Opposition to the proposal has been described as "prompt, universal and absolute" and it was quickly dropped.
The Sydney Morning Herald declared the regulations to be "an instance of the official mind run mad", arguing that if "both male and female bathers of all ages must be clad in a species of skirt [it] would be too ridiculous for comment were it not that many thousands of persons will immediately become the sufferers, some by the legal penalty, others by abandoning the surf, unless public opinion is enabled to express itself quickly and forcibly". Councils beyond Sydney also found themselves referring to the skirt for men proposal as they deliberated on appropriate clothing for both sexes at the beach. One Councillor at
Euroa, Victoria for example, suggested the enforcement of a proper costume, from neck to knee, but "did not go as far as the Bondi mayor in New South Wales, in advocating a short skirt in addition". Both individuals and city councils took the opportunity in different forms of writing to laugh at themselves and the absurdities associated with regulating such matters. One person was moved to write a comic poem and councillors in Victoria, for example, bantered. It was pointed out that while "a regulation was in force dealing with the whole matter – hours, costume, etc., ... 'proper costume' varied so much that it was well nigh impossible to get a proper legal definition." Councillor Cole said that he "had defended youngsters who had produced little trunks; but such small articles adorning the fine manly physique of a gentleman of Cr [Councillor] Eddy's Herculean proportions for instance would probably not be deemed at law to be adequate covering. They might, perhaps, emulate the Sydney example of requiring such cases to be met by the adoption of frilled skirts (laughter) – something of the neck and knee order might be more indecent than skirts." ==Context ==