18. The Inquiry uses the terms Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+. The word “and” has been used rather than “or” because some of these identities intersect.

19. Takatāpui is the te reo Māori term meaning intimate companion of the same sex, Rainbow refers to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual community, and MVPFAFF+ refers to diverse sexualities, gender expressions and roles in the Pacific (Māhū, Vakasalewalewa, Palopa, Fa’afafine, Akava’ine, Fakaleitī (or Leiti), Fakafifine). The term LGBTQIA+ was not used because it has been critiqued for centering Western understandings of gender, sex and sexual orientation.

20. Other terms used include:

• sexuality or sexual orientation, meaning a person’s physical, romantic and / or emotional attraction to people of the same and / or different gender (including people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, queer, pansexual, homosexual, etc)
• gender identity, meaning a person’s internal sense of their sex or gender (including people who are transgender, agender, intersex, non-binary, gender fluid, genderqueer or gender diverse)
• transgender, meaning a person whose gender identity does not align with the sex or gender they were assigned at birth
• cisgender, meaning a person whose gender identity aligns with the sex or gender they were assigned at birth
• intersex, meaning a person born with natural variations of sex characteristics, such as chromosomes, reproductive anatomy, genitals and hormones
• homophobia, meaning discrimination against people whose sexual orientation is not heterosexual
• transphobia, meaning discrimination against people whose gender identity does not align with the sex or gender they were assigned at birth.

Summary of Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+ survivors who registered with the Inquiry

21. In total, 2,329 survivors registered with the Inquiry. As set out in Part 1 of the Inquiry’s final report, Whanaketia – Through pain and trauma, from darkness to light, 7 percent (162 survivors) of registered survivors identified as Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+.

22. The Inquiry recognises that the true number of Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+ survivors who experienced abuse and neglect in State and faith-based care may be far greater. Limitations due to survivors’ understandable reluctance to disclose their sexual orientation and / or gender identity when they were in care, along with poor record-keeping of survivors’ demographic information and failure to document incidents of abuse and neglect mean we may never know the true numbers of Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+ survivors.

23. The table below sets out additional demographic information about Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+ survivors who registered with the Inquiry:

24. Engagement with survivors, whānau and their communities was a critical part of the Inquiry. As the Inquiry progressed and learned more about how to connect with people in ways that were appropriate and safe for them, its engagement methods improved. The Inquiry sought to interact with people on their own terms. Multiple hui were held with people from Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+ communities and organisations that support them. In 2022, the Inquiry engaged groups of specialist advisors, including a reference group with people with lived or academic expertise in Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+ communities and organisations that support them. The Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+ reference group was provided with draft material, in confidence, to provide expert feedback for consideration in the finalisation of the Inquiry’s reports.

Historical and social context most relevant to Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+ survivors

25. Understanding the historical and social context the care system operated in before and during the Inquiry period is crucial in understanding Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+ survivors’ experiences of abuse and neglect in State and faith-based care.

Colonisation and Christianity influenced Māori and Pacific perspectives on sexual orientation and gender identity

26. Before the colonisation of Aotearoa New Zealand, Māori men and women were regarded as essential parts of the collective whole, with evidence of fluid conceptions of gender and sexuality in pre-colonial Māori society.[1] Ancestral names could be gender neutral, emphasising the importance of whakapapa rather than gender. Sexual expression was integrated into various aspects of life, both spiritual and social, and was regularly discussed and depicted in carvings. In her doctoral thesis, Part of the Whānau: The Emergence of Takatāpui Identity – He Whāriki Takatāpui, Dr Elizabeth Kerekere notes that Takatāpui were always an integral part of Māori society pre-colonisation:[2]

“As Māori, we claim our identity through whakapapa over countless generations of ancestors. Whakapapa places us within a whānau, hapū and iwi, which in turn connects us to marae and specific tribal areas on Papatūānuku, our earth mother. Because of this, whakapapa is central to takatāpui identity and spiritual connection to tupuna takatāpui. It is clear that fluid sexual intimacy and gender expression existed among Māori in pre-colonial and post-contact times and has continued ever since.”[3]

27. The arrival of Christian missionaries in the South Pacific from the late 18th century, and in Aotearoa New Zealand from the early 19th century, had significant impacts on Pacific and Māori societies. Many Pacific societies adopted Christianity and it became a core element of their cultural identities. Some Pacific Peoples incorporated Christianity into their own belief systems.[4] Māori responses to the Christian teachings varied but some Māori adapted and absorbed aspects of Christianity into their own spirituality, “incorporating Christianity into their own belief systems at least as much as they were being converted by it”.[5]

28. The adoption of Christian beliefs and practices into Māori and Pacific cultures influenced attitudes towards people with diverse sexual orientation and gender identity.

Broader influence of Christianity on societal attitudes towards difference

29. Churches contributed to building the new settler society in Aotearoa New Zealand, including upholding a social order based on British laws and influenced by Christian values and morals.[6] These societal attitudes meant that during much of the 20th century, Aotearoa New Zealand society expected people to fit in and conform to a narrow definition of what was normal.[7] These views were reflected in State policies influenced by discrimination and eugenics. For example, in 1911, former Attorney-General John Findlay described those who were ‘defective’ as “a source of contamination and weakness” who needed to be isolated from society.[8] This contributed to discrimination against indigenous and minority groups, including people who did not fit socially acceptable norms of sexual orientation and gender identity.[9]

30. As one survivor explained:

“Dominant societal norms [lead to] discrimination and violence towards many, but Rainbow and Takatāpui people in more specific ways – particularly towards those with multiple marginalised identities.”[10]

31. During the Inquiry period, homosexuality was seen as deviant, abnormal and needing to be ‘cured’. These views were influenced and reinforced by Christian beliefs that homosexuality was evil, sinful and unnatural. Homosexuality was also commonly, and wrongly, associated with child sexual abuse.[11] Rigid gender roles, which were influenced by faith-based beliefs, were tightly enforced for most of the Inquiry period. People who did not conform to predetermined ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ behaviours and dress were targets of prejudice and discrimination.

32. Sexual acts associated with homosexuality were criminalised for much of the Inquiry period. “Buggery” and the indecent assault by a male against another male were criminal offences under the Criminal Code Act 1893.[12] The Crimes Act 1961 criminalised “sodomy” and “indecency between males”.[13] Sexual relations between adult men were decriminalised in Aotearoa New Zealand in 1986 with the passage of the Homosexual Law Reform Act. Sexual relations between adult women were never criminalised, but many lesbians suffered the same social discrimination as gay men.

33. Homosexuality was considered a psychiatric disorder until 1973 in Aotearoa New Zealand.[14] Medicalisation of homosexuality peaked in the 1950s and 1960s and included conversion practices with the aim of changing a person’s sexual identity or gender identity.[15] The psychiatric profession’s position on homosexuality as a mental illness began to shift by the 1970s. Psychiatric bodies in several countries removed homosexuality from their catalogues of mental disorders.

34. One survivor said:

“‘What types of harm have Rainbow communities historically experienced in care?’ Colonisation – devaluing of Takatāpui identity and lives, impact of church and colonisation, medicalisation of sexuality and identity rather than recognising diversity of humanity.”[16]

Gay liberation and the gradual realisation of rights for Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+ New Zealanders

35. Since becoming a member of the United Nations in 1945, Aotearoa New Zealand has actively participated in international forums and organisations to promote human rights.[17] Aotearoa New Zealand contributed to the drafting and adoption of key human rights instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 and played a role in negotiating and ratifying international human rights treaties during the latter half of the 20th century.[18]

36. Despite its international reputation, Aotearoa New Zealand could be slow in promoting human rights treaties domestically.[19] Human rights protections in Aotearoa New Zealand’s domestic laws are set out in a variety of statutes and the common (court-made) law.[20] This means they are not all in one place and not all human rights have been incorporated into our domestic law.

37. The 1960s saw the beginnings of gradual change towards the realisation of rights for Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+ New Zealanders. The Dorian Society, Aotearoa New Zealand’s first social club for homosexual men, was formed in Te Whanganui-ā-Tara Wellington in 1962.[21] In 1967, a group of lawyers formed the New Zealand Homosexual Law Reform Society. It presented a petition to Parliament urging homosexual law reform in 1968.[22] Internationally, in 1969 homosexual men and women resisted arrest during the Stonewall Riots in New York City. This is regarded as the start of the gay liberation movement.[23]

38. Aotearoa New Zealand Gay Pride Week and march began in the 1970s. The first national lesbian organisation, Sisters for Homophile Equality (SHE), was formed in 1973.

39. In 1993, the Human Rights Act was passed, which included the prohibition of discrimination based on sexual orientation.[24] Before this, there was no legal protection from discrimination in employment, education, access to public places, provision of goods and services, and housing and accommodation on the grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity.

Visibility and understanding of Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+ identities

40. During the first half of the Inquiry period in particular, the word ‘gay’ was sometimes used to include diverse Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+ identities – including people who identified as homosexual, bisexual, lesbian, transgender, asexual and intersex. In practice, however, the spectrum of identities that made up the Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+ community was largely invisible and poorly understood by most people in Aotearoa New Zealand. This included lack of understanding about the differences between sexual orientation and gender identity. As one survivor explained, “... there are multiple iterations of gender, there are multiple identities within gender”.[25]

41. Towards the end of the Inquiry period, a greater understanding and visibility of the importance of intersectionality began emerging, both within and outside the wider Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+ community. This brought with it a recognition that, particularly for Māori and Pacific Peoples who identified as Takatāpui, Rainbow and MVPFAFF+, their sexual orientation or gender identity is only one facet of their identity. As survivors said:[26]

“I want to acknowledge … [the] Pacific activists who really fought to ensure that our cultural terms and identities were utilised within spaces where LGBTQIA+ was the dominant framing of our communities. And to highlight why it is nuanced and can be detrimental when we are framed in a Western paradigm, or we are framed in experiences that lean more to the Western context rather than our own cultural context.”

“What I really wanted to highlight here is that first and foremost, before I am fakafifine, before I am a trans woman, I am tangata Niue, and within all of that cultural identity, MVPFAFF+ identities and how they interact, they interact autonomously, like there’s no separation of them.”