China

There isn't really 'human rights' so much as 'human needs'. People need to eat, and a government declaring in its constitution that people have the right to food doesn't validate that need any more than saying they don't have the right to food doesn't mean they don't need it. That's a cultural and ideological difference that's worth pointing out because liberals will say 'China literally has no human rights' as a gotcha when it's really just a technicality.

Another way to put it:

• People have needs. Usually an unfulfilled need means death or unacceptable suffering.

• Liberal democratic governments bestow human rights on individuals to validate people's needs, prohibiting themselves or anyone else from denying people those needs.

• Democratic Centralism (or at least China specifically) bestows responsibilities on organs of government to ensure people's needs are met, requiring organs of government to provide for those needs.

So when you talk about someone's rights, that's things like the right to farm a certain plot of land, the right to build a house in your ancestral village, the right to demand a refund for a defective product. Meanwhile food, healthcare, shelter, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness are all needs, and when governments declare people have the 'right' to their needs, they're just creating an extra layer of rhetorical complexity that allows them to avoid taking responsibility.

Sorry for such a long tangent to your question; I just really wanted to point out that technicality. But yeah so taking your question to mean the needs of the poor rather than their rights, China has improved tremendously from the poverty alleiviation scheme. Being out as queer is trickier though, because the organ of government responsible for a lot of your needs is your home province, while as a queer person you almost definitely want to be living in the cities. Unless your home province is actually one of the cities, you're kind of under pressure not to rely on the state for help.