Chapter 6

Time and place

Introduction

To understand the experiences of victim-survivors who shared their stories with the Board of Inquiry, it is important to appreciate the multiple and intersecting factors that affected their lives when they were children. Children are shaped by their immediate relationships with family, friends and teachers.1 They are also influenced by the interactions between people in their networks, such as their family’s relationships with teachers and others.2 In addition, indirect factors, such as the school curriculum or the media, can shape children’s lives.3 Finally, broader factors related to ‘fundamental beliefs, values, cultures and ideologies’ also affect children and their upbringing.4

This Chapter aims to provide some context for the experiences of victim-survivors by describing the relevant social, cultural and political forces that may have influenced their lives at the time of the child sexual abuse. It builds on the discussion of the legislative and governmental policy framework that was evolving between the 1960s and 1980s, described earlier in this Part.

The 1960s and 1970s are often remembered as heralding major social and political changes, demonstrated by movements around the world that pushed for greater equality, respect for diversity, peace, and protection of the environment. While this period was undoubtedly a time of significant societal change, it is important to recognise that liberation and equality movements had their own limitations and were contested and resisted, with progress often hard fought and non-linear. Furthermore, social changes during this period occurred against a backdrop of largely conservative values, which still dominated many of the social norms and attitudes held by the community at the time.

In addition to discussing how global trends influenced life in Australia, this Chapter considers the community of Beaumaris specifically. Most victim-survivors who shared their experiences with the Board of Inquiry attended Beaumaris Primary School. While the Beaumaris community was influenced by broader global trends, it is also clear that it maintained its own identity. Understanding the unique characteristics of the Beaumaris community assists in understanding the experiences of victim-survivors, in various ways.

While this Chapter endeavours to explain the norms, values and practices that shaped Australian society from the 1960s to the 1990s, the Board of Inquiry recognises that it does not reflect the full diversity of people’s experiences,5 which are inevitably more complex and nuanced than a description of societal trends can accommodate.

The 1960s and 1970s have been described by historians as a time when the world became more youthful, inclusive and just, as a range of predominantly youth-led movements pushed boundaries and agitated against the status quo.6

During this time, the Civil Rights Movement in the United States of America fought for racial justice by espousing the dismantling of racial segregation and an end to racial discrimination.7 Second-wave feminists pushed for equal pay, the ending of gender-based discrimination and the improvement of educational outcomes for women.8 LGBTIQA+ activists campaigned to end discrimination and stigma directed at the queer community.9 Disability activists fought for recognition of rights and inclusion for people with disability.10 Environmentalist movements also grew as society started paying closer attention to the threats of pollution.11 Earth Day, founded in 1970, involved 20 million Americans engaging in demonstrations and gatherings to raise awareness about environmentally sustainable practices and the conservation of natural resources.12

In addition, electronic forms of communication emerged. These new forms of communication contributed to the first collective, global consciousness.13 Televisions could rapidly broadcast culture and knowledge far and wide.14 During the Cold War period, the horrors of the Vietnam War were broadcast, triggering a domino effect of anti-war protests across the world.15

However, historians also caution against glorifying this period.16 Inflation, unemployment and recession created a challenging economic climate.17 The waves of protests and reforms were often met with a rise in conservative ways of thinking.18 In reality, much of what is now viewed as inevitable progress was contested and resisted, with governments and sections of the community fighting to uphold traditional power structures that privileged some people over others based on race, class, gender, sexual orientation and gender identity, age and ability.19

Life in Australia: tradition meets resistance

Australia entered the 1960s under the leadership of conservative Prime Minister Sir Robert Menzies. Menzies became Australia’s longest-serving prime minister over the course of two terms in office — from 1939 to 1941 and again from 1949 to 1966.20 He was ‘often characterised as an extreme monarchist’, and personally described himself as ‘British to the bootstraps’.21 Commentators have suggested that the early 1960s in Australia were marked by a pervasive sense of nationalism on the part of Anglo-Australians that was mostly rooted in the notion of British race patriotism.22

The Menzies Government introduced selective conscription for overseas military service in 1964, during the Vietnam War.23 While this was initially met with support, over time more people — largely led by university students — began opposing Australia’s involvement in the Vietnam War and the conscription of Australian soldiers.24

Feminists, trade unionists, First Nations rights activists, sexual libertarians and gay liberationists led other social movements in 1960s Australia.25 Young Australians campaigned for equal pay and workplace rights, free education and First Nations land rights.26 In 1967, Australia held a referendum that led to constitutional reforms. These reforms saw First Nations peoples finally counted as part of Australia’s population.27

Despite the increasing calls for various other reforms across Australian society, people who valued established ways of life in Australia and internationally worked hard to preserve traditional social structures.28 In Victoria, Liberal Premier Sir Henry Bolte led the government across the 1960s and early 1970s.29 Bolte’s election in 1955 had introduced a conservative, coalition government in Victoria that governed for almost three decades.30 During this period, many immigrants from across Europe and other parts of the world increasingly settled in Melbourne, strongly influencing the city’s culture. The population of teenagers and young adults in Melbourne also grew rapidly as a result of the post-war baby boom.31

During the 1970s, protestors sought to decriminalise abortion and homosexuality.32 Feminist and LGBTIQA+ activists also started creating services that responded to their distinct needs, such as women’s refuges, rape crisis centres and telephone counselling services.33 In Melbourne, the first Centre Against Sexual Assault was established in 1979 at the Queen Victoria Medical Centre.34 First Nations rights activists pushed back against the policy of assimilation and fought tirelessly for land rights, setting up the Aboriginal Tent Embassy in 1972 outside of the Provisional Parliament House in Canberra in protest against government policies towards First Nations peoples.35

In 1972, Labor Prime Minister Gough Whitlam’s election brought significant social and political changes to Australia.36 Whitlam called for greater independence for Australia, introducing a new form of nationalism that prioritised Australia’s local and national identity over its colonial ties to Britain.37

Although many young people in Melbourne were not necessarily protesting for reforms, their everyday habits did start to change.38 It became more acceptable for young people to have multiple romantic relationships before settling into a long-term relationship.39 Young people also sought out new forms of fun — staying out late at pubs and dancing in nightclubs across the city.40

By the early 1970s, many of the social and cultural changes that emerged in the 1960s had become increasingly mainstream across Melbourne.41

Life in Beaumaris during the 1960s and 1970s

Beaumaris is a quiet suburban area situated within a bushy landscape on Melbourne’s coastline in, what is now referred to as, the City of Bayside.42 Its natural environment is characterised by ‘the beaches, the picturesque rocky cliffs, [and] the wild freedom of the tea-trees interspersed with manna gums’.43 As the suburb was not yet accessible by train in the 1960s and 1970s, it was relatively isolated from Melbourne’s central business district and from neighbouring suburbs.

After the Second World War, Victoria’s population in Beaumaris and its surrounding areas experienced a ‘dramatic increase’.44 A 1958 article in The Age newspaper described Beaumaris as a ‘“Cinderella” area’ and ‘one of Melbourne’s most popular and attractive suburbs’.45 A 1967 article in the same newspaper’s real estate section described how Beaumaris had become a ‘status area’ and a ‘glamor suburb in the affluent era of the ’fifties and ’sixties’.46 In a book on Beaumaris’s modernist homes, Professor Phillip Goad, Chair of Architecture at the University of Melbourne, described his childhood in Beaumaris as ‘an ideal post-war upbringing’, and highlighted the variety of ways in which children could spend their time in the area’s natural environment.47

Partly influenced by this, the population in Beaumaris expanded and changed as ‘young couples looking for a more progressive lifestyle’ were attracted to the area’s natural environment and relative isolation.48 As one victim-survivor explained, this was the ‘baby boomer era’, and in Beaumaris and its surrounding areas there were lots of children around who lived a ‘free’ life.49 As young couples settled in the area and started families in the period following the Second World War, enrolments at Beaumaris Primary School rose sharply.50 The historical record of the school kept by the Department of Education (Department) states that ‘[b]y the 1950s, the school was bursting at the seams’.51 In the 1960s and 1970s, the vast majority of residents in the local government area identified as Christian, were born in Australia, the United Kingdom or Ireland, and were described by the Australian Bureau of Statistics at the time as of ‘British nationality’.52

Many participants in the Board of Inquiry said that they enjoyed growing up in Beaumaris in the 1960s and 1970s. Victim-survivors described the area during this period as a ‘beautiful cul-de-sac’,53 and said that Beaumaris was ‘gorgeous’ and ‘idyllic’.54 One resident told the Board of Inquiry that Beaumaris was a relaxed community where everybody knew each other and looked out for each other.55 They recalled Beaumaris as being like a ‘happy, country, hippy town’.56 Some people fondly recalled that, as children, they happily spent time together after school and on weekends.57 They remembered how children rode their bikes around and played in the street until the sun set.58

Schools in Beaumaris and its surrounding areas were described as ‘sporty’, and many children in the area built their lives around sport.59 They participated in a range of sports, including football, athletics, tennis, netball and cricket, and recalled that their teams experienced great success in local competitions.60 Children were involved in sports both through their schools, and in connection with other clubs and organisations, such as the St Kilda Little League.61

Reflections on the Beaumaris area in this period paint a vivid picture of a life enjoyed outdoors, with strong bonds forged through the school and local sporting clubs. For a number of victim-survivors who shared their stories with the Board of Inquiry, this was the backdrop against which their experience of child sexual abuse occurred. The grief associated with their experiences remains strongly felt by many current and former residents. Some of these experiences are described in Chapter 7, Experiences of sexual abuse and its impact in childhood(opens in a new window).

Social norms affecting children’s rights and safety

Communities are not only defined by the laws that govern them — they are also shaped by common social norms, values and practices that emerge from day-to-day life. The Board of Inquiry has considered how these influences affected understanding and awareness of child sexual abuse in Australia, especially during the 1960s and 1970s. This particularly relates to how historical child sexual abuse was:

  • influenced by dominant family structures, gender roles and attitudes towards sexuality
  • considered in the context of attitudes and expectations around children and how they should be disciplined
  • viewed and understood, namely through the lenses of cultural taboos and secrecy.62

As explained by Professor Leah Bromfield, Director of the Australian Centre for Child Protection and Chair of Child Protection, University of South Australia, social and cultural factors in the 1960s and 1970s underpinned child sexual abuse being ‘invisible’, children not being heard or believed, and perpetrators being able to ‘act with impunity’.63 Appreciating these broader norms, values and practices assists in understanding the experiences of victim-survivors and the perpetuation of child sexual abuse at that time.

Gender norms and traditional ‘family values’

Despite the progressive movements that emerged globally in the 1960s and 1970s, traditional norms and values persisted in Australia during this period — particularly when it came to family life.

Australian society, heavily influenced by Christianity, idealised the nuclear family.64 Gender roles were traditionally defined, with men typically regarded as the ‘breadwinners’ and women as the ‘homemakers’.65 Men held a higher status in society than women and children, and were viewed as the ‘head of the household’.66

In this context, children’s social standing was at the bottom of the hierarchy — behind women. A child’s role was to be obedient and their needs were secondary to those of the family.67 This created a power imbalance, which contributed to children being fearful of speaking up about sexual abuse.68 If a child did disclose sexual abuse, they were often not believed.69

This power imbalance also reinforced children’s deference to adults. Professor Daryl Higgins, Director, Institute of Child Protection Studies, Australian Catholic University, gave evidence to the Board of Inquiry that such an imbalance related to a patriarchal family structure, where:

  • children were ‘to be seen but not heard’
  • fathers were the ‘head of the household’
  • a child’s role was to be an obedient agent for the adults surrounding them
  • children’s needs were secondary to the broader functioning of the family.70

In the 1960s, social and cultural movements started questioning traditional notions of family, sexuality and gender roles.71 The traditional ‘home and family values’ of the 1950s began to be challenged, and this continued into the 1970s.72 The feminist and sexual liberation movements of the 1960s and 1970s also sought to challenge traditional societal distinctions between public and private spheres of life. Feminists called for a fundamental refiguration of social relations between both women and men, and adults and children.73 Second-wave feminists demanded that their calls for autonomy and liberation be extended to children.74 Feminist groups pushed governments to take action on matters related to sexual violence, which had flow-on effects for how society responded to child sexual abuse.75

It was in the 1970s that child sexual abuse became more widely acknowledged in mainstream public discussions.76 Society started to view sexual abuse as a public health problem that could cause trauma and harm to children.77 Understandings of sexual abuse in this period often focused on women’s ‘experiences of violence as children, as well as the experiences of children at the time’.78 Feminists and child protection advocates tried to understand the sexual abuse of girls and to establish why it was absent from public discourse.79 As part of this process, the movement identified the sexual abuse of (most often female) children as a way in which men exerted social control in the private sphere.80 Consequently, while unintended, limited attention was given to the sexual abuse of boys.81

Society was also very homophobic in the 1960s and 1970s,82 and homosexuality was highly stigmatised.83 It was not until the mid-1970s that Australian states and territories started decriminalising private homosexual acts between two consenting males.84 In Victoria, homosexual acts between males of all ages — regardless of whether such acts were consensual — remained an offence until the early 1980s.85 Prior to this point, in the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), the offence was known as ‘buggery’.86 Given the cultural silences surrounding child sexual abuse coupled with the homophobic attitudes of the time, Australian society was hesitant to address the implications of child sexual abuse perpetrated on boys.87

Professor Higgins, in his expert witness statement as part of the Board of Inquiry’s work, explained that the shame and stigma surrounding homosexuality made it particularly challenging for victim-survivors of child sexual abuse to speak up or be believed if they were sexually abused by a person of the same gender.88 Professor Bromfield gave evidence to the Board of Inquiry that because of attitudes towards homosexuality, boys may have understood that ‘what had been done to them was considered to be abhorrent’, which significantly affected the sense of identity, shame and silencing that many male victim-survivors have and continue to experience.89

Societal stigmas towards homosexuality and child sexual abuse meant that some men had a ‘reasonable fear’ that if they were sexually abused by a male they would be viewed as homosexual or as ‘less of a man for letting that happen to them’.90 Many boys feared ‘the perception that they would be tainted by what had been done to them’ if they disclosed their experiences of sexual abuse.91 A victim-survivor told the Board of Inquiry that being viewed as ‘gay’ by your peers, or admitting to any form of male-to-male sexual activity, would have been ‘absolute ruination’ for a boy at the time.92 Another victim-survivor, who identifies as LGBTIQA+, recalled being called ‘gay boy’ by their peers at school.93

It was not until subsequent decades in the twentieth century that the values, ideas and counterculture of second-wave feminism had a greater social and cultural influence.94 In the 1960s and 1970s, Australians principally adhered to traditional ‘family values’. Professor Bromfield explained:

Now when we look back on the ’70s, we tend to look back on that as though that [counterculture] was a big feature, but throughout the 1970s, the dominant feature of society was still that ideal around traditional family life and gender roles.95

Reticence to discuss sex, sexuality and sexual abuse

Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, families did not usually have open conversations about sex, let alone conversations related to sexual violence.96 Professor Bromfield gave evidence to the Board of Inquiry that child sexual abuse was not ‘something that was talked about at all in Australian families’.97

We’ve been reticent to talk about sex in this country. We’ve been … reticent to talk about child sexual abuse. That has impacted the safety of our children.98

Professor Higgins noted that it was widely felt in the community in the 1960s and 1970s that sex and sexuality should not be openly discussed.99 Adults were hesitant to talk about sex and sexuality, and used vague terms such as ‘immorality’ and ‘interference’ to talk about sexual abuse.100 Dr Katie Wright, Associate Professor, Department of Social Inquiry, La Trobe University, suggested that it was likely that children would have picked up on adults’ hesitancy to discuss sex and recognised that there was a ‘taboo around sexuality in general’.101

Adults rarely taught children about concepts of consent, bodily autonomy and safety.102 One victim-survivor explained that ‘[i]n those days you never spoke to your parents about these things’.103 Another victim-survivor commented that his parents were ‘pretty hopeless’ at discussing sex at home.104

Normalisation of violence against children

In the 1960s and 1970s in Australia, physical disciplining of children was commonly accepted as ‘normal’.105 Social attitudes that positioned children as in need of direction and control often underpinned the use of corporal punishment.106 It was generally understood in society that leaders of institutions had absolute authority, which children were expected to respect.107 Teachers often used corporal punishment to discipline and control children in schools.108

Teachers were allowed to physically discipline children in ways that would now be recognised as physical abuse.109 This is important, as recent evidence suggests that harsh treatment of children that may amount to physical and psychological abuse can increase the risks of sexual abuse, and often co-occur.110 Professor Bromfield gave evidence that the use of physical discipline was an example of ‘the absolute authority of adults over children’, noting that some children accepted it as ‘normal’ and did not complain to their parents about teachers’ use of corporal punishment because ‘they expected it’.111

Some victim-survivors explained how teachers used corporal punishment to discipline students in government schools during this period. One victim-survivor told the Board of Inquiry that teachers regularly caned students across their wrists and hands.112 Teachers expected children to do as they were told, and if students were ‘out of line’, they would get ‘belted’, caned, strapped or given detention.113

The Board of Inquiry was told that some teachers were physically violent towards students at Beaumaris Primary School. In particular, the Board of Inquiry was told that Wyatt would often shove and kick students.114 A victim-survivor from another government school within the scope of the inquiry described being regularly strapped by their teachers.115

Limited awareness of child safety risks posed by institutions and people in authority

Professor Patrick O’Leary, Co-Lead, Disrupting Violence Beacon and Director of the Violence Research and Prevention Program, Griffith University, gave evidence that the position of adults within children’s lives was ‘much less questioned’ by Australian society in the 1960s and 1970s than it is today.116 People placed a great deal of trust in both institutions and individuals in positions of authority,117 and children were expected to ‘respect their elders’.118

Evidence before the Board of Inquiry demonstrates that in the 1960s and 1970s in Australia, there was a lack of awareness of the risk of children being sexually abused.119 For example, there was limited public discussion of child sexual abuse and limited understandings of what is now known as grooming (refer to Chapter 12, Grooming and disclosure(opens in a new window)).120

In particular, schools were not viewed as places where students faced a risk of child sexual abuse.121 As explored in Chapter 5, Children’s rights and safety in context(opens in a new window), schools were ‘not alive’ to the risk of child sexual abuse and there were no policies in place to manage allegations.122

One victim-survivor explained that their family did not know much about child protection or safety.123 Another individual told the Board of Inquiry that there weren’t ‘sufficient guardrails to ensure [children’s] safety and the prevention of exploitation and abuse’.124 People generally did not raise any objection when adults spent time alone with children, and ‘no one questioned or considered any risk of a teacher being alone with a child one-on-one’.125 If a teacher asked a student to stay behind after school hours, no one queried the authority of the institution or the teacher’s right to make that request.126

At a structural level, government policy settings applicable to schools rarely commented on child safety. Dr David Howes PSM, Deputy Secretary, Schools and Regional Services, Department of Education, gave evidence to the Board of Inquiry that even in the mid-1980s the Department had no policies or procedures in place to prevent an authority figure in a school, such as a principal, from spending unsupervised time alone with children.127 Analysis of the Department’s child safety policies and procedures, and the effectiveness of its response to historical child sexual abuse, is in Part C(opens in a new window).

Victim-blaming attitudes

Expert evidence given to the Board of Inquiry demonstrated that when child sexual abuse was discussed, social attitudes often vilified victims. Broader cultural beliefs positioned children as having been complicit in their own sexual abuse.128 They were frequently blamed for having made up stories that unfairly targeted the perpetrator.129

Cultural attitudes often characterised victim-survivors as ‘seductive’.130 By focusing on the behaviours of children, society deflected responsibility for the sexual abuse away from the perpetrator and denied the harm that children had experienced from the sexual abuse.131 Professor Lisa Featherstone, Head of School, School of Historical and Philosophical Inquiry, University of Queensland, provided evidence to the Board of Inquiry that at the time, some health professionals, such as doctors, psychologists and psychiatrists, described children as having encouraged the abuse in some way.132

It was not until the 1990s that the idea of children being complicit in their experiences of child sexual abuse slowly started unravelling.133

Some key moments in the 1980s and 1990s

Under the Terms of Reference, the Board of Inquiry was directed to inquire into historical child sexual abuse that took place between 1960 and 1999. While most of the individuals who engaged with the Board of Inquiry shared experiences of child sexual abuse in the 1960s and 1970s, the inquiry did receive information related to the 1980s and 1990s. This section provides a brief overview of several key moments in society during this time.

The 1980s have been described by some academics as a transformative decade.134 Technology altered everyday life, the AIDS epidemic affected communities, and new social movements sought to address concerns about the environment and the threat of nuclear war.135 The return to a conservative government in the United States of America was considered by some historians as a backlash to the reforms of the 1960s and 1970s.136

In Australia, from 1983 to 1991, Bob Hawke was the Prime Minister and leader of the Australian Labor Party. In 1991, Paul Keating, former Treasurer in the Hawke Government, won a leadership challenge and became Prime Minister. This was the first time a leadership challenge within a party resulted in a change in prime minister. From 1996 to 2007, the Coalition Government was in power, with John Howard as the Prime Minister.

In 1984, the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) was introduced in Australia — making it unlawful to discriminate against a person on the grounds of sex, marital status or pregnancy; to eliminate sexual harassment; and to promote ‘the equality of men and women’.137

In 1987, Prime Minister Hawke committed that ‘by 1990 no Australian child will be living in poverty’.138 This statement was a clear signal that child poverty was not acceptable and that government considered it a priority to end child poverty.

In 1989, the Cold War ended with the fall of communism in Eastern Europe and the collapse of the Berlin Wall.139 In the post-Cold War period during the 1990s, capitalism spread and globalisation accelerated — better connecting people across the globe and deconstructing formerly rigid national boundaries.140

In 1992, in the case of Mabo v Queensland [No 2], the High Court of Australia upheld the claim that lands of this continent were not ‘terra nullius’ (that is, land belonging to no-one) when European colonisation occurred.141 In 1993, the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) was passed.142 It sought to achieve recognition and protection of native title for First Nations peoples and to establish mechanisms to determine future claims of native title.143

As described in Chapter 5(opens in a new window), this period also saw a change in the way society understood children’s rights and safety. The Victorian Government took over responsibility for the Children’s Protection Society, Australia ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, and homosexual acts were decriminalised in Victoria.144 These factors began to slowly reshape the attitudes and norms that affected how child sexual abuse was understood during the 1980s and 1990s.

Chapter 6 Endnotes

  1. This is based on Bronfenbrenner’s ‘ecological systems theory’ that recognises that children develop within a broad culture, with multiple and interacting variables: Emily Martinello, ‘Applying the Ecological Systems Theory to Better Understand and Prevent Child Sexual Abuse’ (2020) 24(1) Sexuality & Culture 326, 327–8.
  2. Emily Martinello, ‘Applying the Ecological Systems Theory to Better Understand and Prevent Child Sexual Abuse’ (2020) 24(1) Sexuality & Culture 326, 327–8.
  3. Emily Martinello, ‘Applying the Ecological Systems Theory to Better Understand and Prevent Child Sexual Abuse’ (2020) 24(1) Sexuality & Culture 326, 327–8.
  4. Emily Martinello, ‘Applying the Ecological Systems Theory to Better Understand and Prevent Child Sexual Abuse’ (2020) 24(1) Sexuality & Culture 326, 327–8.
  5. Transcript of Katie Wright, 24 October 2023, P-37 [44]–[45]; Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 4 [14].
  6. Tamara Chaplin and Jadwiga E Pieper Mooney, ‘Introduction’ in Tamara Chaplin and Jadwiga E Pieper Mooney (eds), The Global 1960s: Convention, Contest and Counterculture (Routledge, 2018) 1, 1.
  7. Christopher W Schmidt, Civil Rights in America: A History (Cambridge University Press, 2021) 135; Duco Hellema, The Global 1970s: Radicalism, Reform and Crisis (Routledge, 2019) 21.
  8. Duco Hellema, The Global 1970s: Radicalism, Reform and Crisis (Routledge, 2019) 23.
  9. Duco Hellema, The Global 1970s: Radicalism, Reform and Crisis (Routledge, 2019) 24.
  10. Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability, Agents of Our Own Destiny: Activism and the Road to the Disability Royal Commission (Research Report, November 2021) 4.
  11. June Edmunds and Bryan S Turner, ‘Global Generations: Social Change in the Twentieth Century’ (2005) 56(4) British Journal of Sociology 559, 567.
  12. Ilze Aizsilniece et al, ‘WMA Members Share Reflections about Earth Day 2023’ (2023) 69(1) World Medical Journal 32, 32; Thomas T Lewis, Salem Press Encyclopedia, vol 2, Earth Day [1].
  13. June Edmunds and Bryan S Turner, ‘Global Generations: Social Change in the Twentieth Century’ (2005) 56(4) British Journal of Sociology 559, 559, 564–5.
  14. June Edmunds and Bryan S Turner, ‘Global Generations: Social Change in the Twentieth Century’ (2005) 56(4) British Journal of Sociology 559, 566.
  15. June Edmunds and Bryan S Turner, ‘Global Generations: Social Change in the Twentieth Century’ (2005) 56(4) British Journal of Sociology 559, 565.
  16. Tamara Chaplin and Jadwiga E Pieper Mooney, ‘Introduction’ in Tamara Chaplin and Jadwiga E Pieper Mooney (eds), The Global 1960s: Convention, Contest and Counterculture (Routledge, 2018) 1, 3–4.
  17. June Edmunds and S Bryan Turner, ‘Global Generations: Social Change in the Twentieth Century’ (2005) 56(4) British Journal of Sociology 559, 567.
  18. Duco Hellema, The Global 1970s: Radicalism, Reform and Crisis (Routledge, 2019) x.
  19. Tamara Chaplin and Jadwiga E Pieper Mooney, ‘Introduction’ in Tamara Chaplin and Jadwiga E Pieper Mooney (eds), The Global 1960s: Convention, Contest and Counterculture (Routledge, 2018) 1, 3–4; Lynn Weber, ‘A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Race, Class, Gender and Sexuality’ (1889) 22(1) Psychology of Women Quarterly 13, 13.
  20. ‘Robert Menzies’, National Archives of Australia (Web Page) <https://www.naa.gov.au/explore-collection/australias-prime-ministers/robert-menzies>(opens in a new window).
  21. ‘Robert Menzies’, National Archives of Australia (Web Page) <https://www.naa.gov.au/explore-collection/australias-prime-ministers/robert-menzies>(opens in a new window); Jon Piccini, ‘Australia, the Long 1960s, and the Winds of Change in the Asia-Pacific’ in Chen Jian et al (eds), The Routledge Handbook of the Global Sixties: Between Protest and Nation-Building (Routledge, 2018) 119, 120.
  22. Anne Pender, ‘The Mythical Australian: Barry Humphries, Gough Whitlam and “New Nationalism”’ (2004) 51(1) Australian Journal of Politics and History 67, 69; Stuart Ward, ‘Sentiment and Self-Interest: The Imperial Ideal in Anglo-Australian Commercial Culture’ (2001) 32(116) Australian Historical Studies 91, 91–92.
  23. Jon Piccini, ‘Australia, the Long 1960s, and the Winds of Change in the Asia-Pacific’ in Chen Jian et al (eds), The Routledge Handbook of the Global Sixties: Between Protest and Nation-Building (Routledge, 2018) 119, 120.
  24. ‘Victoria through the Decades’, State Library of Victoria (Web Page) <https://www.slv.vic.gov.au/stories/victoria-through-decades>(opens in a new window).
  25. Isobelle Barrett Meyering, Feminism and the Making of a Child Rights Revolution: 1969–1979 (Melbourne University Publishing, 2022) 13.
  26. ‘Victoria through the Decades’, State Library of Victoria (Web Page) <https://www.slv.vic.gov.au/stories/victoria-through-decades>(opens in a new window).
  27. ‘The 1967 Referendum’, Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (Web Page, 4 November 2021) <https://aiatsis.gov.au/explore/1967-referendum>(opens in a new window).
  28. Tamara Chaplin and Jadwiga E Pieper Mooney, ‘Introduction’ in Tamara Chaplin and Jadwiga E Pieper Mooney (eds), The Global 1960s: Convention, Contest and Counterculture (Routledge, 2018) 1, 4.
  29. ‘1955 – Present: Stability’, Victorian Electoral Commission (Web Page) <https://www.vec.vic.gov.au/voting/learn-to-vote/history-of-elections-in-victoria/stability>(opens in a new window).
  30. ‘1955 – Present: Stability’, Victorian Electoral Commission (Web Page) <https://www.vec.vic.gov.au/voting/learn-to-vote/history-of-elections-in-victoria/stability>(opens in a new window).
  31. Seamus O’Hanlon, ‘New People, New Ideas and New Attitudes: Melbourne’s Long Sixties’ (2019) Victorian Historical Journal 19, 23.
  32. Michelle Arrow and Angela Woollacott, ‘Revolutionising the Everyday: The Transformative Impact of the Sexual and Feminist Movements on Australian Society and Culture’ in Michelle Arrow and Angela Woollacott (eds), Everyday Revolutions: Remaking Gender, Sexuality and Culture in 1970s Australia (ANU Press, 2019) 1, 5.
  33. Michelle Arrow and Angela Woollacott, ‘Revolutionising the Everyday: The Transformative Impact of the Sexual and Feminist Movements on Australian Society and Culture’ in Michelle Arrow and Angela Woollacott (eds), Everyday Revolutions: Remaking Gender, Sexuality and Culture in 1970s Australia (ANU Press, 2019) 1, 3.
  34. ‘About Us — Our History’, Centre Against Sexual Assault, Central Victoria (Web Page) <https://casacv.org.au/about-us>(opens in a new window).
  35. Kathy Lothian, ‘Moving Blackwards: Black Power and the Aboriginal Embassy’ in Ingereth Macfarlane and Mark Hannah (eds), Transgressions: Critical Australian Indigenous Histories (ANU E Press and Aboriginal History, 2007) 19, 19; ‘A Short History of the Aboriginal Tent Embassy’, Reconciliation Australia (Web Page, 30 May 2022) <https://www.reconciliation.org.au/a-short-history-of-the-aboriginal-tent-embassy>.(opens in a new window)
  36. Seamus O’Hanlon, ‘New People, New Ideas and New Attitudes: Melbourne’s Long Sixties’ (2019) 90(1) Victorian Historical Journal 19, 27.
  37. Jack Doig, ‘New Nationalism in Australia and New Zealand: The Construction of National Identities by Two Labo(u)r Governments in the Early 1970s’ (2013) 59(4) Australian Journal of Politics and History 559, 559.
  38. Seamus O’Hanlon, ‘New People, New Ideas and New Attitudes: Melbourne’s Long Sixties’ (2019) 90(1) Victorian Historical Journal 19, 24.
  39. Seamus O’Hanlon, ‘New People, New Ideas and New Attitudes: Melbourne’s Long Sixties’ (2019) 90(1) Victorian Historical Journal 19, 24.
  40. Seamus O’Hanlon, ‘New People, New Ideas and New Attitudes: Melbourne’s Long Sixties’ (2019) 90(1) Victorian Historical Journal 19, 25.
  41. Seamus O’Hanlon, ‘New People, New Ideas and New Attitudes: Melbourne’s Long Sixties’ (2019) 90(1) Victorian Historical Journal 19, 26.
  42. Philip Goad, ‘Foreword’ in Fiona Austin and Simon Reeves, Beaumaris Modern 2: Modernist Homes in Beaumaris (Melbourne Books, 2022) 8.
  43. Philip Goad, ‘Foreword’ in Fiona Austin and Simon Reeves, Beaumaris Modern: Modernist Homes in Beaumaris (Melbourne Books, 2018) 8.
  44. ‘A Taste of History’, Australian Jewish News (Melbourne, 14 July 1995) 29, citing Graeme Disney and Valerie Tarrant, Bayside Reflections: History and Heritage of Sandringham, Hampton, Black Rock and Beaumaris (City of Sandringham, 1988).
  45. ‘Storm in the Tea-Tree’, The Age (Melbourne, 19 May 1958) 8.
  46. Ray Davie, ‘Gipsy Village to Status Area’, The Age (Melbourne, 13 May 1967) 41.
  47. Phillip Goad, ‘Foreword’ in Fiona Austin and Simon Reeves, Beaumaris Modern: Modernist Homes in Beaumaris (Melbourne Books, 2018) 8–9.
  48. Phillip Goad, ‘Foreword’ in Fiona Austin and Simon Reeves, Beaumaris Modern: Modernist Homes in Beaumaris (Melbourne Books, 2018) 8.
  49. Private session 17.
  50. ‘Detailed History of the School 1915–1982’, Beaumaris Primary School (Web Page) <https://www.beaups.vic.edu.au/page/125/History>.(opens in a new window)
  51. ‘Detailed History of the School 1915–1982’, Beaumaris Primary School (Web Page) <https://www.beaups.vic.edu.au/page/125/History>.(opens in a new window)
  52. Australian Bureau of Statistics, Census of Population and Housing, 30 June 1966 (Catalogue No 2106.0, December 1969) vol 4 pt 2, 70–1, 124–25, 204–5; Australian Bureau of Statistics, Census of Population and Housing 30 June 1971 (Catalogue No 2105.0, May 1973) bulletin 7 pt 2, 139. Note that Australian citizens were British subjects until 1984: National Archives of Australia, Citizenship in Australia (Fact Sheet No 187) 1.
  53. Private session 23.
  54. Private session 6; Private session 11.
  55. Private session 13.
  56. Private session 13.
  57. Private session 6; Private session 13.
  58. Private session 6; Private session 13.
  59. Private session 11.
  60. Private session 6; Private session 23.
  61. Private session 2; Private session 23.
  62. Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 3 [10(c)].
  63. Transcript of Leah Bromfield, 24 October 2023, P-54 [25]–[27]; Statement of Leah Bromfield, 23 October 2023, 4 [15].
  64. Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 4 [14]; Transcript of Katie Wright, 24 October 2023, P-37 [41]; Transcript of Leah Bromfield, 24 October 2023, P-54 [30]–[35]; Antonia Quadara, Framework for Historical Influences on Institutional Child Sexual Abuse: 1950–2014 (Report, December 2017) 19.
  65. Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 4 [14]; Transcript of Katie Wright, 24 October 2023, P-37 [42]–[43].
  66. Transcript of Leah Bromfield, 24 October 2023, P-54 [33]–[35]; Statement of Daryl Higgins, 28 November 2023, 2 [10(b)].
  67. Statement of Daryl Higgins, 28 November 2023, 2 [10(c)–(d)].
  68. Statement of Daryl Higgins, 28 November 2023, 5 [27]–[29].
  69. Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 4 [15]–[17].
  70. Statement of Daryl Higgins, 28 November 2023, 2 [10].
  71. Transcript of Katie Wright, 24 October 2023, P-38 [1]–[5]; Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 4–5 [17].
  72. Transcript of Katie Wright, 24 October 2023, P-38 [9]; Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 4 [14].
  73. Isobelle Barrett Meyering, Feminism and the Making of a Child Rights Revolution: 1969–1979 (Melbourne University Publishing, 2022) 10.
  74. Isobelle Barrett Meyering, Feminism and the Making of a Child Rights Revolution: 1969–1979 (Melbourne University Publishing, 2022) 10, 16.
  75. Statement of Lisa Featherstone, 5 December 2023, 4 [21].
  76. Lisa Featherstone, Sexual Violence in Australia, 1970s–1980s: Rape and Child Sexual Abuse (Palgrave Macmillan, 2021) 126.
  77. Statement of Michael Salter, 27 November 2023, 2 [7].
  78. Transcript of Katie Wright, 24 October 2023, P-39 [16]–[17]; Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 6 [24].
  79. Yorick Smaal, ‘Historical Perspectives on Child Sexual Abuse, Part 1’ (2013) 11(9) History Compass 702, 704.
  80. Yorick Smaal, ‘Historical Perspectives on Child Sexual Abuse, Part 1’ (2013) 11(9) History Compass 702, 704.
  81. Transcript of Katie Wright, 24 October 2023, P-45 [43]–[44]; Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 6 [25].
  82. Statement of Patrick O’Leary, 15 November 2023, 4 [28].
  83. Transcript of Katie Wright, 24 October 2023, P-46 [22]–[23]; Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 6 [26].
  84. Hayley Boxall, Adam M Tomison and Shann Hulme, Historical Review of Sexual Offence and Child Sexual Abuse Legislation in Australia: 1788–2013 (Report, 1 September 2014) 20; Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, Criminal Justice Report (Report, 14 August 2017) pts III–VI, 5.
  85. Crimes (Sexual Offences) Act 1980 (Vic); Hayley Boxall, Adam M Tomison and Shann Hulme, Historical Review of Sexual Offence and Child Sexual Abuse Legislation in Australia: 1788–2013 (Report, 1 September 2014) 81.
  86. Hayley Boxall, Adam M Tomison and Shann Hulme, Historical Review of Sexual Offence and Child Sexual Abuse Legislation in Australia: 1788–2013 (Report, 1 September 2014) 81. The term ‘buggery’ was derived from the Buggery Act 1533 (UK), 25 Hen 8, which criminalised sexual intercourse between men. As a result of this derivation, anti-homosexual laws tended to stay silent regarding women.
  87. Transcript of Katie Wright, 24 October 2023, P-46 [23]–[25]; Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 6 [26].
  88. Statement of Daryl Higgins, 28 November 2023, 4 [24].
  89. Transcript of Leah Bromfield, 24 October 2023, P-60 [36]–[39]; Statement of Leah Bromfield, 23 October 2023, 13 [68(a)]. See also Statement of Daryl Higgins, 28 November 2023, 4 [24].
  90. Transcript of Leah Bromfield, 24 October 2023, P-69 [29]–[31]; Statement of Leah Bromfield, 23 October 2023, 13 [68].
  91. Statement of Michael Salter, 27 November 2023, 2 [8].
  92. Private session 7.
  93. Private session 16.
  94. Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 8 [33]; Antonia Quadara, Framework for Historical Influences on Institutional Child Sexual Abuse: 1950–2014 (Report, December 2017) 14.
  95. Transcript of Leah Bromfield, 24 October 2023, P-54 [42]–[45].
  96. Transcript of Katie Wright, 24 October 2023, P-42 [11]–[26]; Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 4–5 [17].
  97. Transcript of Leah Bromfield, 24 October 2023, P-56 [44]–[45].
  98. Transcript of Leah Bromfield, 24 October 2023, P-57 [10]–[12].
  99. Statement of Daryl Higgins, 28 November 2023, 3 [17].
  100. Transcript of Leah Bromfield, 24 October 2023, P-56 [47]; Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 6 [23].
  101. Transcript of Katie Wright, 24 October 2023, P-42 [24]–[26]; Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 4–5 [17].
  102. Transcript of Leah Bromfield, 24 October 2023, P-57 [5]; Transcript of Katie Wright, 24 October 2023, P-42 [26]–[28]; Kerry Robinson and Cristyn Davies, ‘Docile Bodies and Heteronormative Moral Subjects: Constructing the Child and Sexual Knowledge in Schooling’ (2008) 12(4) Sexuality & Culture, 221, 222.
  103. Submission 2, 1.
  104. Private session 7.
  105. Transcript of Leah Bromfield, 24 October 2023, P-55 [17]; Statement of Michael Salter, 27 November 2023, 5 [18].
  106. Australian Law Reform Commission, Seen and Heard: Priority for Children in the Legal Process (Report No 84, 19 November 1997) [3.3].
  107. Statement of Leah Bromfield, 23 October 2023, 4 [15]; Transcript of Leah Bromfield, 24 October 2023, P-55 [10]–[13]; Statement of Michael Salter, 27 November 2023, 6 [22].
  108. Statement of Leah Bromfield, 23 October 2023, 4 [15]; Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 9 [41].
  109. Transcript of Leah Bromfield, 24 October 2023, P-55 [14]–[17]; Angela Bartman, ‘Spare the Rod and Spoil the Child? Corporal Punishment in Schools Around the World’ (2002) 13(1) Indiana International & Comparative Law Review 283, 288.
  110. Donald Palmer, Valerie Feldman and Gemma McKibbin, The Role of Organisational Culture in Child Sexual Abuse in Institutional Contexts (Final Report, December 2016) 41.
  111. Transcript of Leah Bromfield, 24 October 2023, P-55 [15]–[19]; Statement of Leah Bromfield, 23 October 2023, 4 [15].
  112. Private session 23.
  113. Private session 2.
  114. Private session 15; The name ‘Wyatt’ is a pseudonym, Order of the Board of Inquiry, Restricted Publication Order, 15 November 2023.
  115. Private session 22.
  116. Transcript of Patrick O’Leary, 16 November 2023, P-196 [45]–[47].
  117. Statement of Leah Bromfield, 23 October 2023, 3 [14].
  118. Transcript of Leah Bromfield, 24 October 2023, P-55 [11]; Statement of Leah Bromfield, 23 October 2023, 4 [15].
  119. Statement of Lisa Featherstone, 5 December 2023, 3 [17].
  120. Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 5 [21].
  121. Statement of Lisa Featherstone, 5 December 2023, 7 [37].
  122. Statement of Michael Salter, 27 November 2023, 7 [23]; Statement of Daryl Higgins, 28 November 2023, 3 [18].
  123. Private session 14.
  124. Submission 45, 4.
  125. Transcript of Leah Bromfield, 24 October 2023, P-67 [6]–[7], [11]–[12]; Statement of Daryl Higgins, 28 November 2023, 3–4 [18]–[19].
  126. Transcript of Leah Bromfield, 24 October 2023, P-67 [9]–[11].
  127. Transcript of David Howes, 15 November 2023, P-148 [4]–[17].
  128. Statement of Lisa Featherstone, 5 December 2023, 3 [16]–[17].
  129. Statement of Daryl Higgins, 28 November 2023, 7 [38].
  130. Jo Lovett, Maddy Coy and Liz Kelly, Deflection, Denial and Disbelief: Social and Political Discourses about Child Sexual Abuse and Their Influence on Institutional Responses (Rapid Evidence Assessment, February 2018) 10.
  131. Jo Lovett, Maddy Coy and Liz Kelly, Deflection, Denial and Disbelief: Social and Political Discourses about Child Sexual Abuse and Their Influence on Institutional Responses (Rapid Evidence Assessment, February 2018) 10.
  132. Statement of Lisa Featherstone, 5 December 2023, 5 [24].
  133. Statement of Lisa Featherstone, 5 December 2023, 5 [23].
  134. Jonathan Davis, The Global 1980s: People, Power and Profit (Routledge, 2019) 1.
  135. Jonathan Davis, The Global 1980s: People, Power and Profit (Routledge, 2019) 1.
  136. Nina Esperanza Serrianne, America in the Nineties (Syracuse University Press, 2015) 1.
  137. Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) s 3, as enacted.
  138. Bob Hawke, ‘Election Speech’ (Speech, Sydney, 23 June 1987) <https://electionspeeches.moadoph.gov.au/speeches/1987-bob-hawke>(opens in a new window).
  139. Nina Esperanza Serrianne, America in the Nineties (Syracuse University Press, 2015) 1.
  140. Simon Marginson, ‘Globalization in Higher Education: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly’ in Fazal Rizvi, Bob Lingard and Risto Rinne (eds), Reimagining Globalization and Education (Routledge, 2022) 11, 14. See generally W Joseph Campbell, 1995: The Year the Future Began (University of California Press, 2015) 1–20.
  141. Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1.
  142. ‘About Native Title’, Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (Web Page, 2 November 2022) <https://aiatsis.gov.au/about-native-title>.(opens in a new window)
  143. ‘About Native Title’, Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (Web Page, 2 November 2022) <https://aiatsis.gov.au/about-native-title>.(opens in a new window)
  144. Statement of Leah Bromfield, 23 October 2023, 6 [26]; Statement of Katie Wright, 23 October 2023, 5 [19]; Crimes (Sexual Offences) Act 1980 (Vic); Hayley Boxall, Adam M Tomison and Shann Hulme, Historical Review of Sexual Offence and Child Sexual Abuse Legislation in Australia: 1788–2013 (Report, 1 September 2014) 81.

Updated