some of the outfits did seem to accent the derriere (western garb esp.) and it also seemed that spanking was a good way to show a little more interaction (other than just kissing, dancing etc.) between the principals. I also admit that to me the spanking was the most intresting part of the movie, but it did seem that someone in charge (writer, director, producer, studio head) did want the spanking to be in it. Kiss Me Kate seems to be a perfect part as it has kept the spanking in most adaptations and I Love Lucy had 5 or more spankings in the series and Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz were the producers of the show as well as the stars. There was an actor called Tim Holt and almost every movie i saw him in had some spanking scene in it or threat of one. And almost every movie of Maureen Ohara did sem to have some spanking action as well (whether to her or someone else in the movie). There are other actors, directors producers etc that come to mind just like spanko artists in comics and comic strips and their desire did inspire others. Have a very Merry Christmas everyone.
Jim
daneldorado

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by daneldorado »

web-ed wrote:


It sure would be fun to commission a nation-wide poll on the subject, wouldn't it? "Now then, sir, question #1: do you enjoy spanking women?"


Yeah, that would definitely be a fun question. Seriously, though, if such a poll were taken, it would have to be an anonymous poll... like the ones you see posted here on the Internet.

I can well imagine a proper middle-class gentleman being asked that question, out loud, in public, with perhaps his wife within hearing distance. OF COURSE he would say no! Why would he jeopardize his standing in the community, or in his family, by answering "Yes!" But if the said m-cg is in fact a spanko, he would most likely answer "Yes," honestly, in an anonymous poll.

By the way, web-ed, thanks for setting me up in this way. Maybe it's bragging, but I have been privileged to spank THREE (3) of the ladies you named in your comment: Eve Howard, Janice Gold, and Jennifer Brooks. None of those are their real names, so I have no qualms about naming them here. A couple of them, in fact, will probably feel honored that they are mentioned on this board.

Ah, life is good. Hope you had a wonderful Christmas.

Cheers,
Dan
jimc
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 12:10 am

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by jimc »

i have always been envious of those in the spanking scene that can do more with it and Dan you are a fine example of it. You have been an artist (Spanky Sal, Sam Swatt; Captain Woodshed), a producer (cinema Swats) a star as you have said you have had the great fortune to have spanked Eve Howard, Janice Gold and Jennifer Brooks as well as others i am sure. You have shared a fabulous collection of spanking related art, magazines etc. So i did want to thank you for being all that you are to the Spanko world. I have enjoyed your knowledge that you do share with us just as much as your art. I find it is often hard to comment on a work of art as someone else has already said how much they enjoyed it and adding the same comment seems redunant and unoriginal. Another question came up as i was discussing your works with another spanko and we got into a discussion about how we think we are spankers because we are female bottom admirers and that spanking is of course 1 of the best ways to observe the bottom from a very close distance. What do others think?
Jim
jesseray
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 9:30 pm

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by jesseray »

I realize this is a past discussion, but perhaps I can add a 2 cents view.

In the years I was involved in the Spanking Central(s), I had the opportunity to communicate with (At length and multiple times) thousands of spankophiles…. And certainly the question was one almost everyone wanted to talk about.. (My very first contact- drum roll- Dan Rivera!)

I would say the vast majority came to believe that they were just ‘wired, that way. No evidence of anything to percipitate their interest. Frank/Steve Richardson of CF Publications first memory of life was entertaining other children with spanking stories.

A friend of Steve’s whom had done a LOT of research, had come to the conclusion that spanking was linked to early Mans- hunting and gathering instincts…felt that some of us still have the alpha male residue in us… Cited various drawing thru history etc… The rest of the folks simply had no clue.

What also could be noted- Boys became aware of the interest well before they turned 10. (I was 6)…and usually there was an outside catalyst- for most a TV/Movie scene (for me Beauty and the bandit- which I had seen that one time- yet, Dan was amazed how my recollection of it was almost frame to frame perfect.) of course for many- comic strip and comic book illustrations might have lit the match…for some lucky ones- observing a spanking.

Girls seemed to recognize their interest much later- teens and sometimes even into their twenties. And for them the catalyst seemed to have been threats- either real or TV/Movie…..

My other observation- our initial catalyst tends to remain the template for our interest… egi- Romantic spanking, authority spanking- etc. The individual initiated with a schoolgirl spanking remains devoted to that model.
web-ed
Site Admin
Posts: 3341
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 5:30 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Contact:

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by web-ed »

While it's true this discussion began some time ago, Ray, the subject is by no means closed and your input is welcome. (It's possible for the moderators to lock a topic so the discussion is closed, but I've never seen any reason to do that on these forums).

It is true that some girls do not recognize their interest in spanking until late adolescence. The reason for this is not fully understood, but it may have to do with female sexual psychology being submissive - the more aggressive male sexual psychology may lead to a more active fantasy life in childhood and adolescence. This has yet to be proved; however, we may observe that men are far more active than women generally in getting what they want sexually.
jesseray wrote: My other observation- our initial catalyst tends to remain the template for our interest… egi- Romantic spanking, authority spanking- etc. The individual initiated with a schoolgirl spanking remains devoted to that model.
Your observation is correct. In my theory, I coin the term "transformative event" (TE) in place of what you call the "initial catalyst" to denote the initial experience that forms the "natural" spanko (distinguishing him from the "artificial" spanko, but I don't like these terms, even though I coined them myself, because in my view all spankos are made and not born - it's just that I haven't found anything better yet). The TE leaves its mark on us forever, although subsequent experiences can and do continue to shape the young spanko's future preferences. The obvious example of the effect of subsequent experiences is school paddling/caning - in my view, a young person in most cases has already developed an interest in spanking when seeing or experiencing school corporal punishment then diverts a portion of the spanking interest in that direction ever afterward.

The effects of the TE explain many things, including how Tops, Bottoms, and Switches are created, but the details are too lengthy to go into here (sigh). One of these days, when some of my non-spanking writing is finished, I'm going to come back to this subject, because I do have most of the answers, however immodest that sounds. I just hope we all live that long...
-- Web-Ed
jimc
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 12:10 am

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by jimc »

i liked your observations jesse and web-ed and while i still believe that a spanko is hard-wired i do find your theories do at least now give me an idea about how my intrest got fanned the way it did. I was 4 or 5 when i reconized that i was a spanko ( the dates are fairly easy to remember as i know i was in 1st grade and those were my ages in 1st grade; as for movies my first exposure that i recollect was Public Deb Number 1 with Brenda Joyce and George Raft) i did grow up with comics and i remember looking for spanking comics whenever i could. Of course back then (the 50's) they were child spankinngs ( Little Iodine, the Ryatt's, Nancy, etc.) so my thoughts were more in line of that (playing house or some game with spanking was family oriented back then.) i discovered adult spanking in tv and the movies and my intrest there grew upon seeing a deserving female either spanked or threatened with a spanking ( also quite exciting to hear a threat and sometimes see it carried out). While no one else in my family has my intrest in spanking (therefore the insistence that spanking is hard-wired in people) i do have to say your research does give me pause and maybe a little more acceptance that it was a learned experience, but considering how many spanko's that there are it does seem hard to believe that something so random of seeing a spanking image somehow becomes our passion. Thanks and have a spanking good day
Jim
daneldorado

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by daneldorado »

jimc wrote:


as for movies my first exposure that i recollect was Public Deb Number 1 with Brenda Joyce and George Raft)


The 20th Century-Fox film Public Deb No. One (1940) did, indeed, have a sensational spanking scene in it; but the stars were Brenda Joyce and George Murphy, not George Raft.


Getting back to the question of whether spankers are born or made, I continue to believe they are born. I don't remember any incidents from my childhood that would have, or could have, formed my very extreme desire to spank girls' bottoms. I simply know that when I saw my very first on-screen movie spanking, I was intensely moved by it. And there was nothing to it. Just Allan Jones spanking Susanna Foster for some reason. But my hormones went wild!

When I was about fifteen, a very pretty girl lived in a house across the street from ours. She was in her twenties, and obviously too old for me to date... but I still wanted to spank her. It would never happen, of course. Still, fate has a way of stepping in, in situations like this. This girl had a young niece and nephew, two kids of about eight or nine years of age. For some reason that will forever escape me, they enjoyed getting spanked. So, I would drop over whenever the youngsters were visiting their aunt, and we would play games like "hide and seek." They would hide, and I would seek. And we agreed that, whenever I would find one of them, they would get spanked. All this was going on while Auntie was on the premises, you understand.

Well. One day, I was over at their house, and we were playing "our" game. THE game. I would look for them and when I found them I would give them a spanking... over my knee, and by hand. But I soon discovered that, whenever I would find the BOY, I would spank him lightly; just hard enough to make a noise, but not hard enough for him to really complain. They seemed to love this. But when I would find the GIRL, I would put her over my knee and spank her little heiny just about as hard as my fifteen-year-old hands could spank. She would laugh and kick through it all, and when it was over with, the two of them always wanted to "play again."

And I would say that here, you have a situation where ALL THREE of us -- me, the young boy and the young girl -- were spankos by birth. They liked being spanked, no question. And whenever I got to spank the GIRL (maybe twelve times, in all), I would spank with all my might, and she would laugh with all HER might. Can't tell me all three of us learned that from anybody. Nope, it was bred in our bones.

Cheers,
Dan
jimc
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 12:10 am

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by jimc »

thanks for the correction on my recollection of Public Deb. # 1. as i said i saw it back when i 5 or 6 for the first time and my memory sometimes plays tricks on me from back then and i do have to admit i do get names confused although i could tell you nuances of the scene that stick with me to this day. I think the girls i played house with must have been spankos as well because they were the ones that suggested house or in some cases another spanking game (mine was a spanking game like you played called Grandma in which there was a grandma standing in one circle and everyone else standing in another circle the grandma would call a line "children,children come home!" the children would then say "we can't hear you!" and then the grandma would say that she was sending all these different silly things after them and they would respond again that we can't hear you and this would go on until the grandma said then i am sending myself after you and then would chase the children. any that were tagged then had to go otk in the grandma circle and get 5-10 whacks and then someone else would be chosen to be grandma (either the first caught or the last one caught) i did enjoy catching the females to spank and tried to avoid catching any boys as that was not the fun part of the game to me. have a great day
Jim
web-ed
Site Admin
Posts: 3341
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 5:30 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Contact:

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by web-ed »

Interesting story about your two childhood playmates who enjoyed being spanked, Dan, but it doesn't prove that spankos are born. By the ages they were then (8 or 9) and the age you were when you discovered your interest in spanking watching Allan Jones spank Susanna Foster (not given, but you must have been at least 5) there was plenty of time for the Transformative Event (TE) to have taken place. I believe it occurs by the age of 5 and probably earlier.

The big problem with the inborn theory, as I went on about at some length in an earlier post, is that it runs afoul of evolutionary selection pressure. Spankos are at a disadvantage relative to non-spankos when it comes to passing on their DNA, and if that DNA contained a spanko gene it would reach some vanishingly small presence in the human population. Contrast this with, for instance, the first blue-eyed human, who found himself or herself quite attractive to the opposite sex and was able to pass on this characteristic. Also, any spankos who did mate would have spanko children, and while sometimes this does occur, there is no indication that the rate of occurrence is anywhere near what would be expected. And do most spankos have at least one spanko parent? I don't think so. On the other hand, a great many of us could have been spanked or witnessed a spanking between the ages of 1 and 3 without remembering it. At most, there could be some kind of genetic predisposition to being affected by seeing or experiencing a spanking, which might manifest itself as a generally sensitive (in the sense of being easily affected) personality. This seems reasonable, and could perhaps explain why some people become spankos through a TE and others, subjected to exactly the same experience, do not.

That leaves only the argument that perhaps being a spanko is some kind of fairly common mutation. But a recent figure puts the human mutation rate at one in 30 million base pairs - nowhere near enough to explain the relative proportion of spankos to the general population (which I estimate to be 1%). It might make the result clearer to express it this way: over a period of at least two centuries, only four heritable mutations were discovered in the DNA that was passed from father to son in the "Y" chromosome - simply not enough to explain how 1% of the population (if you'll accept my estimate just for the moment) could have mutated into spankos!

And here's something that isn't a simply a rehash of my earlier arguments: how can you explain the existence and distribution of "switch" spankos genetically? Are there three different mutations, for Top, Bottom, and Switch? And why are there more male switches than female ones? I'm glossing over the possibility here that the switch is half-born, half-made - which in fact is probably not far from the truth in the case of females - but you can see the problems with a genetic theory of origin. I can explain these things with my TE theory, however, and one of these days, I'm going to have to publish it. [For those curious about the example of the female switch, TE theory holds that one side is natural - not inborn, but a product of the TE at an early age - and the other is artificial, that is, behavior learned much later in life.]
-- Web-Ed
hugob00m
Posts: 7209
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2010 9:57 pm

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by hugob00m »

I find it interesting that so many members of this forum, when discussing a transformative event in their lives, mention something they witnessed in a movie, or on television. Did anyone in this group ever witness an actual adult woman getting spanked during childhood? I never did. I never saw my father spank my mother, or an uncle spank an aunt... or anything like that.

The first time I recall seeing a man treat his wife to a spanking was on Topper, with Robert Sterling turning Anne Jeffreys over his knee. And I distinctly remember that I was quite disappointed at the time when the camera panned to her kicking feet and never showed his hand actually making contact with her pretty bottom. I don't know exactly how old I was, but I was much too young to know anything about sex... and in spite of that, it excited me to see an affectionate couple act out a (sort of) disciplinary spanking that clearly had overtones of something else that I didn't understand at the time.

I also saw at least three of the I Love Lucy episodes that featured Ricky spanking his impish wife for disobeying his orders. Again, the spankings were ostensibly disciplinary, but I could tell that it was different somehow than the spanking a parent would've given to a son or daughter.

When McLintock! came out, I was ten years old. I didn't get to see the whole movie on the big screen, (@#$%!) but a week before its release, I was in a theater for some other film and saw the preview. WOW! There was Maureen O'Hara being soundly spanked by... of all people... the Duke! In addition to the theater house preview, there were print ads that showed Maureen O'Hara turned over John Wayne's knee, and... I don't remember what show it was, but some T.V. show did a preview that included the whole chase! Even though the spanking was marketed as slapstick comedy, and even though I hadn't reached full puberty at the time... I could tell that there was much more to this spanking than a haughty naughty girl receiving her well-deserved discipline! (And, as with Topper and I Love Lucy, it was given within the context of a marital relationship) Then, sometime later, I saw the movie in its entirety, and learned that there was another spanking as part of the story, and that, even though it appeared at first to be purely discplinary, somehow it turned into part of the courtship of the young soon-to-be lovers!

I must've had the roots of such feelings all along, since many other people have see those shows and weren't affected the way I was, but for me, those images made an indelible impression.
web-ed
Site Admin
Posts: 3341
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 5:30 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Contact:

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by web-ed »

No, I never witnessed a real-life spanking of a woman by a man during my childhood as far as I know. By the way, to avoid any confusion, I should probably make clear the the Transformative Event (TE) in my theory refers not to the child's first awareness of an interest in spanking, but to the creation of that interest at an even earlier time. Apparently none of us can remember the TE (a sure sign that it must occur very early in life) but we all remember becoming aware of our interest. For me, this had occurred by the age of five, and I remember being strangely excited by the birthday spankings that took place in my kindergarten class. I actually gave one to a female classmate, and with that a young spanko was on his way to a lifetime of kinky perversion :twisted: !

After that, I think it's just like most of the rest of the gang here - I was excited by movies like Kiss Me Kate and Look for the Silver Lining, and probably some animated cartoon spankings as well. I missed the Batman/Marcia Monroe spanking in 1966, not finding it until ten years later in 1976, but in the intervening years I spent a lot of time thinking about spankings for Supergirl and practically every other female character in comics - and the rest is history :D .
-- Web-Ed
web-ed
Site Admin
Posts: 3341
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 5:30 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Contact:

Summary of Arguments Against the Hard-Wired Theory

Post by web-ed »

This is no substitute for a full-length discussion, but I'd like to at least lay out a concise summary of the arguments against the proposition that we are hard-wired to be spankos.
  1. Hard-wired means it's in the genes somewhere, which implies heritability. Yet this inheritance has yet to be observed either in the parents or the children of spankos. (Note: of course, in a few rare cases, spankos may know that a parent or child is also into it; however, the frequency is not as high as the Mendelian laws of inheritance would require).
  2. Heritable characteristics are subject to evolutionary selection pressures, and since spankos are at a disadvantage in the mating game, our numbers should decrease over time, not remain constant as they apparently have for at least a century.
  3. The only way around the above argument is to suppose that the "spanko gene" is a common mutation. But no other human mutation occurs at anything close to the rate required to maintain the observed proportion of spankos, estimated (by me) to be 1% of the population. We spankos are not mutants!
  4. There are at least three different types of spankos: Tops, Bottoms, and Switches. The hard-wired theory (HWT) then requires at least three different mutations, and cannot explain why there should be more male switches than female ones (except perhaps by the notion that the "spanko gene" must be somewhere on the "X" chromosome, making aberrations more likely among males - and this should then result in significantly more male spankos of all types than female ones, something which has not been observed).
  5. There are many types of "fetish" behavior (paraphilia is a better term) other than spanking, yet none of them has been shown to be hard-wired, despite a lot of research. The last significant attempt, tying homosexuality to a smaller than normal cluster of neurons in the brain, failed. It's very hard to see how foot fetishes or transvestism could be genetic, but it's not at all hard to see how a young boy's being next to a woman's feet or a too-strong identification with his mother could cause them. Logically, spanking should have the same general cause (genetic or experiential) that homosexuality, foot fetishism, and transvestism do - if these three are not hard-wired, than neither is spanking.
  6. I'm not sure how many studies have been carried out on aberrant sexual behavior among animals, but in the only case I have observed, drakes (male ducks) engaging in courtship displays with females of the wrong species, the cause is known to be early experience and is definitely not genetic.
  7. Combining some of the arguments above, the combined incidence of all paraphilias, or sexual deviations, must be some significant portion of the population - much too high to be explained by mutations or to survive evolutionary pressure. It is simply incredible to suppose that all these paraphilias could have survived unchanged, as they undoubtedly have, since the days of the cave man if they were genetic in origin.
HWT has become the consensus view among spankos, I believe, because we cannot remember a time when we didn't have these feelings, so we assume we must have been born this way. But while HWT could perhaps survive any one of the objections listed above, I think it collapses under the weight of all of them together, and the frequent assumption that we were born as spankos is ultimately untenable.
-- Web-Ed
jimc
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 12:10 am

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by jimc »

I was just rereading this thread and have some new questions? HWT explains more about us than some of the other views. I see a resurgence of diapering and other infantile things and I cannot imagine anyone finding pleasure in this act, but there are many that do. We do not know what TE we had, but it has shaped us. Spanking to me is otk, clothed or unclothed to females with hand, hairbrush or small paddle. I will even accept slippers, spatulas, wooden spoons or even begrudgingly a tawse and anything else is another facet of our fetish that does not appeal to me. Dan has strong feelings as do most of us in this forum that spanking is a m/f accepted behavior yet I enjoy seeing any female spanked otk by either sex. I find s/m; bondage; enemas; bottom marking or other spanking genres (f/m or m/m) to be abhorrent. While I do not think I am a prude I also do not want to encourage these other fetishes. I am at the mild end of spanking as I enjoy hearing, reading or seeing stories or images of girls or women being otk and enjoying their spankings and am not that thrilled when other extremes are employed. I read that the only videos that sell are the extreme variety and I would not buy those myself so the ones with the more extreme fetish are the more dominant and therefore the ones that their TE must have been stronger. Spanking is my passion, but only in controlled ways. What do others think. Have a great day.
Jim
Post Reply