So one last time, just for the record.
There is NO evidence out there anywhere that conclusively proves that all spanking fetishes, or even a majority of them are caused by being spanked as children.
It has happened, I know of one case where the person involved is sure it did. However, I also know of cases where being spanked has completely turned someone off the idea as an erotic activity. I also know several people who never once had a hand laid on them who still as adults crave nothing more than a nice warm bottom. How do we explain them?
Reactions to spanking are as varied as the human race itself. Some will be aroused, some will be traumatized, some will be both, some will not react at all.
Yes every now and then we see yet another study claiming that a higher percentage of people who got spanked are kinky, however let me point out the key fact they teach you on the first day of even the most basic stats, science, or social science class.
Correlation is NOT causation
Even if there does appear to be a link between to events, it DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN ONE CAUSES THE OTHER. Anyone still having trouble understanding this very simple concept please write it out on the blackboard 1000 times.
The more tenuous a link is, the less likely it is to be a cause. If 95 people out of 100 who ate chicken tacos at the same place on the same day got sick and none or maybe 1 out of another 100 who ate the beef tacos did then it's likely that the chicken made them all sick. If 59% of people who had a chicken taco get into a car accident in the next 30 days, compared with 53% who had the beef tacos, it does not mean, nor is it even likely that chicken tacos cause traffic accidents.
Furthermore, for something to truly be the cause of something else, they both must always be present, and one must always precede the other, or you have to find another contributing factor that cancels out the first. Going back to our chicken example, 96 people out of 200 got sick. (95 chicken eaters, 1 beef eater) why didn't the last 5 get sick, why did just one who ate the beef? In order to prove the chicken the culprit we'd have to go back and prove a) that something in that beef taco came into contact with the contaminated chicken, and b) that something about those 5 people made them more resistant to the food borne illness in the chicken or that they did not eat the same chicken as the people who got sick. Unless we can prove both of these things, we CANNOT conclusively prove the chicken was the cause of the illness. We have a very high correlation, but no causation. We have to keep looking for other causes.
For those of you paying attention to the news, this is what is happening with the FDA's investigation of tomatoes right now. They cannot conclusively prove all the cases came from tomatoes, so they are now having to look at other fresh produce.
Is everyone still with me? Good. There will be a quiz at the end of the period.
Now boys and girls, lets talk about manners and basic human respect. We all know it is wrong to impose stereotypes on others, especially negative stereotypes.
It is wrong when certain groups teach their children that people have dark skin because they carry the mark of sin.
It is wrong when people claim Jewish people sacrifice Christian babies.
It is wrong when someone claims all Muslims are terrorists.
It is wrong when someone says all women are emotional and hysterical.
It is wrong when someone says all men have to be physically strong, athletic and aggressive.
It is wrong when someone says a man is homosexual because he played with dolls as a child or that a woman is homosexual because she was a tomboy.
It is also wrong to walk up to someone or to comment on their blog and declare that obviously their desire to be spanked must have come from some for of childhood abuse. It is doubly wrong to do so as an excuse to post links to anti-CP pages or groups, no matter how vital to saving the world you think your particular cause is. Posting unwanted, un-related, links on someone else's blog is spamming them. That's wrong, too.
I do not approve of spanking children. I do not approve of anyone hitting anyone else against his or her will. Consent is the very center of everything we do.
However, I do not approve of one small, or even large, group presuming to tell any other group how they must live or how they "should be", especially when such pronouncements are based on ignorance and false assumptions.
I spoke to a friend on the phone yesterday, and he said something very wise. He pointed out that regardless of how any of us got here, we still need what we need to be happy and whole as human beings. When someone forces their world view on us instead of understanding us for who we are they deny us that. Railing against political issues in the wrong venue is not helping us, nor is it helping the cause this person is working towards.
Too bad, really. It is a good cause, but I do think they need a little more thought put into their arguments and tactics.
Ms. Betty
The more tenuous a link is, the less likely it is to be a cause. If 95 people out of 100 who ate chicken tacos at the same place on the same day got sick and none or maybe 1 out of another 100 who ate the beef tacos did then it's likely that the chicken made them all sick. If 59% of people who had a chicken taco get into a car accident in the next 30 days, compared with 53% who had the beef tacos, it does not mean, nor is it even likely that chicken tacos cause traffic accidents.
Furthermore, for something to truly be the cause of something else, they both must always be present, and one must always precede the other, or you have to find another contributing factor that cancels out the first. Going back to our chicken example, 96 people out of 200 got sick. (95 chicken eaters, 1 beef eater) why didn't the last 5 get sick, why did just one who ate the beef? In order to prove the chicken the culprit we'd have to go back and prove a) that something in that beef taco came into contact with the contaminated chicken, and b) that something about those 5 people made them more resistant to the food borne illness in the chicken or that they did not eat the same chicken as the people who got sick. Unless we can prove both of these things, we CANNOT conclusively prove the chicken was the cause of the illness. We have a very high correlation, but no causation. We have to keep looking for other causes.
For those of you paying attention to the news, this is what is happening with the FDA's investigation of tomatoes right now. They cannot conclusively prove all the cases came from tomatoes, so they are now having to look at other fresh produce.
Is everyone still with me? Good. There will be a quiz at the end of the period.
Now boys and girls, lets talk about manners and basic human respect. We all know it is wrong to impose stereotypes on others, especially negative stereotypes.
It is wrong when certain groups teach their children that people have dark skin because they carry the mark of sin.
It is wrong when people claim Jewish people sacrifice Christian babies.
It is wrong when someone claims all Muslims are terrorists.
It is wrong when someone says all women are emotional and hysterical.
It is wrong when someone says all men have to be physically strong, athletic and aggressive.
It is wrong when someone says a man is homosexual because he played with dolls as a child or that a woman is homosexual because she was a tomboy.
It is also wrong to walk up to someone or to comment on their blog and declare that obviously their desire to be spanked must have come from some for of childhood abuse. It is doubly wrong to do so as an excuse to post links to anti-CP pages or groups, no matter how vital to saving the world you think your particular cause is. Posting unwanted, un-related, links on someone else's blog is spamming them. That's wrong, too.
I do not approve of spanking children. I do not approve of anyone hitting anyone else against his or her will. Consent is the very center of everything we do.
However, I do not approve of one small, or even large, group presuming to tell any other group how they must live or how they "should be", especially when such pronouncements are based on ignorance and false assumptions.
I spoke to a friend on the phone yesterday, and he said something very wise. He pointed out that regardless of how any of us got here, we still need what we need to be happy and whole as human beings. When someone forces their world view on us instead of understanding us for who we are they deny us that. Railing against political issues in the wrong venue is not helping us, nor is it helping the cause this person is working towards.
Too bad, really. It is a good cause, but I do think they need a little more thought put into their arguments and tactics.
Ms. Betty
