In the Camel........................no let us not get into that. I just wonder where some of the 'reasoned' arguments come from - as well as some definitions.
I can't get my mind round the apparent need NOT to teach spinning. It is true that some spam cans won't spin. The Jodel range are generally expected not to spin. But I have done it. Some aeroplanes drop a wing, when, of course, some recovery techniques shown here are dangerous. I mean you wouldn't lift the wing with aileron - would you? I have known many who have done so until I helped them understand why you should not do it and how easily it leads to a spin. But why didn't they know?
Straightforward stalling should be simple, and it usually is. But what about the one that catches the unwary out?
Recovery is the MOST important aspect of all stalls. If it goes wrong and you spin? What then? Who taught him/her to recover from it? What about the Chipmunk and its demand that the stick MUST be fully forward before initiating recovery from the subsequent dive, always assuming you performed the correct procedure in the first place, if not it will follow the many that have crashed through incorrect spin recovery technique. I also note that the topic is mainly about power on stalling, but that doesn't mean a new student won't experiment with stalling with it off.
I do of course recognise that an instructor will point to all the problems 'associated' with a possible spin, but my point is that it leaves the ACTUAL recovery to the solo unwary who have NOT been shown how. I would not take a bet on result that's for sure.
As you will note I am a strong advocate of teaching students to spin. I agree that you cannot do it in all aircraft so perhaps a bit of voluntary training on one that does would be more than helpful.