Navigating Masculinities: what about men?

"While most men inhabit city streets without either explanation or apology, for women, the right to be in public is hard-won on an everyday basis."

— Romit Chowdhury

 

I recently came across the publication "City of Men. Masculinities and everyday morality on public transport" by Romit Chowdhury. This book aligns with the questions I constantly ask myself about the participation of men in urban dynamics and transportation planning, especially when it comes to incorporating a gender analysis. In this sense, Romit Chowdhury’s book becomes an essential read for exploring how masculinities influence the shaping of public urban spaces and how transportation, a domain traditionally dominated by men, reinforces gender and power hierarchies. Chowdhury not only examines the male presence in Kolkata’s public transport, but also raises critical questions about the invisibility of women’s experiences and how the very infrastructure can reproduce inequalities.

The introduction of "City of Men: Masculinities and Everyday Morality on Public Transport" establishes the fundamental context of the work, focusing on how men inhabit urban spaces, particularly those related to public transport. Romit Chowdhury begins this ethnographic study in Kolkata, India, describing how men fill and dominate the city's public spaces, from parks to bus stops and taxis, and how these dynamics contribute to a specific form of masculinity in the urban context. From the first pages, Chowdhury highlights that while men are omnipresent in public spaces, women must constantly earn their place, which underscores a clear gender inequality in the appropriation of space.

 

Chowdhury raises two key questions that will guide the rest of the book: In what ways do men inhabit the city’s spaces? And how does this inhabitation produce a gendered city? The premise that public transport, being male-dominated, contributes to the construction of a masculinized urban space is a very interesting idea that opens the door to a deep analysis of the relationship between gender, mobility, and urban space. The introduction presents the central argument clearly, but there is also a noticeable inclination toward the male focus which, although it is the objective of the study, could have been complemented by further consideration of the role and experience of women in these spaces.

 

One interesting aspect present from the beginning is the focus on public transport as a microcosm of urban life, where everyday interactions reflect and reproduce patriarchal power structures. The author also points out how mobility itself is seen as a masculine value, which places women in a position of relative immobility or limited mobility. However, a criticism that could be made of this section is that the analysis of power dynamics could have been introduced more explicitly. While the book promises to explore masculinities and how they form part of the urban fabric, the introduction focuses on male presence without fully addressing how these masculinities interact with other aspects of identity, such as class or ethnicity, which could have been developed further from the outset.

 

In the first chapter, ‘The Urban Landscape of Public Transport’, Chowdhury offers a historical and social context of public transport in Kolkata, tracing its evolution and the dynamics that define it today. Here, the author explores the intersection between transport and the labor and social configurations of the region. He highlights how public transport, especially in South Asian cities, is deeply masculinized. Work in the transport sector is not only dominated by men, but it is also associated with a certain image of masculinity, where the ability to navigate the chaos of the city and face environmental dangers becomes a central aspect of male identity.

 

Chowdhury's analysis in this chapter is highly valuable because it positions urban mobility as a determining factor in the formation of masculine identities. The ability of men to move freely through the city, while women often face restrictions, is a way of demonstrating and reinforcing their power in public space. However, a criticism of this approach is that the author could have explored further how this male mobility directly affects women who also rely on public transport. Although it is mentioned tangentially, the main focus remains on male experiences, leaving a gap in the analysis of how women navigate these same spaces, often under vulnerable conditions.

 

Chowdhury also provides a critical reading of urban policies and the power structures underlying the management of transportation in Kolkata. He notes how the urban middle classes often view public transport workers, mostly working-class men, as an “urban disorder.” These negative representations are essential for understanding the power hierarchies operating in the city, as they reinforce socioeconomic and gender inequalities. However, the author could have expanded this discussion by linking it to broader mobility policies that affect women and other marginalized groups. In summary, while the chapter provides a useful framework for understanding the relationship between transport and masculinity, it feels limited in terms of including other perspectives.

 

The second chapter focuses on “autorickshaws”, a key mode of transportation in Kolkata, and the social dynamics that emerge around this form of transport. Chowdhury presents autorickshaw drivers as key actors in the creation of sociable infrastructures, where interactions between drivers and passengers are often daily and repetitive, allowing for the formation of relationships beyond mere economic exchange. Through this analysis, the author shows how the autorickshaw space becomes a stage where masculinities are negotiated and reinforced.

 

A fascinating aspect of this chapter is how the author examines the “sociability” that arises in these transport spaces, suggesting that autorickshaws not only physically connect people but also facilitate the creation of social bonds between drivers, passengers, and the community at large. Chowdhury details how these interactions often reinforce class and gender hierarchies, as drivers are typically working-class men serving a middle-class clientele. While there is some solidarity and cooperation in these relationships, tensions are also evident, especially when passengers, mostly from higher classes, perceive the drivers as “uncivilized” or “dangerous.”

 

Despite the successes of the analysis, one of the weaknesses of this chapter is the lack of a deeper exploration of how women experience these spaces. Although it is briefly mentioned that women sometimes feel uncomfortable or unsafe in autorickshaws, the author does not delve into how these gender dynamics directly affect women’s mobility. Given that the author focuses primarily on male interactions, the opportunity to provide a more comprehensive view of how autorickshaws can be both inclusive and exclusionary spaces in terms of gender is missed.

 

This chapter is particularly interesting for my doctoral inquiry, as it demonstrates that infrastructure is not just a physical system that connects people; it is also a social space where gender identities are negotiated and reinforced. This means that the diverse experiences of users, particularly women, older adults, or caregivers, are not adequately considered, and they may face additional risks or limitations in these environments. By overlooking how gender, class, and race hierarchies influence mobility, infrastructures not only perpetuate these inequalities but also reinforce them. Transport spaces, far from being neutral, become arenas where power relations are negotiated and reproduced, demonstrating that infrastructure is not merely a technical matter but deeply social and political.

 

In the third chapter, ‘Unaccustomed Streets: Taxis’, Chowdhury shifts his focus to taxi drivers, many of whom are migrants from nearby states like Bihar and Jharkhand. Here, it is shown how migration and work in the informal transport sector impact identity and masculine experiences. Taxi drivers, being migrants in a large city, face unique challenges such as social isolation and economic precariousness, which shape their daily interactions and sense of masculinity.

 

Chowdhury’s analysis of the relationship between taxi drivers and the city is intriguing, as it highlights how drivers must constantly negotiate their place in the city, both in physical and social terms. Being away from their families and communities, these men develop a particular relationship with the urban space, where the city becomes both a place of work and one of danger and desire. The author touches on themes such as the vulnerability of drivers to urban violence and their exposure to sexuality and desire in the city, offering a complex view of how migrant men experience and manage their masculinity in these contexts.

 

While incidents of sexual harassment in taxis are briefly mentioned, the analysis does not delve into the broader implications of gender violence in these spaces. Although the focus on drivers is valuable, it would have been enriching to include a perspective that considers both the drivers and the female passengers, providing a more comprehensive analysis of gender interactions in public transport.

 

The fourth chapter, ‘Homosocial Trust: Traffic Police’, introduces a key concept: "homosocial trust." Chowdhury analyzes the relationships between public transport drivers and traffic police, suggesting that despite friction and conflict, there is a form of trust and understanding between them based on shared masculinity. This concept is innovative and provides a new lens for examining how men collaborate and support each other in regulating urban space.

 

Chowdhury's analysis of homosocial trust is solid and offers a deep understanding of power dynamics between men in public space. The author argues that traffic police, although often representing a form of state control, also understand the pressures and challenges faced by male drivers, which often leads to acts of complicity or leniency. These types of interactions, according to the author, reinforce gender hierarchies, as they are based on a tacit understanding of masculinity.

Finally, this book provides a critical and insightful examination of how masculinities are deeply embedded in urban transport systems and how these dynamics reinforce existing power structures. Romit Chowdhury offers a thorough exploration of the ways in which men inhabit public spaces, shaping not only the physical infrastructure but also the social interactions within these spaces. However, while the book effectively highlights male experiences, it leaves room for a more comprehensive inclusion of women’s perspectives and the broader intersectional dynamics at play. By addressing these gaps, future analyses could further contribute to a more equitable understanding of how urban transport infrastructure impacts all users, not just from a gendered lens but also considering class, race, and other social dimensions. Ultimately, Chowdhury’s work serves as a crucial reminder that mobility is not neutral; it is shaped by power, and equitable urban transport planning must take this into account.

The Power of Feminist Urbanism in ‘The Gendered City’ by Nourhan Bassam

I have lost count of how many times I have read ‘The Gendered City: How Cities Keep Failing Women’ (2023) by Nourhan Bassam, a book that came into my hands a few months ago after meeting her and promising to review it as part of my bibliographic exploration for the systematic literature review in my Ph.D. in Engineering.

 

There’s much I could say about Nourhan. Of everything, perhaps my favorite aspect is our conversations, along with the joy of revisiting her book. She expertly combines her academic training in urbanism with an intersectional feminist approach, demonstrating how gender and race intersect within the urban experience. Beyond her accomplishments in urbanism, her work stands as a model for feminist researchers everywhere. It’s indispensable for broadening the horizons of gender studies and urban planning. Nourhan focuses much of her work on criticizing and dismantling the patriarchal structures that have historically shaped city design and planning. She is also a leading advocate for more inclusive urbanism that addresses the diverse needs of women and other marginalized populations. ´The Gendered City´ is one of her most influential works, offering profound analysis and suggestions on how cities can be transformed into more just and equitable spaces.

 

The first section of the book, The City is Built on Gendering, examines how cities have been designed throughout history to replicate and maintain gendered power dynamics. Nourhan makes it clear that cities are not neutral spaces; instead, they play a significant role in shaping how men and women experience urban environments. Using an intersectional feminist lens, she explores how gender intersects with other social categories, including race, class, and sexuality, to create different urban experiences of oppression and privilege. She also highlights how urban policies and city design often perpetuate exclusion and unequal access to public spaces, disproportionately impacting women and other marginalized communities.

 

In the second part, Collective Failures in the Gendered City, Nourhan delves into how and why urban environments that favor men often fail to support women and other marginalized groups. She examines how urban life is embedded with power dynamics that marginalize women, from street design to public transportation. Nourhan sheds light on gender-based violence in urban spaces and the exclusion of women from public life, advocating for more inclusive and safer city policies that benefit all genders. She emphasizes the ongoing issue of violence and harassment in public spaces and stresses the importance of including diverse voices in urban planning.

 

The third part, Departing from the Gendered City, addresses how we can think beyond the long-standing gender-specific structures in urban planning. Nourhan argues that to build fair and equitable cities, patriarchy must be eradicated as a guiding principle in the conception and design of public spaces. This section introduces the feminist concepts of the “caring city” and the “15-minute city,” showing how these paradigms can shift priorities and realign urban planning with social needs. The chapter challenges dominant paradigms that have long ignored feminist perspectives, emphasizing that care should be universally provided, particularly in key life events.

 

‘The Gendered City’ is divided into three interconnected sections that explore the exciting intersection of urban design and gender studies. Nourhan argues that the male-centric approach in urban planning often overlooks the diverse needs of all city dwellers, particularly women and minorities. She shines a light on serious issues like gender-based violence in public spaces and the exclusion of women from urban life, pointing out that many urban policies simply don’t work for everyone. While some cities are beginning to recognize the importance of gender-sensitive urban planning, many still have a long way to go.

 

For example, Nourhan discusses the “Safe Cities” initiative by UN Women, a movement aiming to make urban areas safer and more inclusive. She believes it’s crucial to shift our thinking in urban planning towards creating spaces that are equitable for everyone. One of the concepts she explores is the "15-minute city," a vision where all essential services—like grocery stores, schools, and parks—are within a 15-minute walk or bike ride. By reducing the time needed for errands or commuting, this model could make life easier and safer for women, who often face challenges when traveling long distances.

 

Moreover, Nourhan introduces the idea of a "caring city," where communities are designed to foster support and interaction among residents. Imagine neighborhoods where people know each other and look out for one another, creating a more sustainable and equitable environment.

 

Nourhan weaves these concepts together, advocating for a feminist perspective in urban design. She emphasizes the importance of creating cities that are not only safe and accessible for everyone but also acknowledge and address the inequalities that exist based on gender, race, or social class. By doing so, we can help ensure that every person feels valued and included in the urban spaces they call home.

 

She also paints a vivid picture of how gender dynamics play out differently in cities around the globe, highlighting the ongoing influence of patriarchal structures on women's experiences. For instance, in Cairo, women face significant challenges navigating public spaces due to the constant threat of sexual harassment, which limits their freedom and impacts their emotional and physical well-being. In Dubai, women must navigate a complex web of cultural and religious expectations that dictate how they should behave and dress in public, limiting their freedoms and reinforcing existing power dynamics. In Milan, the feminist movement has made notable strides in reclaiming urban spaces, with women’s centers and organizations actively creating a cultural landscape that promotes gender equality. Meanwhile, in Paris, certain areas of the city still reinforce sexist attitudes, impacting women’s safety and freedom of movement. Even in progressive Amsterdam, challenges persist, particularly for women from racial or ethnic minorities, showing how gender experiences are intertwined with other social identities.

 

´The Gendered City´ was published in a context where gender studies and urbanism are constantly evolving, with a growing focus on creating urban spaces that reflect equity and inclusion. In 2024, these studies have gained significant relevance, partly driven by social movements advocating for the rights of women and other marginalized groups in the public sphere. Bassam offers a critical analysis of how cities have historically reinforced gender inequality, while also illuminating potential paths toward more inclusive urban living.

 

One striking idea from the book comes from Lauren Elkin, who reminds us that “Space is not neutral. Space is a feminist issue.” This quote captures Bassam’s core message: the spaces we inhabit—our city streets, parks, and public areas—are imbued with meanings and power dynamics that affect men and women differently. Her arguments resonate strongly with current practices in urban design and transportation. For example, by incorporating a gender perspective into public transportation planning, we can create systems that are not only safer but also more accessible for women, reducing the risk of harassment and violence. She highlights that the way we design our mobility options significantly affects women’s quality of life, limiting their access to jobs, education, and social opportunities.

 

However, she doesn’t shy away from addressing the challenge of dismantling patriarchal structures that have long influenced urban planning. While progress has been made, many cities still struggle to integrate a gender perspective into their policies and designs. She emphasizes that transforming these deeply rooted systems requires a collective effort that embraces diverse perspectives and actively challenges existing power dynamics.

 

In essence, ´The Gendered City´ is not just a critique; it’s a call to action. Nourhan Bassam urges us to rethink how we design our urban spaces to ensure they serve everyone, regardless of gender. Through a feminist lens, a lens that all urban planners should wear, she’s not only critiquing these enduring structures but also offers a vision for more equitable and inclusive cities. Her work is a vital reminder that creating cities that genuinely cater to all people demands a willingness to challenge the status quo and reimagine the foundations of urban life. This book is a must-read for anyone interested in urbanism, gender studies, mobility, and social justice, as it opens our eyes to the possibilities of a more inclusive future.

 

More about ´The gendered city´ here: https://genderedcity.org/

You can buy it through Amazon in the following link: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CPC79GBK

Is There a Feminist Method Applied to Transportation Planning?: Revealing Women's Invisibility in Urban Mobility.

This critical analysis delves into Sandra Harding's article "Is there a feminist method?" to address the incorporation of gender perspectives in mobility studies and transportation planning. The central thesis posits that women's mobility experiences are often overlooked, leading to inadequate policies that fail to address their specific needs. By examining the intersection of gender and mobility and Harding's postulates, this article aims to reflect on the gender inequalities perpetuated by current transportation systems and advocate for a more inclusive approach to urban planning, one that includes women's experiences and voices not only as passengers, users, and cyclists, but also as urban mobility planners.

Sandra Harding's exploration of feminist methodologies invites a critical reflection on the absence of gender perspectives in traditional social science research. Building upon Harding's ideas, this critical reflection seeks to apply a feminist epistemological lens to the study of mobility, highlighting women's overlooked experiences in transportation planning and challenging dominant narratives that prioritize male experiences, towards a more inclusive and gender-sensitive approach.

Harding's discussion on the limitations of traditional research methodologies resonates in the field of urban mobility studies, where women's experiences are often marginalized or ignored, and their active participation as planners is also limited due to the transportation sector being highly male-dominated. As Harding points out, "women have always resisted male domination" (p. 5), yet their voices remain largely absent in discussions on transportation planning.

This "androcentric" view of transportation planning has disregarded the characterization of travel patterns related to women's trips: multi-stop, commuting, difficult to quantify, and related to caregiving responsibilities. In 2009, Spanish urbanist Inés Sánchez de Madariaga recognized these travel patterns under the concept of "Care Mobility," which encompasses all trips made to attend caregiving responsibilities and sustain life (Sánchez de Madariaga, 2020). These "androcentric standards" (Harding, p. 4) have reinforced that only this androcentric view, until very recently, has been the backbone of urban mobility planning.

Furthermore, women's invisibility in urban mobility planning reflects a broader pattern of gender inequalities perpetuated by urban infrastructures designed without considering women's diverse needs and experiences (Harding, p.7), often associated with caregiving responsibilities.

Moreover, Harding's critique of traditional methodologies highlights the importance of recognizing the intersectionality of gender with other social categories (class, race, culture) in mobility studies. As Harding argues, "feminist researchers have argued that traditional theories have been applied in ways that hinder the understanding of women's participation in social life" (p. 8). By acknowledging the complex interaction of gender, race, class, and other identities in shaping mobility experiences, planners can develop more comprehensive and inclusive approaches to transportation planning and avoid deepening gender inequalities in urban space and transportation.

Gender, intersectionality, and mobility underscore the need for a paradigm shift in transportation planning. Public policies, oriented towards the dominant subject, males, fail to address the specific challenges women face in their daily mobility. As Harding argues, "those who do not actively fight against the exploitation of women in everyday life are unlikely to produce social science research that is not distorted by sexism" (p. 12). By neglecting the gender dimensions of mobility, current policies contribute to reproducing inequalities that disproportionately affect women and those who are their caregivers.

Additionally, Harding's emphasis on the need for feminist-inspired challenges to traditional social research resonates with the call for transformative change in mobility policies. As Harding points out, "the extraordinary explanatory power of feminist research findings in social sciences results from feminist challenges to the grand theories and background assumptions of traditional social research" (p. 3). By challenging existing power structures and advocating for gender-sensitive policies, transportation planners contribute to dismantling systemic inequalities inherent in gendered transportation systems.

To continue the reflection and in relation to the incorporation of women's voices/experiences in mobility studies, to address such invisibility, it is essential to incorporate their voices and experiences in transportation studies at all stages: from pre-feasibility, design, and implementation of projects. By centering women's narratives on mobility, planners can gain valuable insights into the unique challenges and barriers women face in accessing transportation networks. As Harding suggests, feminist research should challenge the grand theories and assumptions of traditional social research to produce more inclusive and nuanced analyses (p. 12).

Why apply feminist epistemologies in transportation planning?

In her exploration of feminist methodologies, Harding emphasizes the need for feminist epistemologies to challenge traditional research paradigms and promote more inclusive knowledge production. She also argues that feminist epistemologies are necessary to reveal the biases and assumptions inherent in existing research frameworks. As she asserts, "the vision available to the oppressed group must be fought for and represents an achievement that requires both sciences to see beneath the surface of the social relations in which all are forced to participate" (p. 12). By centering marginalized voices and perspectives, feminist epistemologies disrupt the status quo and offer alternative ways of understanding social phenomena, including characterizing travel patterns and urban planning.

Furthermore, Harding's central idea applied to mobility planning underscores the importance of incorporating feminist epistemologies to address gender inequalities inherent in transportation systems. By using a feminist lens to develop urban mobility studies and analysis, engineers and other professionals can uncover hidden power dynamics and structural barriers that shape women's diverse urban mobility experiences. Harding's call to challenge existing power structures and underlying assumptions aligns with the need to reassess traditional approaches to transportation planning. As she points out, "the issue here is not so much the right to claim a label but the prerequisites for producing less biased and distorted descriptions, explanations, and understandings" (p. 12). It is through feminist epistemologies that deeper insights can be developed, prioritizing gender equity and social justice in urban planning initiatives.

In conclusion, Sandra Harding's reflections on feminist methodologies provide a compelling framework for reassessing the gender dimensions of mobility. By acknowledging women's invisibility in transportation planning and advocating for a more inclusive approach, those who plan and design transportation systems can contribute to the development of policies that address women's diverse needs in public spaces and transportation. By integrating feminist perspectives into mobility studies and challenging traditional methodologies, we contribute to creating more accessible and gender-sensitive transportation systems. Looking ahead, there is a clear obligation to prioritize gender perspectives in mobility studies to create more inclusive, equitable transportation systems and achieve real social change in how people move. Harding's work serves as a reminder of the transformative potential of feminist epistemologies to reshape knowledge production and promote social justice agendas in various fields, including urban planning and mobility studies.

References

- Harding, S. (1987). Introduction, Is there a feminist method? En S. Harding (Ed.), Feminism & methodology: Social science issues (pp. 1-14). Indiana University Press

- Sánchez de Madariaga, I., & Zucchini, E. (2020). "Movilidad del cuidado" en Madrid: nuevos criterios para las políticas de transporte. Ciudad y territorio, 89-102.

Gender and Care: A Conceptual Approach to Care Mobility

The concept of care refers to the work performed by adult individuals for children, the elderly, people with illnesses or disabilities, and, in general, for the functioning of the home, community, or environment. This work can be paid, but mostly it is unpaid and has a significant feminization component, where historically it has not been considered as productive work; however, its importance lies in sustaining the workforce and has been invisibilized in society's economy.

The care economy is defined as the work performed and value created, primarily in the domestic sphere. Under this logic, and in order to consider its contribution to the national economy, Law 1413 of 2010 was enacted, which determines the need to include "the care economy in the national accounts system in order to measure women's contribution to the country's economic and social development and as a fundamental tool for the definition and implementation of public policies." The law defines the care economy as: "unpaid work carried out in the home, related to the maintenance of the household, care for other household or community members, and the maintenance of the paid workforce. This category of work is of fundamental economic importance in society." It also acknowledges that many individuals participate in the labor market with precarious conditions, leading to conflicts in managing care-related responsibilities.

Focused on unpaid domestic and care work, the law considers activities such as: Organization, distribution, and supervision of household tasks; food preparation; cleaning and maintenance of the home and belongings; laundry; childcare, education, and assistance with school tasks; care for the elderly and sick; shopping, payments, or household-related errands.; home repairs and community services and unpaid assistance to relatives, friends, and neighbors.

Similarly, globally, the burdens and gaps generated by the care economy are beginning to be recognized. In 2015, all United Nations member states signed the 2030 Agenda, where Goal 5 aims to "achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls."

Recognizing the achievement of this goal requires different actions and perspectives, leading to the establishment of 9 targets, where the fourth target states: "Recognize and value unpaid care and domestic work through the provision of public services, infrastructure, and social protection policies, and promote shared responsibility within the household and the family, as appropriate in each country." Thus, unpaid domestic and care work is identified as a facet of gender equity issues, acknowledging the need to generate strategies to recognize, redistribute, and professionalize care-related work.

Mobility and Gender: A Reflection from an Interdisciplinary Perspective

Mobility and gender are two categories that reveal social inequalities and invisibilities in mobility. However, when intersected, they show that mobility not only expresses inequality but also reproduces gender inequalities. This reflection becomes possible when analyzed from an interdisciplinary perspective that acknowledges the need to look beyond disciplinary boundaries. It is crucial for mobility studies and policymaking to incorporate a gender perspective because the invisibility of women has led to transportation planning that does not meet women's needs.

Gender and mobility constitute a dichotomy that has been underexplored in public policies, as they tend to focus on the dominant subject, in this case, men. However, mobility is a complex practice that, as a social phenomenon, allows us to understand not only physical movement and how it is regulated and conditioned through networks and infrastructures but also generates experiences and emotions. Moreover, mobility, as a constituent element of the city, contributes to reproducing inequalities, particularly gender inequalities.

Care Mobility: An Umbrella Concept

There is a type of mobility that is least studied, as very few cities contemplate conducting mobility surveys (which homogenize and view women as a homogeneous group) considering this umbrella concept to quantify and visualize the movements made by predominantly women for caregiving purposes and household care: care mobility. The concept of 'care mobility' was introduced by Inés Sánchez de Madariaga in 2009, identifying the need to differentially understand daily trips related to caregiving activities. This need arises from how mobility is planned in different cities, focusing on trips with origins and destinations related to work or study and residence. Therefore, movements associated with the care economy are often overlooked, assuming linear trips within predefined routes attributed to caregivers, who are predominantly women within the family.

From a gender perspective, analyzing modern urban planning and applying the concept of 'care' invites us to consider men's and women's lives. The concept encompasses all activities necessary for the maintenance and reproduction of life, which are generally unpaid, unequally distributed, and attributed to gender roles and norms (sexual division of labor), widening the gender gap as women continue to assume double and triple burdens of work, including caregiving tasks. These realities intersect with other factors such as age, race, among others, which can exacerbate discrimination.

It is here that transportation must ensure a minimum level of safety, comfort, and affordability, taking into account caregiving, household maintenance, and caregiving for individuals. Following transportation, city planning should review how to configure the necessary infrastructure and services for daily life (childcare, elderly care). Moreover, developing policies that improve mobility, with a gender and care perspective, has a direct impact on the entire population. Supporting public transportation systems, non-polluting modes of transportation, and transportation systems that enable women to engage in employment and household activities is crucial because caregiving tasks continue to be assigned to women and have not been adequately redistributed between men and women, despite policies developed in recent years.

Why Discuss Gender in the Context of Care Mobility?

When discussing the economy and care mobility, direct reference is made to caregiving roles, which, as shown in previous sections, have a differential cultural burden depending on whether they are performed by men or women. For example, in 2017, 89.4% of caregivers for people with disabilities requiring permanent assistance in their daily activities were women.

Other variables besides the gender of individuals must be considered to assess the depth of these inequities. While for individuals with higher education, the distribution of burdens is approximately for every hour men dedicate to unpaid care work, women dedicate 3 hours. For those without any educational level, the ratio is 1 hour for every 5 hours assigned to women. Another associated characteristic revealing the unequal burdens associated with caregiving roles is age: for those under 18, women perform 3 hours of unpaid care work for every 2 hours performed by men, while among those aged 18 to 44, women perform 3 hours for every 1 hour of men, and for those over 45, women perform 4 hours for every 1 hour of men.

In this way, among many others, the disparity in the burdens associated with caregiving roles for those who reproduce feminine versus masculine roles is evident, where the responsibility for caregiving disproportionately falls on women. Therefore, analyzing the impacts due to time devoted to caregiving cannot overlook the unequal burden borne by women.

Furthermore, understanding and visualizing care mobility have the potential to reduce gaps, as the omission of care mobility can lead to an increase in the inequality gaps generated by caregiving-related burdens. To develop caregiving trips and considering that mobility often disregards actors associated with caregiving, individuals make adaptations to their trips to meet their relevant parameters, often resulting in increased road risks, which opens up an analysis perspective of road safety, gender, and care mobility.

Finally, the possibility of having or not having access to the city, of guaranteeing the right to the city, lies in the capacity of those who plan mobility and urbanism to include the gender perspective and recognize care mobility. Care, therefore, becomes a motivator for trips. When these two categories are not taken into account as analytical categories for transportation and mobility planning, they limit people's ability to move and enjoy their surroundings, while also increasing the burdens already associated with the care economy.

References:

Gasper, Des. (2012) Interdisciplinarity Towards a complex ecology of ideas. Ambiente y sostenibilidad, 2, 3-34.

Pineda Javier (2024). El giro conceptual y la ética del cuidado. La Sociedad del Cuidado y Políticas de la Vida. CLACSO (in print).

Pineda, Javier (2011). La carga del trabajo de cuidado: distribución social y negociación familiar. En El trabajo y la ética del cuidado  (pp. 35-75), Luz Gabriela Arango; Pascale Molinier (Eds.). Medellín: La Carreta/Universidad Nacional de Colombia.

Congreso de Colombia (2010). Ley 1413 del 11 de noviembre de 2010, Por medio de la cual se regula la inclusión de la economía del cuidado en el sistema de cuentas nacionales con el objeto de medir la contribución de la mujer al desarrollo económico y social del país y como herramienta fundamental para la definición e implementación de políticas públicas. https://www.dane.gov.co/files/acerca/Normatividad/Ley1413_2010.pdf

United Nations. (n.d.). Igualdad de Género y Empoderamiento de la Mujer. Recuperado el 12 de febrero de 2024, de Objetivo 5: Lograr la igualdad entre los géneros y empoderar a todas las mujeres y las niñas: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/gender-equality/

UN Women - Latin America and the Caribbean. (n.d.). Reconocer, redistribuir y profesionalizar el trabajo de Cuidado. https://lac.unwomen.org/en/news-and-events/articles/2019/3/recognize-redistribute-and-professionalize-care-work

Sánchez de Madariaga, I., & Zucchini, E. (2020). "Movilidad del cuidado" en Madrid: nuevos criterios para las políticas de transporte. Ciudad y territorio, 89-102.

Secretaría Distrital de la Mujer. (13 de enero de 2020). Más mujeres en el sector del transporte = más equidad y mejor percepción de seguridad. https://omeg.sdmujer.gov.co/

Secretaría Distrital de la Mujer. (2019). Experiencias de las mujeres en el espacio y transporte público. Bogotá́: Boletín informativo de la Secretaría Distrital de la Mujer.

Secretaría Distrital de la Mujer. (2018). Valoración del trabajo doméstico y de cuidado no remunerado 2017. Obtenido de https://omeg.sdmujer.gov.co/