Status of Women Committee on Feb. 3rd, 2026

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 22 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on the Status of Women.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders.

I'd like to make a few comments for the benefit of members and witnesses here today. Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. For those who are participating by Zoom, click on the microphone icon to activate your mic. Please mute yourself when you're not speaking. For interpretation, if you look at the bottom of your screen, you can pick floor, English or French to get the translation you would like. If you wish to speak, raise your hand. All comments should be addressed through the chair. Thanks for your co-operation on that.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Monday, September 15, 2025, the committee will resume its study of anti-feminist ideology.

Now, before we welcome our witnesses, I'd like to provide a trigger warning. We'll be discussing themes and experiences related to anti-feminist ideology. This may be triggering to viewers with similar experiences. If any participants feel distressed or need help, please advise the clerk. For all witnesses and members of Parliament, it's important to recognize that these are difficult discussions, and so let's be compassionate in our conversations.

Let's welcome our witnesses.

As an individual, we have Tristan Boursier, doctor of political science.

From Les 3 sex*, we have Mylène de Repentigny-Corbeil, director general.

From the Ontario Coalition of Rape Crisis Centres, we have Dina Haddish, members' coordinator. Welcome.

Let's begin with opening statements from the witnesses.

Mr. Boursier, you have five minutes.

[Tristan Boursier, Doctor of Political Science, As an Individual]

Thank you Madam Chair, members of the committee.

Thank you for inviting me to appear today on the important topic of antifeminism.

Antifeminism can be defined as a counter-movement. As such, it opposes feminism as a social movement. It opposes the core value defended by this movement, namely gender equality. Contrary to popular belief, antifeminism is not limited to sexist attitudes or ordinary misogyny. It is primarily a political world view based on the core idea that inequality between women and men is not only natural but also desirable. As such, antifeminism is an ideology in its own right that seeks to challenge, hinder or reverse progress towards equality.

It's important to emphasize that antifeminism is not a new phenomenon. Historians such as Christine Bard have shown that it has existed throughout the centuries in different forms. My work, however, doesn't focus on historical forms of antifeminism, but rather on its contemporary manifestations, particularly in digital spaces.

My research focuses mainly on Quebec and France. Nevertheless, in a globalized digital environment, it is impossible to ignore the influence of the United States, where online antifeminism is especially well structured, visible and economically attractive. Messages spread, translated and adapted, and they cross national borders with great ease.

More specifically, I'm interested in key players in this ecosystem: influencers. These are individuals whose main activity is to produce and disseminate digital content that promotes an antifeminist world view, such as videos, podcasts, memes, or paid training courses.

These aren't fringe actors; they sometimes have very large followings and develop real business models based on capturing attention. The world view they promote is very often masculinist. Masculinism can be understood as a subcategory of antifeminism. It is based on the idea that feminists have gone too far, causing a supposed masculinity crisis. According to this narrative, we now live in societies dominated by women and feminism, to the detriment of men, who they believe must therefore be protected.

Masculinist actors thus present themselves as defenders of men in direct opposition to feminism. This discourse is based on a logic of reversing power relations. Historically dominant groups are described as victims, while feminist struggles are presented as oppressive. In the cases I study, this kind of speech isn't strictly ideological; it also has an economic component and it causes real-world violence.

Antifeminism is becoming a way to monetize online content: It is a product to be sold, a lever for visibility and revenue that encourages harassment and hate speech. Digital platforms play a central role here. They facilitate the mass dissemination of this content, its algorithmic recommendations, and its access by increasingly younger audiences. This discourse is often the result of dissemination tactics that make it difficult to identify or counter with existing legal mechanisms. Nevertheless, it contributes to normalizing deeply unequal representations of social relations between the genders.

My work shows that contemporary antifeminism is not just a fringe phenomenon. Rather, it's part of a broader strategy to spread reactionary ideas. I'm increasingly seeing a convergence of antifeminism and the far right. This convergence can then feed into partisan strategies for mobilizing the male vote.

Understanding antifeminism as a structured ideology, promoted by identifiable actors and amplified by digital environments, is essential to grasping its social and political effects. This is more than just a debate about abstract ideas; it is a phenomenon that influences our perceptions, our socialization trajectories, and ultimately our relationship with democracy itself.

Thank you for your attention, I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Thank you.

Ms. de Repentigny‑Corbeil, you have five minutes.

[Mylène de Repentigny-Corbeil, Executive Director, Les 3 sex*]

Thank you.

Madam Chair, members of the committee, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today on behalf of the organization I lead, Les 3 sex*, which fights for the sexual rights and sexual health of women and LGBTQ+ people.

I'm sure that the individuals and organizations that testified before me have made the same observation: Antifeminist and masculinist ideologies are no longer a fringe phenomenon. They're on the rise across the country and now shape a significant part of our social and digital landscape.

These days, comments that dehumanize women and reject gender equality circulate freely both online and off-line. Too often, this rhetoric is portrayed as simply harmless or innocuous opinions. However, these ideologies have very real consequences for the dignity, safety and health of women and girls in Canada.

Behind this rhetoric lies a well-organized online ecosystem called the manosphere. It includes various masculinist communities, such as pickup artists, men's rights activists, incels and others, who share common beliefs such as hatred of women and feminists, victimization of men and the legitimization of control and violence against women.

The figures are alarming: In Canada, one in five women has been a victim of online harassment, 80% of educators say they have witnessed sexist or masculinist behaviour among young boys, and a quarter of young people aged 13 to 18 report having experienced at least one form of technology-facilitated sexual violence.

These data aren't abstract; there are real lives behind them. Violence promoted and normalized in the manosphere can have serious consequences such as isolation, psychological distress, depressive symptoms, self-harm and even suicidal thoughts, especially as the manosphere increasingly targets very young boys. In Canada, 47% of young people aged 12 to 17 are exposed to sexist or racist content online at least once a week.

The problem is obviously not young boys. The problem is the narratives they're being fed: simplistic narratives where women become scapegoats and male domination is presented as a solution to their insecurity. These narratives have real consequences. A survey of 1,400 students in six Montreal high schools reveals that more than one-third of boys, or 34%, believe they should have the right to control who their girlfriends interact with. These narratives take root all the more easily because they are disseminated insidiously. Research shows that a simple online search, for example for physical exercises, can lead to content from the manosphere in just a few videos.

Faced with these worrying findings, however, we must not give up.

It is still possible to take action. The studies are clear. To curb the rise of masculinist ideologies, we must invest heavily in prevention, education and awareness. This isn't about stigmatizing boys, but about providing them with safe spaces to develop their critical thinking skills, understand the mechanisms of online radicalization, deconstruct antifeminist discourse, and reflect on models of healthy, egalitarian and non-violent masculinity. Moreover, this education doesn't end at school.

Adult men who have completed their schooling also need tools for digital literacy and prevention of antifeminist radicalization. In the field, community organizations are already doing this essential work. They're involved in prevention, awareness raising, support, research and crisis intervention. They are developing tools to counter misinformation, support victims and empower young people. These actions are effective; they reduce adherence to masculinist rhetoric and prevent the radicalization of hundreds of young boys.

However, these organizations are running out of steam. Demand is increasing, situations are becoming more complex and resources aren't keeping pace. Without stable, predictable and structured funding, it becomes extremely difficult to take action upstream, where prevention is most effective. Your commitment can make a real difference. It can curb the rise of hatred, prevent violence and literally save lives.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Thank you.

Ms. Haddish, now you'll have the floor for five minutes.

[Dina Haddish, Members' Coordinator, Ontario Coalition of Rape Crisis Centres]

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to the committee for the invitation.

My name is Dina, and I'm speaking on behalf of the Ontario Coalition of Rape Crisis Centres, or OCRCC. We are a provincial network representing sexual assault centres across Ontario. Our member centres work directly with survivors of sexual violence and provide survivor-centred, trauma-informed services in communities, public education and systems-level advocacy.

Our remarks today reflect what our member centres are seeing on the ground and how anti-feminist ideology is undermining survivor safety, disclosure and access to justice.

Based on the work of our member centres, anti-feminist ideology is not abstract: It is producing direct and material harm for survivors of sexual violence and the organizations that support them. Centres are experiencing intensified harassment and backlash, including coordinated online attacks, intimidation at survivor-led events and the spread of narratives that frame feminism and survivor advocacy as ideological, deceptive or harmful. This environment is creating a chilling effect on disclosure and help-seeking. Survivors are choosing not to report sexual violence, not to testify, not to attend public events and not to seek services due to fear of online pile-ons, doxing and reputational harm.

Member centres are also seeing weaponization of legal and administrative processes being used to intimidate and silence survivors and service providers. The result is not less sexual violence, but less disclosure and reduced access to supports.

It is also essential for us to situate anti-feminist ideology within a settler colonial context. Both the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls identify sexual violence as an ongoing consequence of colonial practices, institutional failures and systemic inequality. The MMIWG2S report in particular names this violence as persistent and structural rather than isolated. Anti-feminist ideology reinforces these conditions by denying systemic harm, dismissing survivor-centred and feminist analysis, and resisting accountability for state and institutional failures to prevent sexual violence.

Anti-feminist ideology does not take hold in a vacuum. It is enabled by structural conditions that weaken responses to sexual violence.

First and foremost, precarious funding to sexual assault centres, particularly for public education and prevention work, limits the sector's ability to counter misinformation, respond to harassment and engage in sustained efforts to challenge rape myths.

Second, there is a lack of coordinated national data on sexual violence, which undermines evidence-based policy-making and allows misleading narratives about prevalence, reporting and credibility to persist.

Third, gaps in trauma-informed and survivor-centred responses, especially within legal and institutional systems, create conditions in which survivors of sexual violence are retraumatized or disbelieved and anti-feminist narratives appear legitimate.

The impacts of anti-feminist ideology are not evenly distributed. Indigenous, racialized, migrant, queer, trans, two-spirit and disabled survivors face compounded barriers to disclosure, credibility, safety and justice. These survivors are more likely to experience intensified scrutiny, disbelief and retaliation when they come forward.

Addressing anti-feminist ideology and its impacts on survivors of sexual violence requires concrete policy action. We urge the committee to consider the following.

The first is stable long-term federal funding for sexual assault centres, including funding dedicated to public education and prevention work that combats masculinist, anti-feminist ideologies.

The second is stronger protections against the misuse of legal and administrative processes to silence survivors and sexual assault centres.

The third is meaningful implementation of the TRC calls to action and calls for justice related to sexual violence prevention, trauma-informed systems and accountability.

Anti-feminist ideology is making it harder for survivors of sexual violence to come forward. If we are serious about safety, mental health and justice, this reality must be addressed.

Thank you for your time. I welcome the committee's questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Now we're going to go into our rounds of questions.

When there's one minute left in the time, I will give you the yellow card, and when there are 30 seconds left, you'll get the red card.

We're going to start our round of questions with Ms. Roberts for six minutes.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses. I appreciate your time. Hopefully, we can come to some ideas on how we can improve the situation.

I'm going to ask all three of you to comment on the education piece. Does anyone have any numbers on how individuals were educated to stop their anti-feminist thinking?

Let's start with Tristan.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Do you want to answer the question, Mr. Boursier?

[Tristan Boursier]

Thank you for the question.

I don't work in the field of education specifically, so I don't have any recommendations to make on that issue. I would just like to point out that it seems to be an interesting avenue to explore, as highlighted by many of my colleagues who are specialists in the field.

I would also like to point out that schools are up against some extremely powerful players: the digital giants and social media. These players are creating a favourable environment for antifeminism, and they are in direct opposition to our schools. The question is whether schools are strong enough to stand up to these players who are attacking them directly.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Okay, thank you.

Would anyone else like to add anything to that?

[Dina Haddish]

Yes, I'd like to respond.

Research and practice show that anti-feminist thinking can be reduced through early education, specifically on healthy masculinities, on consent, on healthy relationships and on engaging men and boys as allies. Sexual assault centres have been leading that work in communities for decades, despite chronic underfunding and the really limited funds earmarked for public education. It's a cornerstone of the sexual assault centre model to integrate that public education piece to combat anti-feminist and hegemonic masculinities.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Last but not least is Ms. de Repentigny-Corbeil.

[Mylène de Repentigny-Corbeil]

Thank you for the question.

I agree, studies show that prevention, raising awareness and early education can help people think critically and challenge certain ideas. These studies are definitely relevant to the current movement.

I want to add that education isn't just about school. Many boys and Canadians who are no longer in school still hold these ideologies. They need to be educated and made aware, particularly when it comes to digital literacy, but also gender equality. This requires people who are on the ground and who can raise awareness.

To answer the question of whether there is specific data on the rise of antifeminism, I would say that this is a movement that is beyond us. Technologies are becoming increasingly sophisticated. Studies show that prevention will always help to deconstruct ideas that promote hatred.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

If anyone does have any data, I'd really appreciate getting it because it'll help us to maybe advance that in our findings and ensure that we get that education piece in there.

My next question is this. We talk about anti-feminism. What about the parents? Where are the parents on this whole topic? Do you feel it's a failure of parenting?

Anyone can answer. I'm good with that.

[Mylène de Repentigny-Corbeil]

I can try to answer that.

I don't think so at all. I think most parents have good intentions. I think there's a lack of understanding about what happens online. I think there's a need and a necessity for better digital literacy, a better understanding of control, of what's going on, but also, above all, a better understanding of what's happening online. It's about better understanding the terminology and what these ideologies can promote and how they unfold online.

I don't think it's the parents' fault at all. I think parents need this awareness and education to better support their young boys and better prevent the violence that can develop or the ideologies that these young boys can acquire at a very early age. There's a lot of focus on older children and later adolescence, but these ideologies can be transmitted as early as nine, 10, or 11 years old. Parents can play an important role, but they need to understand the situation and be aware of it.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

I guess my question is this: If we are examples to our children and we project that in the home setting, do you not feel that this would generate beyond that, and if they are exposed to online activity, would that not be a deterrent?

I know that I've raised my son to treat women or men or anybody with respect.

[Dina Haddish]

I would like to respond.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Thank you.

[Dina Haddish]

I think supporting parents with resources is certainly essential, but it's part of a whole-of-community response and a whole-of-community approach to violence prevention.

We all have a personal responsibility to end not only anti-feminist attitudes but violence against women and gender-diverse people generally. Supporting parents with resources is part of that, because parents are essential partners in prevention, but it doesn't end with parents. There are coaches and teachers—

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

That's the end of your time, Ms. Roberts.

Now we're going to Madame Ménard.

Ms. Ménard, you have six minutes.

[Marie-Gabrielle Ménard, Liberal, Hochelaga—Rosemont-Est, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Boursier, Ms. de Repentigny‑Corbeil, Ms. Haddish, thank you for taking the time to be with us today. Your expertise is a valuable contribution to our study, one which has been disturbing, and yet also fascinating. I believe I can speak on behalf of all my colleagues here today.

Mr. Boursier, I will start with you.

We are nearing the end of our study, and something in your opening remarks caught my attention. I feel that this is something that hasn't been explored very much. You say that the rise of feminist ideology has real economic consequences. I'm curious to hear more.

[Tristan Boursier]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

If I may correct you, it's the rise of antifeminist, not feminist, ideology.

What I observe in the field with my own data is that the discourse is not only ideological and political, but also, for these influencers, a way to make money, to monetize content. The two are intertwined. You have to keep both of these in mind to understand how this content and these ideas spread and manage to convince people.

Antifeminism is not new. As I mentioned, and as others have mentioned before me in this study, it has been around for a very long time. Christine Bard talks about antifeminism spanning centuries. However, what seems new is its intensity and its ability to reach younger audiences. That's why I'm focusing on digital social media to understand this.

In this context, I've noticed that antifeminist content posted by people who aren't necessarily antifeminists has increased significantly in recent years and seems to come with an increasingly professional approach to monetizing their content.

[Marie-Gabrielle Ménard, Liberal, Hochelaga—Rosemont-Est, QC]

So we can conclude that this is a business model for a lot of these people.

[Tristan Boursier]

Yes, I'd say so. Not everyone involved in antifeminism manages to turn a profit, but I do think that's what motivates them. They have some extremely influential and popular role models. I won't name them here, as I think they've already been mentioned many times. This inspires other, much lesser known influencers who hope to cash in on this windfall too.