Why get spanked on your bottom?

I have a question. Why is a spanking adminstered to your bottom? Why can't it be somewhere else. I know that your thighs get hit too, but still that's near your bottom. When I was younger I always wondered why I was spanked on my butt and thighs. Of all places my butt and thighs. I thought maybe it was because I sat there or because my butt looks funny as the belt hit it. But I always wanted to know why. Even now I want to know why. So maybe someone can tell me.

[kager]

Originally Posted by Inuyasha2cute

I have a question. Why is a spanking adminstered to your bottom? Why can't it be somewhere else. I know that your thighs get hit too, but still that's near your bottom. When I was younger I always wondered why I was spanked on my butt and thighs. Of all places my butt and thighs. I thought maybe it was because I sat there or because my butt looks funny as the belt hit it. But I always wanted to know why. Even now I want to know why. So maybe someone can tell me.

I think it is because you can take a pretty good spanking there without permantent damage. I mean most people got enough well...fat there to protect the muscels. I hope you understand what I'm trying to say.

I understand what you mean Kager.

[Mushy]

Yeah, it's pretty much that your bottom is more naturally protected. Lasting damage can still be inflicted, of course, and a miss can be pretty damaging if you hit too high up or something and hit more of the spine and tail bone. D: Forgive me, I sucked in science and anatomy and therefore I can't really give you a descriptive explanation. xD

[Ai]

This question actually made me stop and think for a while and I've come up with various plausible explanations - how scientific they are I don't know but they sure as hall make sense to me.

Your gluteus maximus (the muscle in your bottom) is the largest muscle in your entire body. Children (and a lot of adults above size 0) also have a layer of fat protecting that area. These factors make it the safest place to hit on your body.
There is also the physiological fact that humans are not designed to stand up all the time - we need to sit a lot, or lie down. Sitting on a well spanked bottom is not an easy task - you are reminded of your punishment with every little wiggle or movement, especially when you first sit down or stand up.
This makes it psychological as well. Another factor making it a psychological punisment is the humans value of modesty. Your bottom is your second most private place (if you consider your genetals you most private) and having someone invade that area makes you realise you are not in control - you are being (either by your own free will, or through force) submissive.

Imagine having a big bruise on your arm - yes it's annoying and painful, but in a very different way to a spanked bottom. A spanked bottom (unless you have major bruising or blisters) will not prevent you from carrying on with your life, a bruised arm, hand, calf etc will. Injuries to the back can result in paralysis or even death - nobody in their right mind would spank there. Having your back flogged however is different - the whip or cat-o-nine tails is designed to welt, cut or tear skin, not bruise muscles like a paddle - all the damage from a flogging shouldn't go as far as the bone (though I'm sure there have been cases where it has)
If the origins of spanking go back to neolithic man (nobody will ever be able to answer that question lol!) then humans were still prey to many animals back then. A human with a limp would not be able to run away fast enough. As they were hunter gatherers (which is a fulltime job as it were) someone with an unusable arms would be unable to collect as much food. Now here is the clever part - someone with a very sore, or even bruised bottom would still be able to carry out these important tasks! In the wild, mother dogs and wolves will correct their pups with a short, sharp bite to the scruff of their neck - it causes brief pain, and no lasting damage. The pup knows it has been punished but is still able to carry on as normal within minutes.
I have a feeling that neolithic man would no go in for long spankings (as are the fashion through recorded history) but instead use the short, sharp, shock approch - one or two swats to remind the child or adolescant who is boss.

However I begin to digress! If this hasn't answered your question I hope it has at least given you and others some ideas to think about.

Oh, its answered my question and them some. I understand now. Your really smart. Thanks Ai.

[Ai]

Technically it isn't an answer as such... just a collection of my thoughts on the subject (with a lot of assumptions and no scientific evidence XD) But I hope it made for an interesting read ^_^

[Crash-Bash]

I was always under the impression it was safer. As Ai mentioned, a reddened bottom doesn't have any perminant damage unless done improperly...which should NEVER be the case anyway. If it did, then it would stop being spanking and start being physical violence.

[AnimeFan23]

hehe why on the bottom? Because it is better on a big fleshy area

It was a very interesting read Ai. Thanks, it really changes how I see spankings now. And your right CBFan, it would be more violence then a spanking if it wasn't done on your bottom.