In Canada, a man can be charged for criminal harassment if a complaint or lawsuit against a woman makes her feel harassed.
Additionally, the "fear of financial safety" is cleverly word saladed by Judges to be a variation or component of "emotional safety", and men do get convicted of criminal harassment.

[46]  As set out above in Sidhu, assessment of the reasonableness of the complainant’s fear considers the history and circumstances of the relationship and the state of mind of the victim. I find that the trial judge convicted on fear for safety, which was based at least in part, on an emotional or psychological threat, which arose not only out of a threat to financial security, but from consideration of the circumstances as a whole.  In light of the complainant’s testimony, considering that the trial judge found that he believed the complainant for the most part, and also considering the trial judge’s wording and emphasis in several portions of the Decision which reference emotional trauma and harm, the trial judge did not convict on the basis of financial safety alone, and in this way, he did not err in his application of the legal test for “fear for their safety”.

This means that if you are suing a woman in Canada, and she feels that her financial safety is at risk, she can use feminist police forces like Toronto Police to allege that she fears for her emotional safety because a lawsuit against her will affect her financially.

Meanwhile, feminists are given carte blanche to smear innocent men's names online and contact employers with malice to get men fired from their jobs.

Isn't that a double standard that feminists are allowed to defame innocent men while men who file lawsuits or complaints against women end up being criminally charged or criminal harassment in Canada?

Citation:

R v Fenn, 2022 ABQB 67 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/jlxfm>