![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Caning. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Caning at the Reference desk. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
This passage claims that caning was known to the French at one time as 'the English vice.' I know that the French once attached this label to homosexuality in general. I question whether it is accurate to use it specifically for caning, unless there is a source for that. Marty55 00:38, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
I am worried by the inclusion of a weblink at the bottom of this entry to www.corpun.com. In my opinion this website glorifies the caning of children and sadism in general -- to the point of being pornographic. I refer you, in particular, to the commentary that runs alongside footage of a judicial caning in Malaysia.
New British legislation will bring websites like this one into a very grey legal area, if not ban them outright. [Unsigned and undated comment from 2007 or earlier]
I am the editor of www.corpun.com. My website does not "glorify the caning of children" or anyone else, and it also has nothing to do with sadism or pornography. As anyone can see who goes there, its purpose is to provide factual documentation about corporal punishment of various kinds. To take the example to which you refer, my page about judicial caning in Malaysia simply describes the context for a purely factual documentary video, it does not "glorify" the procedure, indeed it warns viewers that that particular material is not for the squeamish. I am not making a value judgement about it one way or the other. You may well personally disapprove of the fact that Malaysia does this but that cannot be a reason for censoring information about it.
What "new British legislation" are you talking about? Ffaarrrreellll 21:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
I think this whole section is a bit misleading. It talks about various different sorts of cane with names like "senior cane" and "reformatory cane" as though these had some standard or official meaning, but cites no sources for these rather sweeping claims. Wouldn't it be better just to say that a punishment cane can vary greatly in size from perhaps X cm long when typically used on small children, to Y cm long and Z cm thick when used judicially in Singapore or Malaysia?
I wonder if it is also worth stressing that the word "cane" in this (essentially British) context means something significantly different from what the word tends to mean in American English. A punishment cane is generally thin, swishy and flexible, typically of rattan; whereas in US usage the word mostly seems to refer to a thick, rigid stick as in "walking cane" or "(blind person's) white cane" (these things tend to be called "walking stick" and "white stick" in British English) and hence e.g. the confusion over the so-called "caning" of Senator Sumner, in which (so I understand) he was hit in the legs with a rigid walking stick simply as a physical assault rather than a punishment -- not really much at all to do with "caning" in the sense meant here.
I would also get rid of the BDSM references, which have nothing to do with corporal punishment. Ffaarrrreellll 22:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
i don't know if terms like 'junior cane' and 'reformatory cane' were ever used but is aw the regulations for corporal punishment at my state secondary school and they definitely stated that a smaller cane was to be used on younger boys and all girls and a larger cane could be used on the older boys it would have been very natural to call these junior and senior canes the book published by the teachers opposed to corporal punishement("caning: a last resort?") reprodued a flyer from a firm which made canes, which certaininly talked about junior, standard and senior models... 89.243.19.32 21:15, 12 May 2007 (UTC) Beanokid
Do people really think the external link of the video is necessary? I'm leaning towards no, but I'm open to being persuaded. WLU 16:19, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Please see... the reason for merger is tivial. 222.225.124.80 09:47, 3 November 2007 (UTC).
I had started work on an edit and had been about to add some more references but see it had been deleted. No reason was given, but could be because I had not added references which is fair enough. Quite a few men mention having got the cane in autobiographies etc. Shane Warne did in a TV interview with Michael Parkinson. Shall put back up unless the anonymous editer strongly objects. Informed Owl ( talk) 04:58, 28 May 2008 (UTC)Informed Owl
As the corporal punishment was in widespread use in British schools until fairly recently a list of men who acknowledged getting the cane is potentially extremely large. We do not need this. PatGallacher ( talk) 20:22, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
This article should be merged with the "Laws in Malaysia" and not with a page about a Prisons. Timothyngim ( talk) 11:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
This still needs tidying up. THe dates when it was abolished in the UK should be added - it was banned in state schools before it was in private (fee paying) schools as far as I am aware. Informed Owl ( talk) 12:27, 20 September 2008 (UTC)Informed Owl
I removed the "famous people"-section, but my removal was reverted by Informed Owl ( talk · contribs). Quite a lot of people in the world have been caned, quite a few of these are famous, why list a dozen of them chosen seemingly at random in this article? What sets these people out from other celebrities who were caned? As it stands, the section is an indiscriminate list, and Wikipedia is neither a directory, nor an indiscriminate collection of information. Any thoughts? Gabbe ( talk) 13:37, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
The article says that only men are caned in Malaysia. However, there is a possibility that this will change, or was never true - see Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno. Orthografer ( talk) 15:36, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
The following section was removed because "Disproportionate to mention this one case out of all the millions of cases in different countrires":
Well, it may be "disproportionate" to mention a case (although I am not aware that there are millions of deaths), but I have not found any other information about caning taking place in Bangladesh (BD), did not know that caning was against the BD law (although WP has a footnote:" The above list (of countries that allow caning as a judicial punishment) does not include countries where a "blind eye" is sometimes turned to unofficial JCP by local tribes, authorities, etc. including Bangladesh...") , that caning nevertheless is still done under the Sharia law in BD, and that the BD government persecutes alleged perpetrators. All these issues are raised by the case and deserve to be heard. Does the section belong here, or should it be the start of a Caning in Bangladesh article (it is against the law), or filed under her name as her case has gained notariety? Just aside, I wonder what the mortality rate is for contemporary caning of women and men. Ekem ( talk) 01:54, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
I've been trying to locate some reliable sources about how exactly caning "works" in a British/Commonwealth educational context - how it is or was justified, why and when and how often it is or was given, who gives or gave it, the effects, and so on. Particularly looking at the 20th century, since many of us struggle to make much sense of the century before that (kids hanged for stealing a loaf of bread, etc).
Having found very little, I'm led to conclude that J Mecurio's "Caning - Educational Ritual" is one of the best sources we have, even if it's obviously far from the ideal source for Wikipedia. So I have a fair number of facts to add based on that source (while also needing to note the "facts" are in many cases limited to the narrow scope of the source).
There have been some comments before about putting material into this article when it might equally well go into the School corporal punishment article. I can see the sense in this. In a few instances, elements of Mecurio's conclusions are, in his mind, New Zealand-specific, and in those instances it makes sense to put those facts in the New Zealand section of the School corporal punishment article.
More widely, though, that other article seems better suited to being an overall summary as it is now, not to have a lot of extra detail. So for example, I look at the United Kingdom entry there, and I can't imagine that inserting more specific information about specific schools or different types of corporal punishments, or more history (there's lots!), would make it more readable or useful.
Caning (this article) is for whatever reason an almost uniquely British-and-Commonwealth institution, and therefore although many of the questions and observations of Mecurio (who, why, how, when,) are in theory relevant to the wider article on school corporal punishment, I think they add more here than there. (The same boy gets corporal punishment more than 300 separate times in one year - if that happened in modern-day USA, I think we would see a headline about it!)
I welcome comments on this choice of placing, or how to do it better any other way. -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 21:14, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Caning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2007%2F11%2F29%2Ffocus%2F19604403&sec=focus{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2008%2F7%2F26%2Ffocus%2F21889827&sec=focus{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2012%2F2%2F22%2Ffocus%2F10779950&sec=focus{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2007%2F11%2F28%2Fnation%2F19595309&sec=nationWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:37, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Caning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:37, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Having a look at the description of the external links, shouldnt they be removed because of the depiction of real violence?-- 2003:72:4D1C:A100:786B:B78:1813:DA24 ( talk) 14:19, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Caning. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Caning at the Reference desk. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
This passage claims that caning was known to the French at one time as 'the English vice.' I know that the French once attached this label to homosexuality in general. I question whether it is accurate to use it specifically for caning, unless there is a source for that. Marty55 00:38, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
I am worried by the inclusion of a weblink at the bottom of this entry to www.corpun.com. In my opinion this website glorifies the caning of children and sadism in general -- to the point of being pornographic. I refer you, in particular, to the commentary that runs alongside footage of a judicial caning in Malaysia.
New British legislation will bring websites like this one into a very grey legal area, if not ban them outright. [Unsigned and undated comment from 2007 or earlier]
I am the editor of www.corpun.com. My website does not "glorify the caning of children" or anyone else, and it also has nothing to do with sadism or pornography. As anyone can see who goes there, its purpose is to provide factual documentation about corporal punishment of various kinds. To take the example to which you refer, my page about judicial caning in Malaysia simply describes the context for a purely factual documentary video, it does not "glorify" the procedure, indeed it warns viewers that that particular material is not for the squeamish. I am not making a value judgement about it one way or the other. You may well personally disapprove of the fact that Malaysia does this but that cannot be a reason for censoring information about it.
What "new British legislation" are you talking about? Ffaarrrreellll 21:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
I think this whole section is a bit misleading. It talks about various different sorts of cane with names like "senior cane" and "reformatory cane" as though these had some standard or official meaning, but cites no sources for these rather sweeping claims. Wouldn't it be better just to say that a punishment cane can vary greatly in size from perhaps X cm long when typically used on small children, to Y cm long and Z cm thick when used judicially in Singapore or Malaysia?
I wonder if it is also worth stressing that the word "cane" in this (essentially British) context means something significantly different from what the word tends to mean in American English. A punishment cane is generally thin, swishy and flexible, typically of rattan; whereas in US usage the word mostly seems to refer to a thick, rigid stick as in "walking cane" or "(blind person's) white cane" (these things tend to be called "walking stick" and "white stick" in British English) and hence e.g. the confusion over the so-called "caning" of Senator Sumner, in which (so I understand) he was hit in the legs with a rigid walking stick simply as a physical assault rather than a punishment -- not really much at all to do with "caning" in the sense meant here.
I would also get rid of the BDSM references, which have nothing to do with corporal punishment. Ffaarrrreellll 22:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
i don't know if terms like 'junior cane' and 'reformatory cane' were ever used but is aw the regulations for corporal punishment at my state secondary school and they definitely stated that a smaller cane was to be used on younger boys and all girls and a larger cane could be used on the older boys it would have been very natural to call these junior and senior canes the book published by the teachers opposed to corporal punishement("caning: a last resort?") reprodued a flyer from a firm which made canes, which certaininly talked about junior, standard and senior models... 89.243.19.32 21:15, 12 May 2007 (UTC) Beanokid
Do people really think the external link of the video is necessary? I'm leaning towards no, but I'm open to being persuaded. WLU 16:19, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Please see... the reason for merger is tivial. 222.225.124.80 09:47, 3 November 2007 (UTC).
I had started work on an edit and had been about to add some more references but see it had been deleted. No reason was given, but could be because I had not added references which is fair enough. Quite a few men mention having got the cane in autobiographies etc. Shane Warne did in a TV interview with Michael Parkinson. Shall put back up unless the anonymous editer strongly objects. Informed Owl ( talk) 04:58, 28 May 2008 (UTC)Informed Owl
As the corporal punishment was in widespread use in British schools until fairly recently a list of men who acknowledged getting the cane is potentially extremely large. We do not need this. PatGallacher ( talk) 20:22, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
This article should be merged with the "Laws in Malaysia" and not with a page about a Prisons. Timothyngim ( talk) 11:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
This still needs tidying up. THe dates when it was abolished in the UK should be added - it was banned in state schools before it was in private (fee paying) schools as far as I am aware. Informed Owl ( talk) 12:27, 20 September 2008 (UTC)Informed Owl
I removed the "famous people"-section, but my removal was reverted by Informed Owl ( talk · contribs). Quite a lot of people in the world have been caned, quite a few of these are famous, why list a dozen of them chosen seemingly at random in this article? What sets these people out from other celebrities who were caned? As it stands, the section is an indiscriminate list, and Wikipedia is neither a directory, nor an indiscriminate collection of information. Any thoughts? Gabbe ( talk) 13:37, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
The article says that only men are caned in Malaysia. However, there is a possibility that this will change, or was never true - see Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno. Orthografer ( talk) 15:36, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
The following section was removed because "Disproportionate to mention this one case out of all the millions of cases in different countrires":
Well, it may be "disproportionate" to mention a case (although I am not aware that there are millions of deaths), but I have not found any other information about caning taking place in Bangladesh (BD), did not know that caning was against the BD law (although WP has a footnote:" The above list (of countries that allow caning as a judicial punishment) does not include countries where a "blind eye" is sometimes turned to unofficial JCP by local tribes, authorities, etc. including Bangladesh...") , that caning nevertheless is still done under the Sharia law in BD, and that the BD government persecutes alleged perpetrators. All these issues are raised by the case and deserve to be heard. Does the section belong here, or should it be the start of a Caning in Bangladesh article (it is against the law), or filed under her name as her case has gained notariety? Just aside, I wonder what the mortality rate is for contemporary caning of women and men. Ekem ( talk) 01:54, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
I've been trying to locate some reliable sources about how exactly caning "works" in a British/Commonwealth educational context - how it is or was justified, why and when and how often it is or was given, who gives or gave it, the effects, and so on. Particularly looking at the 20th century, since many of us struggle to make much sense of the century before that (kids hanged for stealing a loaf of bread, etc).
Having found very little, I'm led to conclude that J Mecurio's "Caning - Educational Ritual" is one of the best sources we have, even if it's obviously far from the ideal source for Wikipedia. So I have a fair number of facts to add based on that source (while also needing to note the "facts" are in many cases limited to the narrow scope of the source).
There have been some comments before about putting material into this article when it might equally well go into the School corporal punishment article. I can see the sense in this. In a few instances, elements of Mecurio's conclusions are, in his mind, New Zealand-specific, and in those instances it makes sense to put those facts in the New Zealand section of the School corporal punishment article.
More widely, though, that other article seems better suited to being an overall summary as it is now, not to have a lot of extra detail. So for example, I look at the United Kingdom entry there, and I can't imagine that inserting more specific information about specific schools or different types of corporal punishments, or more history (there's lots!), would make it more readable or useful.
Caning (this article) is for whatever reason an almost uniquely British-and-Commonwealth institution, and therefore although many of the questions and observations of Mecurio (who, why, how, when,) are in theory relevant to the wider article on school corporal punishment, I think they add more here than there. (The same boy gets corporal punishment more than 300 separate times in one year - if that happened in modern-day USA, I think we would see a headline about it!)
I welcome comments on this choice of placing, or how to do it better any other way. -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 21:14, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Caning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2007%2F11%2F29%2Ffocus%2F19604403&sec=focus{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2008%2F7%2F26%2Ffocus%2F21889827&sec=focus{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2012%2F2%2F22%2Ffocus%2F10779950&sec=focus{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2007%2F11%2F28%2Fnation%2F19595309&sec=nationWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:37, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Caning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:37, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Having a look at the description of the external links, shouldnt they be removed because of the depiction of real violence?-- 2003:72:4D1C:A100:786B:B78:1813:DA24 ( talk) 14:19, 3 February 2018 (UTC)