Oppression and privilege in the transport sector

In transport, “neutral” is almost never neutral: it usually means planning for a dominant subject, a commuter who travels home–work–home while care-related trips (taking children, accompanying older adults, shopping, going to the doctor) are left out. These trips often follow a trip-chaining or polygonal pattern. This is not a minor flaw; it is structural oppression. As Frye explains, it isn’t a loose thread, but a birdcage made of many rules and technical assumptions that, together, immobilize women. A double bind appears, for example, either you take longer and more expensive routes to protect your safety, paying with time and money, or you choose the faster route, paying with higher risk and possible sanctions for arriving late. In both cases, the user, often a caregiver, bears the cost.

 

Through Young’s lens, the problem shows up in five faces of oppression. Exploitation: the system relies on the unpaid time and energy of care work (waiting, transfers, accompaniment) to sustain others’ productivity (i.e., trips tied to paid work). Marginalization: because care trips are barely measured, they don’t count in demand models and are left out of investment. Powerlessness: although they are expert users, women rarely have voice or vote in technical working groups or committees. Cultural imperialism: the “standard user”, the male pendular commuter, sets the meaning of efficiency (speed, long through-routes), and everything else is treated as an exception. Violence: the threat of sexual harassment, combined with poor lighting and the lack of toilets or elevators, restricts routes and schedules and harms the mobility of women and caregivers.

 

McIntosh shows the mirror: many men (including planners) move through the city with an invisible knapsack of unearned privileges, less fear at night, being treated as a default “expert,” traveling without a stroller or heavy bags, finding toilets available. Bailey sharpens the path for change: negative privileges (absence of barriers) should be universalized, e.g., safety, accessibility, and reasonable travel times for everyone, while positive privileges (conferred status and credibility) should be dismantled, such as the technical monopoly that discounts care expertise.

 

A feminist approach to transport is not a “social add-on”; it is institutional engineering: (1) measure care mobility (trip-chaining, idle time, obstacles with strollers); (2) redesign infrastructure and operations (lighting, toilets, elevators and ramps, space for strollers and packages, frequencies and request stops during care hours, effective anti-harassment protocols); (3) redistribute power (binding, compensated participation of caregivers; merit criteria that recognize situated experience). We will know it worked when double binds disappear, the five faces recede, and those “privileges” become effective rights for everyone.

 

References

- Bailey, A. (1998). Privilege: Expanding on Marilyn Frye’s “Oppression.” Journal of Social Philosophy, 29(3), 104–119.

- Frye, M. (1983). The Politics of Reality: Essays in Feminist Theory. Crossing Press.

- Young, I. M. (1990). Five faces of oppression. In Justice and the Politics of Difference (pp. 39–65). Princeton University Press.

- McIntosh, P. (1988). White privilege and male privilege: A personal account of coming to see correspondences through work in women’s studies (Working Paper No. 189). Wellesley College Center for Research on Women.

Moving Care: the other face of urban mobility in Bogota

In Bogota, as in many Latin American cities, moving around is not just a matter of transportation, it’s a matter of care. In the daily routines of millions, trips are not only made for work or education but to meet vital needs that sustain community life: taking children to school, accompanying older adults to medical appointments, shopping for groceries, picking up medications, attending workshops at a Care Block (Manzana de cuidado). These movements form what has been called the “mobility of care,” a concept first introduced by Inés Sánchez de Madariaga in 2009 as both an analytical category and a political tool to rethink cities through the lens of social sustainability.

The Bogota Region Mobility Survey 2023 offers a clear snapshot of this form of mobility by identifying trips made to care for others or to access care services. Seven percent of the city’s daily trips fall into this category. Most of these trips are short, multimodal, fragmented throughout the day, and made either on foot or by public transport. According to the survey’s summary, 72% of care trips in Bogota are made by women. This overwhelming female representation highlights not only a disproportionate burden in terms of time and effort, but also the urgent need for transport planning that incorporates a gender perspective.

Care mobility makes visible the invisible architecture that supports life in cities. According to the report by Sensata UX Research, CAF, and Secretaría de Movilidad (2024), caregivers have significantly different travel patterns: they combine multiple stops, prioritize safety and accessibility over speed, and often travel with dependents, which fundamentally changes how they experience urban space. Added to this is the reality that many caregivers lack stable or personal income, making transportation costs a major barrier to accessing essential services.

In a personal review of the Bogota Mobility Survey (2023), it became clear that this form of mobility is deeply shaped by structural inequalities: public transport offerings do not fully meet caregivers’ needs, and infrastructure decisions often prioritize technical criteria while overlooking the social use of space. This is why it is critical to incorporate intersectional approaches that recognize how gender, age, disability, motherhood, and place of residence shape differentiated mobility conditions.

Bogotá’s Care Blocks (Manzanas del Cuidado), a pioneering policy initiative, have placed the right to care at the heart of public policy. In Fernández Gallego’s study (Despacio, 2023), the benefits of bringing services, facilities, and training closer to those who have historically carried the burden of care work without pay or recognition are documented. But care policy must go beyond service access; it must also transform the conditions for getting there. A caring city is one that makes moving to care possible.

A revealing figure from Sensata et al. (2024) shows that over 60% of people who make care-related trips must adjust their routes due to a lack of direct lines, insecurity, or inaccessibility. This means spending more time on the streets, facing higher risks, and bearing a greater physical and emotional load. Often, these care trips are not even recognized by those who make them, they are so normalized that they become invisible, even to the public policies meant to support them. This invisibility has real consequences: while transport systems are designed for linear, efficient travel, life moves in fragmented, circular, emotional ways.

Moreover, there is a relational component that rarely gets measured. Caring in motion is not just about performing tasks; it’s about accompanying, protecting, teaching, supporting. It’s a profoundly social practice that builds the city through affect and connection. So when infrastructure doesn’t accommodate a stroller, when there’s no place to sit with an elderly person, when someone travels in fear or discomfort, more than just the travel experience is at stake, the ability to sustain life with dignity is undermined.

The public transport system in Bogotá, although extensive, is not yet configured to support care mobility. In the Bogota Mobility Survey (2023) it was found that the infrastructure and operation of TransMilenio, Bogotá’s bus rapid transit system, prioritize peak-hour commuter flows and overlook the needs of people making encumbered, relational, or off-peak trips. Women caregivers report difficulties entering and exiting buses with strollers or assistive devices, delays due to a lack of escalators or elevators, and a general absence of rest areas, signage, or staff prepared to support care-based travel.

These barriers are even more evident in the city’s most vulnerable territories. In Ciudad Bolívar, where many users depend on the TransMiCable cable car system, the presence of steep slopes and fragmented urban grids makes care trips more demanding. While TransMiCable has had positive impacts in terms of connectivity, time savings, and safety perception, the lack of integration with care-centered services or accessible last-mile solutions limits its transformative potential for caregivers. Many caregivers interviewed in the area still reported walking long distances with groceries or children in tow, due to the lack of suitable feeder services and the topography itself.

Despite being the majority of caregivers, women remain underrepresented in transport decision-making and continue to face environments where harassment and insecurity prevail. Gender-based violence in transit settings, as documented in several institutional reports, adds yet another layer of restriction to the freedom of movement for women and girls, especially when they travel accompanied.

To map care mobility is to map inequality. It’s a way to visualize not just material gaps but everyday forms of resistance, routes that carry bodies, relationships, and networks. On this map, every point marks an act of care. And every act of care is a chance to imagine a more just, sensitive, and humane city. The goal is not simply to include caregivers in the transport system, but to reconfigure that system around their needs. Caring is also movement, and moving is also resistance. Recognizing this is the first step toward transforming the city.

References

1. Fernández Gallego, B. (2023). Cuidando a las cuidadoras: Las Manzanas del Cuidado y la movilidad femenina en Bogotá. Despacio. https://www.despacio.org

2. Madariaga, I. S. de, & Agudo Arroyo, Y. (2019). Mobility of Care Report: Assessment of Nairobi’s Public Minibus Transport Services. UN-Habitat

3. Secretaría Distrital de Movilidad. (2023). Cartilla Encuesta de Movilidad Bogotá - Región 2023. Alcaldía Mayor de Bogotá

4. Sensata UX Research, CAF, & Secretaría Distrital de Movilidad. (2024). Caracterización de los patrones de movilidad en Bogotá con enfoque de género e interseccional [Informe final de consultoría]