"Do you think breaking into someoneones home and pulling down the pants of a teenage girl and procede to put your hand on her naked buttocks, the same thing as giving your OWN four year old a smack on the bum (pants up) when she's having a tantrum in a busy carpark?" - PaulL

Yet the judge apparently found Freudenthal's "disturbing actions" to be as legitimate as the carpark scenario you describe. What do you think about that?

What's more, divine_msn "doubts the sexual connotation" and tries to justify Freudenthal's actions. Jewely agrees, chalking it up to "old school" ignorance of alternative methods (despite having an advanced degree in psychology).

DiPalma from the DA's report tried to similarly play the "discipline card" while on trial, portraying the victim as an ill-behaved brat. Though it didn't work in his case, it's worked remarkably well for others. One of spanking's drawbacks is that it blurs boundaries in a way that makes it easier for predators to operate.

We don't know from the DA's report whether the boy had been spanked at home. But we do know that DiPalma, his teacher, told him that he was behaving badly and therefore he was going to get a spanking. What is an 8-year-old supposed to think in that situation?

Depending how frequently or severely they are punished that way at home, many kids might figure they deserved the spanking or at least that DiPalma was entitled to do it as an adult in charge. (And in fact, teachers at some schools *are* allowed to spank students.) They might imagine their parents would approve and that maybe they'd be in even more trouble if their parents found out about it.

By contrast, children who've never been punished this way and aren't so conditioned to see spanking as a normal adult-child interaction will be appalled by the very idea of their teacher doing this to them. The "you've been naughty" ploy doesn't have the same currency.

“What's more, divine_msn "doubts the sexual connotation" and tries to justify Freudenthal's actions. Jewely agrees, chalking it up to "old school" ignorance of alternative methods (despite having an advanced degree in psychology).”

Oh he did? Well I change my mind then. I went back and read it again and yep I’d missed the “middle-aged psychologist” bit completely. I’m still not seeing the sexual connection in this situation though. Instead of being ignorant I've decided he's a bad tempered old toss pot.

"If I was in a debate team I would probably start with this:
Do we define abuse by the feelings of the perpetrator or the victim? A child not knowing whether the adult got any kind of pleasure (sexual or otherwise) would still have been abused. If it is a case of definition in relation to how the person carrying out the abuse feels then a smacking parent is probably all clear and good to go as they usually have convinced themselves it is for the good of the child." - Jewely

I don't think it's strictly either-or, but with most crime the experience of the putative victim tends to precede--without precluding--questions of intent. If a spanking is so severe as to be cruel, sincere good intentions on the part of the spanker could mitigate the offense, but it wouldn't excuse it. Consider also that if a man grabs a woman's breasts, you don't necessarily have to prove that he got sexual pleasure from doing so to convict him of a sexual offense.

Do you think it would be reasonable for the 14-year-old girl whose friend's dad pulled down her swimsuit and spanked her to feel that she was sexually violated?

I'd expect she'd feel very angry, humiliated, probably shocked that this man had completely lost his TEMPER and given her a painful hiding, but 'sexually violated'? NO I very much doubt it.

This is a 14 yr old who by the sounds of her out of control behaviour has probably had her knickers (willingly) pulled down a few times before and knows the difference ....

C'mon blwpyrtv - stop weaving your own nasty little fantasies into this story ......

It is a great pity that Boaz isn't around any longer.

>>Do you think it would be reasonable for the 14-year-old girl whose friend's dad pulled down her swimsuit and spanked her to feel that she was sexually violated?<<

I would have loved to have seen his response to that little gem, given that he is also a self-proclaimed spanker-of-teenage-girls.

But I confess to be a little surprised at divine_msn's reaction.

>>This is a 14 yr old who by the sounds of her out of control behaviour has probably had her knickers (willingly) pulled down a few times before and knows the difference<<

Way to be judgmental, divine_msn. Any rapist would love to have you on their jury, I'd bet. You'd be there in the jury room, "hey people, she was no stranger to having her knickers pulled down, draw your own conclusion"

Anyhow, I still see violence as an admission of personal defeat, that you'd been outwitted by a kid.

Still nothing to do with a) political correctness or b) the government though.

Pericles - he gave her an arse whopping. There was no mention of accusation of fondling, touching genitals, digital penetration etc.

If I was on the jury, I'd have to find him guilty of assault but not sexual assault.

As for your assumptions of my attitude towards rape victims - I've treated rape victims, female and male, so pull your head in.

However I will call a spade a spade: some women through stupid, risky behaviour which often involves substance fueled sexually explicit hijinks with males they have know 5 minutes then get into water out of their depth are partly to blame for their dilemma.

Yes - partly to blame. No - they did not deserve to be raped but their actions put them at grave risk.

When a drunk crashes his car and injures passengers, we don't say "Oh the bottleshop should not have sold him that bottle of rum" or "The car is to blame - he shouldn't have had such a powerful machine" we blame the driver. However if we are aware that the passengers got in that car knowing the driver was intoxicated we assume they are partly to blame for their dilemma.

I know personal responsibility is a frightfully unfashionable concept and avoided at all cost by so many, but that's how it is. Play with fire - get burnt