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.
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: 7210
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
sunflower309
Posts: 181
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:14 am

Re: Spankophiles - born or made?

Post by sunflower309 »

i guess i'll put my 2 cents into this thread. for as long as i can remember spanking has always been a "thing" with me. especially reading spanking stories. but i do not like extremes either. no bruising, bleeding etc. i enjoy a good spanking (hopefully bare bottom) with hand or small paddle. it stings, but is not painful in a bad way. i would not let anyone use a whip etc on me. or severely beat me. i have bruised on a couple of occasions but it was mild and at the start of my adult spankings. i guess my bottom is tougher now! no one else in my family has this attraction and my sisters and i were all raised the same. so i would say i was born with it. but not to the extreme.

sunflower
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 »

Your 2 cents are welcome, Sunflower. However, I believe the case I have amassed against spanking being "inborn" or genetic is overwhelming. For some reason, I forgot to update this thread last year when I finished my magnum opus on spanking psychology The Whys of Spanking. I took up the issue once again in Chapter 2, Born or Made?. Here is the summary I made there for the case against spankos being "born that way":
  1. Such a mutation would be unfavorable, tending to reduce the relative spanko population over time, yet this has never been observed, nor has it been seen with the population of any other paraphilia.
  2. For paraphilias to arise as a result of a recurring mutation in generation after generation (i.e. if the proportion of such individuals in the general population has already reached its minimum), we would expect to need a mutation rate far higher than the estimated value of 103 mutations per person (and even this estimate may be too high).
  3. Laws of inheritance require that some of the spanko's offspring would inherit the spanking desire. While there are certainly known cases where a son or daughter has followed in the spanko parent's footsteps, so to speak, the pattern seems random and uncertain, and does not follow the Mendelian laws of inheritance.
  4. No physical feature of the brain has ever been shown to be altered in any kind of paraphilia. Such alteration would seem to be a necessary consequence of a genetic cause, since genetic alterations must produce observable changes in the individual's morphology or biochemistry to manifest themselves as actual disorders.
  5. Specific preferences within spanking, such as for the use of particular implements or positions, can often be traced back to early experiences, suggesting that the desire to give or receive a spanking itself must have a similar origin.
  6. In animals, some abnormal courtship behavior can be explained through early experiences (e.g. the drake who displays at the wrong species of female, mentioned earlier) and are known not to have a genetic cause.
  7. Certain specific paraphilias (other than spanking) are believed to be caused by early experiences, e.g. voyeurism which is believed to result when a child unexpectedly sees someone naked or observes a couple engaged in sexual intercourse (see The Encyclopedia of mental disorders). And if some are caused this way, then it is likely that most or all arise in similar fashion, including spanking.
What would be finally dispositive is a case study involving identical twins, such as was done with homosexuality. My belief is that cases would be found in which one twin is a spanko and the other is not, but of course no psychological researcher has been interested enough in the question to perform such a study, which would be difficult and expensive.
-- Web-Ed
Post Reply