This International Women’s Day, as it takes on an increasingly corporate feel, we’re left asking if the action we accelerating towards is radical enough?

On Saturday it was International Women’s Day (IWD). Like many dates on our communal calendar, the increase in popularity in acknowledging the moment comes alongside a co-opting of the message. Despite its origins in socialist and union movements, increasingly at its most transactional corporations, influencers and targeted ads use the premise to sell more products.

All hope is not lost as there remains mobilisation of women wanting to make change happen too. We were inspired by a number of women’s marches around the world; from highlighting the plight of women in Afghanistan to the rolling back of women’s rights in the USA and challenging unequal pay, workplace conditions and gender-based violence.

But as IWD morphs into all things for all people within its capitalist context, at Care Full we’re left reflecting on how it can become an effective vehicle for systemic change beyond these confines. This challenge is neatly summed up by the theme this year: accelerating action. But in what direction? Towards what destination? And what if the vehicle itself has broken down?

The work towards gender equity is inherently political. It is not a single fixed end point but an ongoing practice in dismantling a patriarchal economy and rebuilding something fairer and more caring.

And so there is a challenge for IWD and talking about the detail of the world we want to create. When it comes to care (especially the unpaid labour variety) the solutions are often simplified. The IWD website calls for us to ‘recognise, redistribute and reduce’ the ‘burden’ of unpaid care. Each of these actions require different strategies and with the language of ‘burden’ rooted in our existing economic model – which seeks to sideline and minimise care by describing it as a cost not a foundation – the ambition risks falling short.

So whilst need for action is seen as a given, without a destination of the world we want to create the solutions are left wanting. We’re left with a dominant perspective that care is a policy problem to be fixed, and typically one focused on “social value” as opposed to economic; but the two are intertwined.

Care is at the intersection of our economic and social lives; globally, for example, 708 million women say they are not in paid work because of care responsibilities compared to 40 million men. And this is part of the reason why, in the EU, the income ‘lost’ to women as a result of unpaid caretaking is €242 billion. On BBC Radio Five on Monday, the excellent feminist economist, Emma Holten articulated that the value we place on care is an economic decision. She cited the example that nursing has is considered without economic value because it doesn’t generate profit, as is providing unpaid care. This is perfectly highlighted by a man who texts in to the discussion referring to a friend who is a stay at home mum in her 30s. He expresses concern that this care is at the expense of “pursuing a career” and is detrimentally making her “economically inactive”. We’re not so sure.

We’s argue instead that we have to acknowledge that unpaid labour is essential not just to the economy but to our lives. Paid labour and our capitalist economy wouldn’t exist without the unpaid labour that holds it up.

We can hope – or maybe accelerate – towards an IWD next year that shows the clear link between gender inequity and our capitalist system so that we can possibly start to move to a future that enables us to not only care but be cared for and about. 

By Ruth Hannan & Hannah Webster