Double standards analysed in the first article cited on this thread are the product of an imbalance of power between women and men, as evidenced in the second article with the apparent reversal of such standards when "women are more free to be themselves".

Achieve equity between women and men and double standards disappear.

Moreover, pretending women and men have the same life experience, and are thus subject to an amorphic, same standard, absent negotiation, causes, not resolves, double standards.

Gender roles and stereotypes disadvatageous to a gender are prescribed by a dominant gender.

Like sexual violence, double standards are about power not sex.

A male rewarded for sexual prowess over women is celebrated for achieving power over women.

When women are their own bosses, male opportunities to achieve power over women are obsolete since women are responsible to their own kind, not men.

Equity in governance eliminates both sexual violence and double standards from perceived sexual conquest.

The traditions of socially advanced communities, as with Australia's indigenous peoples, eliminate double standards with the maintenance of women's and men's business.

The social culture introduced into Australia over the past two centuries has struggled to throw off a legacy of male privilege which inhibits the achievement of equity.

Contrast an emphasis on a single male family lineage in introduced communities with extended family parentage in indigenous traditions in which the child, not the natural parents, is the focus of care.

Introduced communities are approaching equity, albeit that there has been "the possibility of no drop, or even of an increase" in violence against women in Australia over the past 30 years [http://2mf.net/news158.htm].

The certainty of constitutional recognition of equity with provision for law enacted by agreement between women's and men's legislatures, eliminates stubborn and intractable double standards.