Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Covid-19 and purity spirals

684 replies

DreadPirateLuna · 09/04/2020 13:54

Covid-19 is a very serious illness which threatens our most vulnerable and risks overwhelming the NHS. We should all do what we can to flatten the curve and save lives. People whose behaviour risks lives (e.g. urban residents traveling out to holiday homes in rural communities) should face criticism and sanctions.

However, I can't help feeling that some of the outrage at some behaviours is less about reducing the spread and more about getting caught in a "purity spiral".

Take all the outrage about people in parks. Fresh air and sunshine is good for physical and mental health, it improves the immune system which is particularly important during an epidemic! Many urban residents have no other source of open space except the local park. The ability to get outside can be lifesaving for victims of DV. Risks of contracting disease are very low if you keep your distance from others outside your household.

Yet I've seen photos of walkers and family groups in parks, keeping far away from others, but accused of selfishness and killing the elderly and disrespecting the NHS. Parks in London have been closed, meaning more congestion of other areas and residents confined to homes, which is damaging for reasons outlined above.

And it's usually (though not exclusively) women and esp mothers who get blamed. Those selfish Karens and their broods.

A more sensible solution would be to allow restricted access to the parks. Maybe allow only locals in nearby flats without gardens. But it seems we're not doing sensible these days.

OP posts:
isabellerossignol · 10/04/2020 22:03

As for how is someone at risk from lifting an item off the shelf - from the time taken to walk to the shelf and select the item ( extra shoppers that they encounter during that time) and from the risk of touching objects that might be contaminated (the more items you pick up the greater the chance one of them is infected).

That wasn't the scenario I was referring to. I was talking about a queuing system where you are queuing in the aisle anyway. What difference does it make to lift something off a shelf when you're standing there and can't move forward anyway?

I've actually only been to the supermarket once since this whole thing started. The entire shop was open but no one was browsing due to the one way system and the spacing on the floor and the need to move along. And as for 'the more things you touch, the more risk', why would you only apply that to luxury items? There's no difference risk wise between a tin of soup and a bottle of wine.

Hearhoovesthinkzebras · 10/04/2020 22:11

TheProdigalKittensReturn

So ignore me then. No one is making you reply.

isabellerossignol

Have you seen the graphics that show how many people one person can infect? It's set out like a family tree. Top line is 1 person, 2nd line is 3 people, 3rd line shows each of those three infect another three and so on. By the time you get to the tenth line the number infected is in the thousands. If you reduce just three or four interactions you reduce the numbers down to hundreds or even tens.

This is the same principle. Say you go to buy ten items and then buy one extra item, that is an extra chance to catch it. For each extra item you pick up the risk goes up. So it's not about eliminating the risk entirely but about reducing it as much as you can.

isabellerossignol · 10/04/2020 22:17

I think I'm done too. The discussion is completely illogical to me.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 10/04/2020 22:18

Glass of wine before bed? I'm still on the oolong but no reason I can't toast with that.

isabellerossignol · 10/04/2020 22:20

I'm drinking red wine right now. I'm trying not to enjoy it but I can't help it, it's very nice.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 10/04/2020 22:21

I am enjoying my oolong very much. It's scented with orchids!

isabellerossignol · 10/04/2020 22:23

Prodigal that sounds a bit... luxurious.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 10/04/2020 22:24

(bows head in fake shame)

Justhadathought · 10/04/2020 22:31

Nope, they can just be blocked off by shops

I really don't understand why not permitting people to buy certain types of items at a supermarket can help in fighting a virus? So long as people are socially distancing - what issue can there possibly be?

I do have to agree with some other posters that there is so much 'visible' and 'self reported' virtue signalling going - all under the guise of being unselfish and considerate much of which has absolutely zero net effect in reducing the impact of coronavirus. It has become a form of social tyranny.

My daughter discovered today that the elderly woman who she shops for twice a week, and who has quite exacting standards and specificity of produce ( being vegan), also has another neighbour going shopping for her too...but apparently does get out for a walk on a daily basis.

I think we are all doing, as best we can, to meet our own needs and those of our families - but each in our own, individual ways, according to our natures. I think there are some people who actually love being at home all of the time, and spend their days baking, for example.

Maybe some are staying home and being absolutely 'religious' - but at the same time doing a lot of on-line shopping......which necessitates lots of other people to work to order, and to deliver; thus exposing themselves on their behalf, as one example.

Justhadathought · 10/04/2020 22:40

Again, why can't those of us who are shielded go out at all, even for a walk? There must be risk in just walking out of the door yet so many people keep stating that going out and staying out is completely fine. If it is, why are people like me told not to.go.out at all then

I think the government is trying to tread a balance between unnecessary authoritarianism, and setting an 'ideal standard'. If you give some people too much wriggle room they will take it, plus much more.

People, such as yourself, who are hyper conscious. are not the problem.......I'm sure you could go for a walk if you really wanted or needed to - if you were sensible and careful...without endangering yourself or other people. I'm obviously not sure of your specific condition, though.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 10/04/2020 22:42

Have you read about what's been happening in some Amazon warehouses? They're unpleasant places to work at the best of times, even more so now.

There are no consequence free actions, and most people are doing the best they can in a very trying situation.

Justhadathought · 10/04/2020 22:44

Where do you live

To my mind, hooves is describing Asda. A large branch of Asda.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 10/04/2020 22:49

Toasting with a nice glass of white wine.

Dances · 10/04/2020 22:55

Asda or Tesco

So DIY and booze aisles to be cordoned off. Plus certain types of personal grooming, rules to be issued forthwith

Mrsfrumble · 10/04/2020 22:57

You might think walking in a park is lower risk but it isn't no risk is it?

FFS. No, it’s not no risk. But my family need to eat! I’m not booking deliveries because the message is that they should be for more vulnerable people. I can’t drive to the supermarket because, as I’ve explained, we don’t have a car. So the only “no risk” strategy is not eating I guess.

Dances · 10/04/2020 22:57

Yes, I think you are right kittens

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 10/04/2020 22:58

Surely in a general sense personal grooming would be one of the last things you'd deem non essential in a situation where people were at risk of getting ill? I'm not seeing how preventing people from buying shampoo would be a positive here, is what I'm saying.

isabellerossignol · 10/04/2020 22:59

Plus certain types of personal grooming, rules to be issued forthwith

I can imagine the rules on that. Soap is ok, moisturiser is forbidden. Deodorant is ok, but not fragrance. Shampoo is fine, conditioner is unnecessary.

Hearhoovesthinkzebras · 10/04/2020 23:00

People, such as yourself, who are hyper conscious. are not the problem.......I'm sure you could go for a walk if you really wanted or needed to - if you were sensible and careful...without endangering yourself or other people. I'm obviously not sure of your specific condition, though.

I'm immunosuppressed. Why would the shielding letter say explicitly not to leave the house if it's ok to go for a walk, if I really wanted to?

Even in doors there are strict rules to follow. If it's so easy to avoid infection why are they going to so much trouble to shield us?

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 10/04/2020 23:15

I can imagine the rules on that. Soap is ok, moisturiser is forbidden. Deodorant is ok, but not fragrance. Shampoo is fine, conditioner is unnecessary.

And when all the nice loo roll is gone they can replace it with the weird stuff we had at school that was semi transparent and scratchy. It was like wiping your arse with tracing paper.

Dances · 10/04/2020 23:19

Or strips of newspaper
That was back in the days of print newspapers
Only virtual ones go wipe our arses on now

DJLippy · 10/04/2020 23:21

I dont think anyone had shared this yet but it helps to frame the whole discussion.
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000d70h

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 10/04/2020 23:21

Everyone has seen this, right?

TitianaTitsling · 10/04/2020 23:31

Do you want to take your horror disgust and rage and bloody do something nwith it? I've just had a text from my colleagues on the ward and we are fucking OUT of PPE... we are now reusing, I am so pleased your angst is this, you aren't happy with others social distancing? Come and join us in acute care or proper ly self isolate.

TitianaTitsling · 10/04/2020 23:33

Oop sorry for rant shite day at workork downing of wine and inability to post correctly

Swipe left for the next trending thread