For reasons I will explain shortly, the ‘Facebook and Child-spanking Fetish Groups’ blog article should either be taken down, or drastically rewritten. It is based almost entirely upon demonstrably-false misinformation from Jillian Keenan’s long-discredited videos.
There was indeed a case decades ago in which 9 people traded videos of themselves spanking either their children or child-sized dolls. This remains the first and last example of a spanking fetishist child abuse ring known to have existed ever. It is also the only evidence in Ms. Keenan’s videos based on anything real.
Ms. Keenan shows an image of a classroom teacher appearing to spank a little girl with a ruler. This image is from a 2 and a half minute video from 2004 of playful “birthday spankings” in her classroom. The image Ms. Keenan claims constitutes “an assault on a little girl,” flashes by at the 01:13 mark. Ms. Keenan blurs out the child’s face, so viewers of her youtube video can’t tell that the birthday girl is smiling while “assaulted.” Another little girl at the beginning of the video tells the interviewer that being play-spanked by “Mrs. Oster” is, quote, “a fun way to celebrate” her birthday, and she’s later shown across Mrs. Oster’s lap smiling and laughing with delight during her so-called “spanking.” Other segments show the class eating donuts and popsicles while the Beatles song “Birthday” plays in the background.
I would like to send Prostasia this 25 meg 2 and a half minute video so you can see for yourselves that I am telling the truth about the image Keenan misrepresented. Please let me know if that is possible and how I might go about sending it.
As for the alleged spanking parent “conference,” that was nothing but an online roleplay fantasy by a bunch of fetishists, (most or all of whom are likely lonely, single, childless pervs, swapping stories on Facebook as their make-believe “strict parent” personae, and pretending to one another that they and their “children” are real). Here’s how we know this “conference” wasn’t real:
An actual 4-day conference of any kind involves a great deal of advance planning and coordination. If an actual conference were in the planning stages, threads would have appeared offering or asking about possible venues. Would someone’s church allow their basement to be used? There would have been questions and concerns about funding, and about housing for out of town visitors. What would the costs be for attendees? Is there a sliding scale for low income attendees? What are the dates for the conference? What is the deadline to register? What affordable hotel accomodations suitable for families exist within walking distance from the venue? Will child care be available for infants during the workshops? On and on.
Absolutely none of this appeared in that forum because those ridiculous “workshops” were total fantasies and everyone in that Facebook group knew it. The only posted information about the “conference” consisted entirely of titillating descriptions of those imaginary “workshops” full of the kinds of details about which spanking fetishists find exciting to write about and read. Literally hundreds of fake fantasy “parenting” groups like that one have come and gone over the decades, just usually on more obscure online venues than Facebook.
And if that alone weren’t enough, Ms. Heuvel-Collins asks, “why isn’t this illegal?” Simple answer: it already IS illegal! The descriptions of the “workshops” in that “conference” included children being forced to disrobe and be paddled naked for the viewing pleasure of an assembled audience. I challenge anyone to cite a jurisdiction anywhere in the English-speaking world where such a thing wouldn’t already violate current child protection laws. There aren’t any. There was never going to be any such “conference” and therefore everything in that Prostasia article based on erroneous assumptions to the contrary should be removed forthwith - i.e. virtually the entire page.
The misrepresented “birthday spanking,” a couple stills from a 1935 episode of “Our Gang” (which she claimed were victims of spanking fetish child abusers) and the nonexistent “conference,” are the ONLY “evidence” in Ms Keenan’s videos for the existence of spanking fetish child abuse rings now or at any time in the past twenty years. Wasting time and attention on a nonexistent threat, based on demonstrably false “evidence,” does not further the cause of child protection, Prostasia’s ostensible mission.
A relative handful of spanking fetishists do abuse children, but as loners not as organized rings. There are indeed bonafide cases of school or church officials with the authority to spank children in their care caught with child-spanking-oriented porn. I would be happy to see Prostasia redo that article to focus on genuine cases of that nature; I’ll even offer my assistance in doing so if asked.
However, both of Jillian Keenan’s videos and all of the article’s text based upon her unhinged falsehoods needs to be removed.