I just posted this as a comment on the article, but I want to repeat it here to make sure it's part of the discussion.
In many cases, there is no plausible explanation for how the way a spanking is conducted would make sense in the real world because stories are deliberately intended to bend the rules a bit. In practical terms, the stories are set in a world that is almost identical to ours, but is a bit different in some ways relating to spanking.
For example, when teachers and principals spank kids on the bare bottom, it is often because the author is envisioning a world where that kind of thing is accepted (or tolerated) at least in certain kinds of schools, not because there is some reason why a similar school in the real world might reasonably expect to get away with it. Similarly, spanking writers routinely exaggerate the severity of spankings it is considered reasonable to give kids - especially for any but the most serious of offenses. And adult spanking stories often envision a slightly different society where there is a lot more room to get away with giving adults non-consensual spanking if their behavior justifies it, or for authority figures to offer to substitute spankings for other kinds of punishments or consequences, than there is in the real world.
In these kinds of situations, incorporating an explanation into a story would not make sense because the explanation is part of the world the characters live in, not part of the story itself. This leaves authors a choice. They can make readers wade through a disclaimer explaining how the society their story is set in is a bit different from ours. Or they can assume readers will be smart enough to figure that out for themselves, at least after they gain a little experience reading spanking stories. There are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches.
The situations that really bother me are ones that cannot be explained by recognizing that the world in the author's imagination is a little bit different from the real world. For example, if authors do a good job of creating a feeling that a character deserves a spanking, it is relatively easy to disregard the fact that the spanking would be considered an act of assault in the real world. But in order for disobedience to justify a feeling that a spanking is deserved, it is necessary to establish why the person administering the spanking is in a position where it is reasonable to demand obedience. Otherwise the spanker comes across as an arrogant jerk and it feels ridiculous for the spankee to react as if the spanking were reasonable without some kind of explanation for the reaction. Similarly, as Rollin pointed out, warnings can make a huge difference in whether readers perceive spankings as deserved or as not making sense.
The more difficult it is to explain why the reasons for a spanking are fair, the more need there is for an author to explain why the spanker expects to get away with it, and the more need there is for some kind of explanation if the spankee does not react to the spanking as unfair. Even when stories are deliberately intended to be outrageous or outlandish - for example, many of Grace Brackenridge's stories - the stories work much better when there is some kind of explanation for what kind of twisted logic causes spankers to make outrageous or outlandish decisions, or why spankees do not react negatively to unfair spankings, than they do in the absence of any meaningful explanation. |