Nudge Theory: Are Women greater targets?

[RedToothBrush]

www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2018/05/01/hostile-environment-the-dark-side-of-nudge-theory
Hostile environment: The dark side of nudge theory

I have just read this thread and the first thing that has jumped into my mind is just how much women are greater targets for this method of collective control.

Women have much greater contact with the state and their health care is much more influenced by ideology.

Whilst how this works in the context of the windrush scandal is easy to see and define.

For women its much more difficult. There are examples like the Rape Clause which is very overt, but other examples are less obvious. They are usually framed as things which are 'better for us' without our input.

Overall I think there is a sense of the 'walls closing in' despite the vocalisation of #metoo.

I know what will be used as an obvious example (trans ideology) but it would be interesting to reflect on other examples and how they all work together.

Interesting. I think it's a technique that's been around long before it actually had a name ("nudge theory") - after all, it lies at the heart of Arthur Dent's rant about the publicly accessible planning application, freely available in "an unlit basement, with no stairs, in a locked filing cabinet, with a beware of the leopard sign on it."

I can think of lots of examples - for instance the fact that it's always easier to get through to the "subscribe to our service" phone number for an internet or utility supplier than to get through to their "customer service" or "cancel my susbscription" phone numbers. But sex-specific ones. That's an interesting one. I shall give it some thought.

One which springs to mind, though, is the push for LARCs. GPs are incredibly gung ho about fitting them and bring immense pressure to bear on women to have one (targets must be met...) They are incredibly reluctant to remove them, even when women report quite severe side effects. It's always "give it another few months to bed in..." I've read threads on here where women have been reduced to buying a scalpel and a set of butterfly sutures from the chemist and removing implants themselves because doctors refused to do it.

So many examples within the hostile environment and nudge theory in benefit reforms that have led to disastrous consequences for women and are analogous to Windrush in that any contact with the state at all becomes abusive.

One that springs to mind is the havoc created when poor data matching meant that thousands upon thousands of single mothers were accused of cohabiting and their tax credits were withdrawn with no notice. Many were unable to prove the negative and it took up to a year in many cases to get the tax credits reinstated. One woman was told she was living with Joseph Rowntree - yes, the Joseph Rowntree, 19th century philanthropist - and the DWP refused to back down and reinstate her tax credits for ages.

We had one woman come to our foodbank who had made a suicide attempt because she got caught up in this and all the other stress of being a poor single mother had left her unable to cope. The state's response to that? Threaten to take her kids into care.

Anyone working in the area of benefits cuts - to the disabled, to low earners, to the unemployed - could probably give you fifty such examples. All because the state is attempting to "nudge" behaviour. It's bloody Dickensian.