What makes a spanko?

Often123 I'm curious about how many of our members are active spankos, aside from having an interest. That definitely includes our authors.

I am pleased to say that I am an active spanko and have been for most of my life. Obviously I would like more of it. Like sex. Some of my stories are firmly based on actual events.

As regards where the kink comes from and how common it is I think Phil K has probably nailed the percentages except I suspect that there are an appreciable number of women who, although they might enjoy a spanking would never accept one from a man (or admit to being interested) because it smacks (pun intended) of male domination and a patriarchal society to which they are utterly opposed.

I imagine male spankees are inhibited from admitting it because it doesn't fit with traditional views of maleness. I have little difficulty in telling friends, male and female, that I like spanking girls' bottoms but I don't think I would be so open if I wanted to be spanked.

I think it was Kinsey who observed that the results of surveys of people's sexuality had to be viewed carefully because the subjects were likely to talk up "good" stuff and deny the bad. It explained the mismatch between the number of men who claimed multiple partners and the number of women who denied it.

Geoffrey Stirling.

Brosse, while politicized, slanted, or just plain bad science does happen, it's very dangerous to discount it all in favor of anecdotes and hunches. (In the USA we have a president who thinks that way.) There's an old saying about babies and bath water which is worth remembering when confronted with lies from agencies that occasionally publish poor findings. However, it is certainly important to recognize sloppy science when presented with it. It is probably just as important to realize that someone else's bad science does not automatically elevate everyone else's unproven opinion.

kdpierre

Certainly there is credible research and mainly within the STEM fields. However research in the humanities becomes very subjective and is often politically aligned.

The other issue is that too often those funding research are inclined to get the results they want to see.

Currently in the UK there is one major Government report that the Government themselves promised to make public, but are now refusing to do so, because the Civil Servants claim it is "not in the public interest to know the findings." The reason being is that it exposes systematic and inexcusable failures by the government, social services and the police.

What makes a spanko?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxt3MxGbTKI

No "might" about it. It took me 40 years to come out and I said, "There will be no going back!"

I agree with her that Little House on the Prairie is much better than so-called erotic videos.

Though LHotP was not a favourite programme of mine, I know what you mean.

Even if there is no spanking scene or reference in a drama, your mind can create a possibility of one based on the credible characters and the settings.

So, what do you propose?

I would say, keep science as the main guide, but use investigative thinking and reporting to expose the frauds. It's no different than any other system that is used by people in that the method is sound, but all kinds of humans will use it in their own ways. It's no different than the legal systems. They are designed well, but all systems assume a degree of honest effort. But to say there is corruption with the legal systems again begs the question: so what do we do instead? Let everyone free no matter what, or jail anyone accused no matter what? You don't throw out the baby with the bath water.....but maybe we need more scrutiny from people. I would prefer that to substituting the 'man in the street's "hunches".

The only thing I propose is be sceptical and open minded. Up until about 30 years ago people generally trusted 'experts', that has now changed largely because the experts have often been found wanting and proved wrong.

To often these days politicians and big corporations hide behind the 'experts' they base their decisions on, so that when it goes wrong the excuse is "Don't blame us we took the best advice", except it probably wasn't the best advice, just the most politically expedient at the time.

The "experts" in psychology-related intellectual fields today are not reliable. The science of psychology today is all screwed up due to the influence of dead wrong philosophical premises - such as determinism, subjectivism and altruism.

I believe that we laymen must collect for ourselves as much knowledge as we can on our own - and then figure out our own conclusions on the basis of reason.