Fairness, Severity and Morality

I have also found this to be true, and like you were getting at by mentioning believable fiction, I think it's about those expectations. I tend to write stories that involve reasonable spankings used as punishment for misdeeds, delivered fairly and not overly severe. The couple of times that I have deviated from this, I've received some criticism, even though the spankings weren't nearly as harsh as some stories (here and elsewhere) that have received positive feedback. I think it may be because most of my stories are closer to reality, so those reading them have come to expect that and were taken aback by a different type of story. Those who write more severe spankings probably have a group of readers who seek those types of stories out and may be put off by a lighter, more realistic spanking.

This is definitely an interesting discussion with many aspects. An important one for me seems to be the author's/narrator's attitude: I can accept a lot when the author seems to be on the spankee's side, but I react much more quickly when the narrator appears to be on the side of a cruel and insensitive spanker. Still there are exceptions - e.g. when the story is a farce where exaggeration is the whole idea, or when the point is to expose an unsympathetic or unreliable narrator.

I have a theory that readers who are most offended by unjust or otherwise improper punishments are more likely to condone (non-consensual) cp in the real world. They will prefer stories which reinforce their world view: just and responsible spankers, deserving miscreants and proportional punishment. To those who don't condone it, nothing which happens in a (non-consensual) spanking story would ever be acceptable in real life, so it's not so much of an issue. Just a theory ...

Well, the comments I've received on "Matched Pair," first on the soc.sexuality.spanking newsgroup and later here in this Library, tend to express the hope that eventually the unfair spanking situation will be reversed and the two feminine protagonists will somehow get even with the unseen villainess--although that's been set up as being highly improbable within the story's brief plotline.

In that account, it's simply a wealth-and-power imbalance which results in one girl reluctantly accepting herself being publicly paddled and strapped for the well-known misconduct of another, but after all there's no pretense of realism in the story--it's clearly set in a fantasy existence, with its clandestine employment of the "whipping boy" (though "girl" in this case) concept to appease a seemingly gullible populace.

One-sided disciplinary relationships between characters who are otherwise peers (siblings and/or cousins close in age as children, adult siblings and/or cousins, romantic partners, spouses, friends, professional colleagues) are generally consensual in fiction (and presumably in real-life as well), and to numerous readers their one-sided nature seemingly means that they're inherently 'unfair' and the punished ones are victims--yet of course those involved, even the ones who end up with throbbing bottoms and tearstained faces, obviously don't feel that way overall, although in any particular case the spankee might not believe a nonetheless-accepted chastisement to have been fully justified.

To me, as both reader and writer, a spanking-oriented peer relationship may be objectively 'unfair' yet be one that works out best by far for both parties. Readers' comments about such situations often suggest that the corporally corrective roles should be reversed, or that a third party intervene to enforce 'fairness' by giving the disciplinarian an ass-thrashing him/herself, but in most of those fictional cases that would upset the effectively-functioning psychological dynamic between spanker and spankee. (Once in a while I'll even write a story which temporarily reverses the punitive positions, often at the recommendation of readers--also partially to keep the spanking administrator from becoming too smug or "corrupted by power," since I do often employ recurring characters.)

As a primarily F/M reader (and writer), I especially appreciate circumstances under which a physically more impressive male cooperatively bares his behind (actively or passively) to accept sound corporal correction from a smaller, weaker female who is his social equal and enjoys no formal authority over him, yet feels that he has no viable option but to accept her decision concerning what discipline he is due from her--even if he may feel that the specific spanking wasn't necessarily earned. Though I generally make such feminine-delivered chastisements deserved or at least needed by their masculine recipients, occasionally they involve gender-based 'double standards' being employed, because after all even mature, well-meaning individuals (females in these cases) can make mistakes and react impulsively, or with self-satisfaction enjoy one-sided situations on occasion.

Sometimes 'unfairness' can indeed be quite a delicious disciplinary concept... --C.K.

On the other hand, "smug, corrupted-by-power spanker" is one of my big turn ons.

Thank-you to Blackbirch for initiating this fascinating thread. I found that Blackbirch's own posts summarised my own views more or less exactly. Unjust punishment and/or severe punishment are in my mind perfectly okay provided they are confined to the fictional world and contribute to the drama of the story, but like all right minded people (I would hope) I am opposed to injustice and abuse in the real world. However, I am intrigued by KDPierre's perceptive and disturbing question (above). I find stories which include sexual misconduct with a minor deeply unsettling (in much the same way as other readers obviously find stories with unjust or severe spankings disturbing), so why should I find one type of fantasy okay but the other repulsive? I find it very difficult to answer this. The best I can come up with is one is my fantasy, whereas the other most definitely is not. But why should I find fictional spanking excesses exciting (and I stress 'fictional'), but child abuse, even fictional, totally gross? If anyone has any ideas, please put me out of my misery.

Because one of those is a much stronger taboo than the other.

Now, personally, I'm not offended by the notion of stories involving sex with minors. They don't appeal to me, but I think they can be a healthy outlet for people who DO have those fantasies. The LSF already has stories involving assault, rape, and various other atrocities played for pure titillation (hell, I've written some myself); I don't see why pedophillic stories would be any more dangerous than those, so long as they're clearly framed as fantasy.

However, the law does not agree with me in that regard, and the LSF would be in great danger of being shut down if it hosted such material. The librarians have little choice in the matter regardless of how they feel about it.

Well, I'm assuming that you do differentiate between "spanking excesses" and "child abuse" in fiction, so that in stories involving children receiving corporal punishment an 'excessive spanking' (presumably too long and/or too hard and/or applied with too severe an implement) still wouldn't be truly 'abusive' behavior to you--there's some factor that differentiates the two in terms of severity and/or appropriateness. (I tend to think that way myself, upon reading--or sometimes writing--a description of an extremely severe ass-thrashing, to a child or adult, which I nonetheless don't consider to be outright abuse.)

Of course, some readers might equate an 'excessive spanking' with 'abuse,' I've certainly read (and as an author occasionally received) comments to that effect, involving both children (generally teenagers) and adults being spanked.

My figuring is that, in fiction anyway, even an 'excessive' butt-blistering is appealing to many spankophile readers, since it does involve spanking while the extreme severity can be overlooked or at least trivialized because "it's only a fantasy account, after all"--however, a description of outright 'abuse' is likely to repulse the same readers.

The online 'Disciplinary Wives Club,' which promotes F/M marital spanking, advises its feminine disciplinarians to "err on the side of severity" in blistering their mates' bare behinds, and I believe that such an approach is quite popular among numerous readers (and writers) of fictional chastisements, whether of children or adults: "Better that it hurts a bit too much rather than too little." Indeed, a fantasy spanker may even find it mildly amusing afterward that he/she "got carried away a bit," walloping his/her victim somewhat more intensively than he/she had originally intended, so long as no lasting harm was done.

That's my thinking anyway... --C.K.

A fascinating theory that applies to me to a certain degree, but not completely. There is certainly a part of my emotional self that likes to see the world in black and white; that thinks that the boundary between good and bad is clear for everybody to see; that believes that just punishment will be accepted by the "good at heart" and help them mend their ways; that thinks that punishment is actually craved by those who have misbehaved, and that a fair spanking leads to emotional release. This part of me is definitely an important part of my spanko personality, and is probably why I prefer just and fair stories where the spankings are hard enough to be real punishment, but never become abuse.

The problem is that my intellectual self doesn't believe in this picture. The world seems much more complicated - very few of us fit into the categories "good" and "bad", and in most complex situations in life, it is impossible to tell with certainty which options are good and which are bad. "Punishment" in real life is never just punishment - it carries along with it complicated consequences that are impossible to foresee. In my spanko fantasy world, I can imagine spankings that are fair and have the intended consequences - in the real world, I find such things almost impossible to imagine (except between consenting adults who wants to make their fantasy world real for a while).

While I agree that Mood videos are rather brutal for my taste I do find much of Rigid-east/Lupus material to be quite erotic. I believe some of the "victims" were from the UK and had well striped bottoms but we must never forget that presumably it was consensual and I guess after a few days their backsides had returned to their normal state.