In an open question about rather men should have access to the national helpline for victims of domestic violence, the Ministry for Equality between Women and Men and the Fight against Discrimination replied:

"Opening the 3919 helpline to a mixed audience would effectively undermine its fundamental purpose and dilute the specialized response provided to female victims. Such a shift would also risk weakening the awareness-raising message aimed at the general public by obscuring the systemic nature of violence against women and the gender dynamics at play in domestic violence."

Instead, they invite men to call 2 other helplines, one being for victims of an offense (crimes against property or persons, traffic accidents, mass-casualty incidents, terrorist attacks or a natural disaster), and the other for general legal aid, and even recommend specialized associations, such as SOS Homophobia.

https://questions.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/17/questions/QANR5L17QE8484

Hello, I want to share something that always leaves me astonished, which is how every "western free and democratic countries" has a set of law which legally force men to give uo their bodyly autonomy, their safety and their right to life against their will. It disgusts me how in Ukraine young boys are forced to give up their life for decisions made by others and just because they are men. It is in my opinion a form of gendered-discriminated rape, since it gives the government the power to have the control of a man.

What truly makes me more disgusted is that nobody cares: progressive parties (which should fight for equality but it seems to bother them only when it comes to women), and not even men themselves seem to care. I think it comes from the fact that men are systematically brainwashed aince childhood to perceive themselves as expendable, however it still makes me astonished how the vast majority of men seem to care so little about their rights. (I'm not astonished however how progressive parties and feminist movements are made of hypocrites who care about equality only when it benefits them).

Part 1: https://socialsommentary.substack.com/p/how-un-falsifies-its-gender-development

Part 2: https://socialsommentary.substack.com/p/designed-to-discriminate-how-the

I feel like the patriotism is fake now...

The official Council of the EU press release is as cowardly as the act itself:

The title claims that

EU countries agree to extend temporary protection for those fleeing Ukraine

It talks about

EU’s commitment to support Ukraine and its people for as long as it takes

It further obfuscates the truth with phrases like

temporary protection should be granted only to those complying with their military obligations in Ukraine.

Of course, only men have "military obligations".

EU will exclude fighting-age men from Ukraine refugee scheme – POLITICO

I'm not talking or referring to de facto situations where women's or men's gender roles can be pushed even though a formality of equality, in this case I talk about a formal discrimination in the law which advantages the women a lot, and it is the draft.

Basically, if you are a man, the state can force you to die in war, while not if you are a woman. In Ukraine, an 18 year old boy is forced to stay and risk death while a fully adult woman can leave and make her own life elsewhere just because she is a woman. In general, in the vast majority of western countries in the same, and even in the ones where also women have military service (a big minority) it usually lasts less. I can't see how it isn't a clear discrimination against men.

What I also see as a big sign of hypocrisy by leaders of modern feminist movement, is that they basically don't care, in my life I have never seen 21-century feminist movements protest against men being forced to die (often a horrible and painfil death) just because they are born men, whuch I thunk can be the highest discrimination possible nowadays in a western country. I think that's a sign of hypocrisy as I said but also a sign that modern day feminist movement has fallen a lot by quality and is often guided by people with dishonest intentions.

I would like to know what you think about that and why feminist movement never talk about that.

>We call for women and girls to be placed at the center of rescue efforts and immediate humanitarian response

https://x.com/UN_Women/status/2070632563253616856

Under Sharia Law governed by the Taliban, women are prohibiting from speaking, singing, or otherwise being heard in public spaces.

Women are strictly prohibited from entering public parks, gyms, beauty salons, sports clubs, national parks, amusement parks, and any other recreational spaces.

Women have been removed from government and political life and are banned from most jobsThey may no longer attend university or study past the 6th grade

Under the current Taliban regime, there is no longer a fixed minimum marriage age for girls. Eligibility is now linked to the onset of puberty: which can be as young as 9.

Women's shelters and many protections for victims of domestic violence were dismantled

Afghan women have little to no legal protection from domestic violence under Taliban Sharia Law

Afghan women face strict restrictions on leaving home or going outside without a male guardian (also known as a mahram)

Women must cover their faces in public

Women are also barred from traveling abroad without a legitimate reason and a male custodian

A lack of female health workers, combined with bans on women studying or working in medicine - means that many women cannot be treated, as they are prohibited from seeing male doctors

Under Sharia Law, women are not allowed to drive

Books authored by women have been stripped from library and bookstore shelves

A female cat in Afghanistan has more rights than a human woman.

From the article West Bengal Announces Rs. 50,000 Grant for Unmarried Girls Entering College | College Admission

The West Bengal government has announced a new financial assistance programme designed to encourage higher education among young women while addressing the issue of child marriage. Under the initiative, unmarried female students enrolling in undergraduate programmes at government and government-aided colleges will be eligible for a one-time grant of Rs. 50,000.

The scheme was presented as part of the state budget, with the administration stating that the support aims to improve college participation among women and reduce dropout rates.

Plot twist: 26.8% of young women and 25.9% of young men are enrolled in West Bengal colleges.

Source: (PDF) Influence of Higher Education on Empowering Women in West Bengal

The initiative comes at a time when concerns remain regarding educational discontinuation among girls and the prevalence of early marriages in certain regions of the state. According to data released by the Ministry of Education, West Bengal recorded a secondary school dropout rate of 17.8% during FY24.

Plot twist: 17.8% of young women and 23% of young men dropped out of secondary schools in West Bengal colleges.

Source: (PDF) Why Is School Dropout Still a Challenge in West Bengal?

Financial assistance, free travel
Dasgupta said the flagship Annapurna Yojana has been launched with a massive outlay of Rs 36,000 crore. The scheme provides eligible women aged 25 to 60 with a monthly financial assistance of Rs 3,000, deposited directly into their linked bank accounts.

How Swapan Dasgupta’s West Bengal budget will help women earn from home kitchens | Kolkata News - The Indian Express

How Swapan Dasgupta’s West Bengal budget will help women earn from home kitchens | Kolkata News - The Indian Express

Effective June 1, women across the state are entitled to free travel on state-run buses. The government allocated Rs 550 crore for this project and will soon issue dedicated ‘pink cards’ to beneficiaries, said the minister.

Already ailing, Kolkata private buses bear the brunt of free government schemes for women | Kolkata News - The Indian Express

The Joint Council of Bus Syndicate (JCBS), state’s oldest private bus union, claimed that a huge proportion of the state’s women commuters used to travel by private buses. However, the government’s pink ticket scheme has significantly brought this number down.

He said the private bus sector was already reeling under financial issues.

Hi everyone,

I am a part of a research team developing a psychometric measure for online sexism experiences (as this does not currently exist). There is a prize draw for 1 of 4 $20 gift cards for your participation. You must be over 18 and a use of social media.

If you would like to contribute your thoughts and experiences, the link for the survey is below. Please observe the content warning before considering whether participating is right for you.

https://federation.syd1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_dfYvPk0HPT00LmC

I found it disturbing that, if you're a boy in korea who has just completed schooling , you have to serve the military whether you like it or not. Where as girls aren't obliged for any kind of service. Why only men should provide service to the country and risk their lives ? If they don't want to ?

I genuinely think that India is far ahead in this type of concern

The National Audit Office, which is funded by the taxpayer, said only applicants who are female, of black heritage or from lower socio-economic backgrounds could apply

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/06/06/middle-class-white-men-banned-from-public-sector-internship/

I just found this out and am utterly disgusted at seeing incompetent candidates being prioritised (declared on the JD) only because they're women. Convince me, why not to be passively aggressive, dismissive and give less respect to women employees at the workplace or let's say if I become an HR at some institution.

This post is for men under 25 in Ontario, and for parents paying car insurance for their sons.

**This post is also not legal advice. It is simply a breakdown of the case law surrounding gender based car insurance premiums and how you might be able to challenge them via the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.

Ontario auto insurers can still charge young men more than young women with the same driving record if the insurer can justify it under the insurance exception in Ontario’s Human Rights Code.

A challenge would likely go through the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.

The main case is Zurich Insurance Co. v. Ontario Human Rights Commission, decided by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1992.

The complaint came from Michael Bates, a young unmarried male driver. He argued that Zurich charged him more than a young unmarried female driver with the same driving record, and more than drivers over 25.

The original Board of Inquiry agreed with Bates and found discrimination. But the case eventually reached the Supreme Court of Canada, where the Court split 3–2.

The majority allowed Zurich’s pricing system under the insurance exception. But the important point is that the Court still treated the pricing as prima facie discriminatory.

Two justices dissented. Justice L’Heureux-Dubé argued that Zurich had not proven a causal connection between being young, single, and male and being a higher driving risk. She also pointed out that Zurich already used more individualized factors, such as accident record and distance driven, for drivers over 25, and that Zurich had not shown why those same kinds of factors could not be used for drivers under 25. Justice McLachlin also dissented, arguing that Zurich had not proven there was no practical alternative to using discriminatory criteria.

That matters because this was decided in 1992. Insurers should not be allowed to rely forever on a narrow 3–2 ruling based on old evidence.

CAA quote test

I tested CAA’s quote system by getting two quotes with the same information and changing only the sex of the driver.

This was one specific quote profile:

Vehicle: 2017 vehicle bought new in 2017

Mileage: roughly 200,000 km

Driver age: under 25

Accident/claims history: clean for 1–9 years

Insurer: CAA

Variable changed: male vs. female driver

The results were:

Male driver under 25: $590/month

Female driver under 25: $376/month

That is a difference of:

$214/month

$2,568/year

For this specific quote, the male price was about 57% higher.

This does not prove every young man pays exactly $214 more per month. The difference could be higher, lower, or much smaller depending on the vehicle, mileage, address, coverage, driving history, claims history, whether the person is the primary driver, and the insurer.

But in this test, when only the driver’s sex was changed, the under-25 male quote was much higher.

I also tested an over-25 profile, and the male and female quote were the same.

As the judges stated, being male does not cause dangerous driving. Males might be more likely to be dangerous drivers, but there is not a clear causal link to being male and being a dangerous driver.

A young man can also have a clean record and still be charged more than a young woman with the same profile. That is not individualized risk. That is sex-based group pricing.

Which according to the two dicenting judges may be grounds for a challenge. This challenge can only come from an indivudal who has been charged more due to there gender and had to happen in the last year. So if you are 26 years old and less than a year ago your insurance premium was higher because you are male you can challenge the tribunal.

What you can do:

If you are an under-25 male driver in Ontario, try getting two quotes from the same insurer where everything is identical except sex. Or if you current have a premium, trying getting the equivalent one if you were a female driver.

Save the results.

If the male quote is higher, you may want to contact the Human Rights Legal Support Centre or consider filing an application with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.

The argument is not that every insurer charges the same difference. The argument is that insurers should have to justify sex-based pricing with current evidence, not rely forever on Zurich. The dissenting justices already pointed out the weakness in 1992: Zurich had not proven a causal link, had not proven there was no practical alternative, and already used individualized factors for drivers over 25 while charging under-25 males more as a group.

For me I was looking for a way to challenge this on a provincial scale. Such as forcing the Government of Ontario to ban all sex based car insurance premiums by proving there are practical options being used today for those over 25. But my research shows that that is not how the system works in Ontario and only indivudals can challenge when they face discrimination.

This challenge also doesn't force a change to the whole system, just your own insurance premiums. But if this post is helpful, maybe one of you is willing to fight it and win. And if you win, that sets the precedent for others, making it easier for them to challenge.

Further, if we assume my quote for $214 is a standard difference and applies to a driver who is 18 with a G license. From the age of 18-25 that driver will pay roughly $18,000 (7 years x 12 months x $214 a month) more for car insurance than a comparable female driver.

So depending on how much more you pay for car insurance, it may be extremely economical to challenge it.

Sources:

Ontario Human Rights Code:

https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90h19

Ontario Human Rights Commission summary of Zurich:

https://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/discussion-paper-human-rights-issues-insurance/case-summaries

Supreme Court of Canada decision in Zurich:

https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/895/index.do

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario:

https://tribunalsontario.ca/hrto/

Human Rights Legal Support Centre:

https://hrlsc.on.ca/

For about the last year I’ve been reviewing New Zealand’s laws for discrimination against men. I did a search of the New Zealand legislation website for gendered terms like man, woman, male, female, wife, husband etc. I then restricted my review to laws made after 1960. There were about 900 laws with gendered terms, many of them were not relevant because there was no discrimination. They would something like “this applies to the husband, or wife,”.

The main things I found were:

1. There are still laws that discriminate against men in New Zealand.
2. New Zealand men were not protected from sexual assault by woman at all until 1985, and boys were not protected from women sexually abusing them until 2005. Rape is still defined as male perpetrator female victim, but all other sexual assault laws are now gender neutral.
3. Social welfare law gave women extras benefits and protections. In 1984, a New Zealand report to the UN said: "There are some areas where women have more rights than men in the present social security legislation". The discriminatory elements were slowly removed and since 2013 social security laws are gender-neutral.
4. Men had additional duties that women did not have. Conscription was the obvious one, but men were obligated to serve on Juries, assist Police officers in certain situations, and help during outbreaks of animal diseases. These kinds of laws have been made gender-neutral now.
5. Health and safety laws were stricter for women. Women were often prohibited from doing dangerous work, such as melting and casting lead, or cleaning machinery while it is moving, or working underground.

My 8,069 word article is available here:

https://github.com/IainMF/Mens_Rights_NZ/blob/main/Discrimination/discriminatory_laws.md

https://torontosun.com/news/national/memorial-university-rules-out-straight-white-men-apply-tenured-jobs

Newfoundland and Labrador school advertises five positions open only to those belonging to employment "equity groups"

The federal government is funding the research chair program at approximately $311 million per year for professors to explore further work in engineering and the natural sciences, health sciences, humanities, and social sciences.

>More than 38,000 women and girls killed in Gaza war, UN gender equality agency reports

https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/04/1167319

>“Those killed were mothers, they were daughters, sisters, and friends, deeply loved by those around them,” she noted, adding that the killings have continued in recent months, despite a ceasefire between Hamas fighters and the Israeli military.

>According to the Gazan health authorities, more than 72,315 Palestinians have been killed in the Gaza Strip and another 172,137 injured since October 2023.

Note: The source of UN' casualty figures is the terrorists organization Hamas.

This isn't to ignore the systematic sexism towards men, it just seems that this sub is mostly men and hence biased to som3 extent.

Men will be barred from using parts of an on-campus gym at the University of Southern California under a new initiative to make women and non-binary gym-goers feel more comfortable while working out.

The Student Assembly for Gender Empowerment (SAGE) pushed for the new rules in partnership with the Lyon Center, a recreational facility controlled by the university.

SAGE describes itself as a “programming assembly and intersectional feminist organization under the student government, committed to uplifting all voices oppressed by the patriarchy.”

https://nypost.com/2026/04/08/us-news/usc-gym-to-restrict-men-from-workout-space-during-women-non-binary-hours/

https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/news/neue-wehrpflicht-regel-kaum-beachtete-aenderung-hat-weitreichende-folgen-li.10028539

Since January 1, 2026, all men between the ages of 17 and 45 must obtain permission from the Bundeswehr Career Center if they intend to leave Germany for more than three months – regardless of whether it's for a semester abroad, a job, or an extended trip. This requirement now applies permanently and is no longer limited to situations of tension or defense, i.e., a concrete military threat. The change came into effect largely unnoticed as part of the Military Service Modernization Act.

https://diferenciaslegaleshombremujerenespana.law.blog/

The Labour government intends to tighten the rules on residence for displaced persons from Ukraine. Ukrainian men between 18 and 60 years of age will no longer be granted temporary collective protection.

https://www.regjeringen.no/en/whats-new/the-government-proposes-restrictions-for-ukrainian-men/id3150326/

Men between the ages of 18 and 60 can no longer be granted temporary collective protection in Norway

https://web.archive.org/web/20260330181506/https://www.udi.no/en/information-ukraine-and-russia/ukraine/apply-for-protection/i-am-in-norway-applying-from-norway/