ContextAccording to the new decision of the European Court of Justice on 1 March 2011, insurance companies in the European Union can no longer adopt policies that involve gender discrimination. The ban on gender-based premiums has serious implications for insurers in the areas of life insurance, general insurance and various annuity products. The question of whether a unisex pricing policy should apply in Australia is of great concern to both policyholders and insurance companies. In my view, Australia should not follow the EU's lead of gender-neutral pricing rules prior to the publication of any associated local legal acts. This essay will present reasonable discussions from both an ethical and cultural perspective. Unisex Pricing: Implications and Evaluation Ethical Implications Sexism, understood as the behavior in which members of one sex are treated unfairly compared to the other, is normally thought to be a moral wrong (refer to 1 Mary B. Mahowald). It could therefore be argued that, from an ethical point of view, the differentiation of rewards based on sex tends to be inappropriate. However, insurance companies calculate the amount of premiums and claims based on various risk factors of which gender is usually the most important. Similar to age and weight, gender is nothing more than a differentiating criterion used to evaluate the cost of providing insurance products and the likelihood of paying claims. It is generally recognized that there are significant biological differences between females and males in terms of risky behavior such as mortality rate, risk of morbidity and likelihood of accidents. The elimination of gender differentiation in Australia will place severe pressure on insurers' portfolios. Business Strategy Because risk factor distinctions, including life expectancy and accident rates between the sexes, persist one way or another, premiums could not be adequately reflected in a single unisex price. However, from a legal point of view, there is no guarantee that gender-based pricing can be distinguished from gender discrimination. We should therefore propose some business strategies to face future challenges caused by changes in legal regulations. First, the new prices should only be applied to newly hired policyholders to avoid sudden company adjustments. Instead of using gender, the underlying biological differences between male and female should be classified into various risk factors. This may include testosterone in blood tests, while each individual policyholder's personal risk will be a better reflection of that