Female teachers from Scots College make explosive claims about students’ ‘sexualised gestures’, deepfakes and wolf-whistles in wake of gang rape charges
Two female teachers at Sydney's Scots College have alleged a culture of sexism and sexualised behaviour among students, including wolf-whistling, sexualised gestures and deepfakes, in the wake of rape charges against three former pupils. The claims, made anonymously to The Saturday Telegraph, come as the elite school faces intense scrutiny over its culture following the arrest of three teenage boys accused of sexually assaulting a girl in an alleyway in Bondi Junction last month.
One teacher, still employed at the school, said staff and students had been targeted with sexualised deepfakes and described overhearing boys in Years 7 to 9 rating female teachers' and pupils' appearances and using derogatory language. A second, former teacher said male students dismissed female staff as "dramatic" for giving the same instructions male colleagues gave without pushback, and that complaints were reportedly brushed off by leadership as "harmless banter". Principal Dr Ian Lambert and chairman Glen Pather wrote to parents on 18 August stating sexual violence is "never acceptable" and confirming staff had spoken to all students in Year Five and above; the three accused boys, aged 13 and 14, face charges including aggravated sexual assault in company and are due before a children's court on 25 August.
- Scots College teachers allege sexism, deepfakes, wolf-whistling by students
- Follows rape charges against three teen boys over Bondi Junction assault
- School says it has spoken to all students, accused due in court 25 August
New here? Start with this
Female teachers at Scots College, an all-boys school in Sydney, have come forward with allegations about pupils' behaviour towards women, including sexualised gestures, wolf-whistling and the circulation of deepfake images. Deepfakes are digitally altered images or videos made to look real, often using someone's likeness without consent.
The claims have surfaced shortly after separate gang rape charges were laid involving students connected to the school, which has put fresh scrutiny on how the school culture treats women and handles complaints of misogyny and sexual misconduct. It is not yet clear how many staff are affected or what the school has said in response.
It is worth noting that the rape charges are allegations that will be tested through the criminal justice system, and the teachers' claims about wider behaviour are separate matters still being reported on.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Advocates for taking the teachers' allegations seriously argue that schools have a duty of care to staff and students alike, and that behaviours such as sexualised gestures, wolf-whistling and circulating deepfake images should never be dismissed as harmless adolescent horseplay, particularly when they emerge alongside serious criminal charges. On this view, staff who raise concerns are acting responsibly by flagging a pattern that may reflect a wider culture of disrespect towards women, and swift, transparent action is needed to protect those affected and to signal that such conduct carries real consequences. They would say that waiting for a criminal conviction before addressing a toxic culture risks leaving staff unsupported and other students at continued risk in the meantime.
The case against
Those urging caution argue that these are as yet unproven allegations, and that conflating separate incidents with the ongoing criminal case risks unfairly tarring an entire school community, including students who have done nothing wrong, before any due process has run its course. They would emphasise that reputations, of both the school and individual pupils, can be seriously and permanently damaged by allegations aired publicly ahead of investigation, and that responsible reporting and institutional response should distinguish clearly between substantiated misconduct, disputed claims, and matters properly reserved for the courts. On this view, proportionate, fact-checked handling protects fairness for the accused without in any way excusing genuine wrongdoing where it is established.