"Government failed to consider gender in its response to covid pandemic"

[MowldyStupidAndAssive]

So says the Guardian today

"...out of 73 meetings, only 13 made explicit reference to gender terminology with further analysis showing these mentions all related to biological sex – for example that more men were dying and the risks posed by Covid-19 to pregnant women"

It seems that they are saying that the social impacts of the pandemic (such as the main burden of childcare responsibilities) were "gendered" (ie not related to biological sex), and that these were not considered no shit Sherlock

I think I'm a bit confused with what their actual point is though because we all know which sort of women were expected to do the childcare

I think they're actually trying to say, though muddling it by their use of language and their own confusion as to what 'woman' means, to say that the government response did consider sex differences in relation to medical issues but didn't consider the disproportionate impact on women (employment, childcare etc). Which is of course true.

It’s so frustrating that they’ve tied themselves up in knots with the language because of course what they mean because this is a perfect example of where and why Dec matters- it’s the social impact on biological women that they are very obviously talking about.

*Sex not Dec! Even my phone doesn’t want me to mention it!

Yes yes but what about the impact on failing to consider sex? /sarcasm

This is why language accuracy matters

The problem, imo, isn't that they're using the term 'gender' - as far as I can tell, they're actually using it for what it should be used for i.e the societal differences attached to the two sexes. Their problem is that they are also wont to use 'gender' elsewhere to mean... who knows what, some indefinable feeling or 'identity'.

They had Dr Sarah Jarvis on R2 the other day, she was saying that more women experienced depression during the pandemic than men because female brains were more prone to depression. I'm screaming at the radio "it's the structural inequality that places the entire burden of care on women you twat"

I don't see how this could have been better done even with gender experts. They talked about how schools closing affected women more, but also workers with increased risk of exposure were mostly women. If schools and childcare had stayed open that would have impacted women in education and healthcare.

Bottom line is that of the people doing essential work, both paid and unpaid the majority are women, and they are not fairly compensated for their labour. If it was highly valued, both socially and financially, I expect more men would step up. There's no biological reason why men can't or women should.

These days when I see a headline like that, especially from the guardian, I assume they are complaining about the impact (presumably literal violence) of TW not being able to impose themselves on women in female spaces or go out in heels and a miniskirt. Or that references to sex (medical impact) are making them feel suicidal.

If schools and childcare had stayed open that would have impacted women in education and healthcare.

The main issue for childcare was primary schools. And there was no evidence of significant ability to spread between primary aged children. So keeping primaries open would have had limited impact on spread or healthcare (so long as teachers maintained distance)

So, what do we think the government could have done differently then?

Keep primary schools open - at least in the second lockdown by which time the evidence was there.

Single mother here, with zero practical support from ex and CM stopping for a lengthy period of time as he was put on furlough and at the same time had to move.

I've had to take unpaid dependent leave due to no wrap around childcare during the height of the pandemic. 20+ hours. I have also amassed credit card debt having to buy devices and other learning resources/materials and an increased food bill for DC. I do not qualify for FSM or any other covid related grant.

I'm also having to defer a huge, life changing goal due to the cost involved.

The financial pressure right now is unreal.

Just to add, I'm a keyworker, so had to work over the pandemic.

Just been thinking. They could have kept schools open for young children, say up year 7 or 8, used secondary schools and leisure centres and colleges and universities to get enough space to distance everyone, acknowledge that childcare was primary aim, suspend curriculum, use teachers, other school staff, youth workers and anyone with CRB check to staff it. Off wraparound care for essential workers.

Some of the things brought in recently should have been there at the start, childcare bubbles, support bubbles for families with babies, partners allowed to attend maternity appointments.

I think lots of women had issues with exercising outside due to safety concerns, women could have been allowed to exercise in pairs with someone from outside their home.

I’m a teacher. I couldn’t be used for childcare as I was teaching live to timetable immediately from lockdown 1 - same as a lot of teachers.

That debate was done to death on the CV board. There just wasn’t the space or staff to accommodate every child, that was why schools opened to provide childcare to keyworker parents who could not wfh.

Honestly, I understand they point they are trying to make. However, due to their reluctance to talk in words/terms the general public understand for many years now, it comes off really garbled.

I think lots of women had issues with exercising outside due to safety concerns, women could have been allowed to exercise in pairs with someone from outside their home

Yes at least this was acknowledged in England for the January lockdown. It came later in Wales, but only if you lived close enough to meet without driving (a rule which I would have ignored if I had been in Wales).

Yes covid has had a disproportionately bad impact on women, as did the 2008 recession and the so-called resulting austerity (which always had more to do with Tory dogma than balancing the books). When there's a crisis, it's always women who lose out the most.

@motherrunner

I’m a teacher. I couldn’t be used for childcare as I was teaching live to timetable immediately from lockdown 1 - same as a lot of teachers.

That debate was done to death on the CV board. There just wasn’t the space or staff to accommodate every child, that was why schools opened to provide childcare to keyworker parents who could not wfh.

But you wouldn't have needed to provide online learning if the school was open.

Oh for FUCKS SAKE.

put your money where your mouth is guardian.

It's bad enough that they use people with vaginas or whatever when it's a woman's issue LGBT thing but on the main pages use women to mean sex.

But this is taking the utter piss.

They are using gender to mean sex based roles? As feminists always did? Fucking hell..

And they are surprised that women have got screwed? Seriously?

And they are hand wringing?

My response.

GO FUCK YOURSELVES YOU HYPOCRITICAL BASTARDS.

Bottom line is that of the people doing essential work, both paid and unpaid the majority are women, and they are not fairly compensated for their labour. If it was highly valued, both socially and financially, I expect more men would step up. There's no biological reason why men can't or women should.

To be fair, this isn't the case in all sectors. We have literally thousands of drivers and many mechanics and I've never met a female one. Of the three councils I work with, not one has a single female bin woman or refuse truck driver. I also regularly have to go to the recycling plant and they only have one female plant operative who is a female Polish woman brought in to manage the picking line - and dozens of men picking through the recyclable waste.

By contrast, we have lots of female office workers and managers.

Not that I disagree that carers and nurses etc should be paid better (I believe they are in some countries, like Canada where they can earn pretty well). But bin men have the 3rd most dangerous job in the UK and get paid

They are using sex and gender correctly. Sex to refer to biology and gender to refer to social roles. It is the clear and correct use of sex and gender and has nothing to do with transgenderism or gender identity.