David Lisak - Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence on the College Campus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iZCWfYZ9IU
I found this to be a thought provoking lecture on male sex offenders and their patterns of behaviour, especially in large organisations like the military or educational institutions.

David Lisak, PhD.

David Lisak is a nationally recognized forensic consultant, trainer and lecturer.

His research and applied forensic work on non-stranger rapists has helped guide rape prevention and response policies in major institutions, including the U.S. Armed Services and numerous colleges and universities.

His research on male survivors of childhood sexual abuse has helped focus public attention and spur new initiatives. He is a founding board member of 1in6, a national non-profit devoted to helping men who were sexually abused as children.

Dr. Lisak has conducted workshops and trainings in all 50 states, in Canada, and overseas. He also serves as an expert witness in both criminal and civil cases, and has testified in state and federal courts across the country.

Himself a survivor of childhood sexual abuse, Dr. Lisak was one of three men profiled in the documentary, Boys and Men Healing.

I assume the situation in Australia is similar to the USA, I found this link to "Why college rape victims don’t go to the police"

http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america-tonight/articles/2014/5/19/why-college-rapevictimsdonatgotothepolice.html

Phillip S,
The White House Report on campus sexual assault is also critical of the way suspected perpetrators are treated by college tribunals, in some cases the panels will not allow him to know who has made the allegation or even what he's being accused of. This also has a chilling effect on reporting since people with information or reasonable suspicions of sexual misconduct are loath to throw a fellow student into some Orwellian kangaroo court process.
I don't know what the process is here, when I was at Uni almost 30 years ago it was "transparent" to the point that most everyone on the campus knew who the complainant and accused were and what was alleged to have happened, disciplinary or "show cause" panels were rare and a hot topic when they occurred. I remember a "sex for grades" case where a first year girl alleged that she had been propositioned by one of the male lecturers so the student union board and women's group marched her up to his office, confronted him and held a sit in, from then the disciplinary process leaked like a sieve.
I think the leaking came from the student union because back then they were genuine union reps, for better or worse students would usually have their union rep at their side in any hearing and the S.U. board members were all the classic "bludging hippy" types in their late twenties who'd managed to string out a B.A for eight or nine years.

It does seem that confessing to having been sexually abused as a child can be a lucrative career move.

This probably goes double if it is someone famous, as we have just seen.

[Deleted for abuse.]

Hasbeen
Are you talking about Pamela Anderson?
I think her career as such is pretty much over anyway, she's now a celebrity activist:
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/RCMP+Vancouver+Island+Pamela+Anderson+abuse+claims/9863622/story.html

Sexual abuse isn't always abuse, it becomes abuse when there's an opprortunity to gain by playing victim. Of course there are serious cases of real sexual abuse & they get dealt with as soon as evidence is brought forward. Young children will refrain from telling at first but when people come out 40 years later it does seem odd waiting that long. It does appear to me that most sexual abuse cases can't be reported because of PC, defamation laws etc. Many cases aren't reported because the offenders are in the legal business & in religious outfits. The main reason why sexual abuse is si rife is because of our legal system in which the victim has to go through humiliation & great expense to fight the offender who can literally sit back & relax because he/she is innocent until proven guilty unlike the victim who is guilty of defaming an offender until they can prove themselves right.