It's come to my attention that some aren't entirely sure what it is I mean when I state that women are disproportionately impacted by pandemics, which is why it's necessary to have conversations that focus on women and the steps required to address this. Allow me to explain.

Evidence has shown time and time again that when it comes to global health crises, women and girls are especially vulnerable. It is no different in the case of COVID-19.

For example, women (who make up 70% of the health and social service workforce) are front and centre of every nation's response efforts to treat and stop the spread of the virus. So, whilst the mortality rate may be higher in men, women are more at risk of exposure.

As countries the world over have closed schools and set travel restrictions, additional pressure has been placed on mothers and women to shoulder the burden of balancing childcare, frail care, domestic responsibilities, and the new reality of working at home.

(This is in addition to the disproportionate amount of domestic, or free, labour that women already do.)

The world over, organisations are urging Governments to factor gender into their relief efforts. The UN Population Fund have released a gender guidance document, whilst UN Women shared a COVID-19 checklist for policy- and decision-makers working to address the pandemic.

“An effective response to pandemics needs to really look at gender dynamics in a meaningful way,” says Sarah Hendriks, the UN Women policy director. And in order to ensure it can, it's imperative we collect and study sex-segregated data, and allow it to influence our strategies.

As a move towards improved sex-segregated data collection, UN Women is not only looking at differing rates of infection, but at the economic impacts, differential care burden, and domestic violence rates, which are all known to be exacerbated by epidemics.

It's imperative that our nation's focus on gender inequalities, on gender-specific problems, does not become another victim of the COVID-19 crisis. We cannot afford to not address these things because it feels as if the risk and the negative impact is equal for all.

It's not.

Pandemics exacerbate existing gender inequalities & can make it more difficult for women & girls to receive health care. An example of this is that since health care systems must channel their resources to combat the pandemic, sexual & reproductive health care can be overlooked.

The trouble with their being overlooked is that irrespective of the state of the pandemic against which we're fighting, the need for access to adequate family planning, sanitary products, and maternal care does not cease to exist, rather it persists.

Women who're underpaid, non-protected, or hourly workers are forced to put their health at risk when they leave home to earn a living. In spite of the need for isolation as a measure to control infection, for many low-income women (& men), not going to work is just not an option.

Evidence shows that in times of crisis, women face increased financial instability. Policy- and decision-makers must ask how they are targeting economic responses and whose interests they are serving, as well as whether their measures account for gender-specific challenges.

Governments also need to prioritise services for the prevention of, & response to, increased domestic violence & GBV, particularly in the context of self-isolation. Levels of intimate partner violence spike when households are placed under stress & forced to live in closed spaces

Amidst efforts being taken by Governments to limit & control the spread of COVID-19, we can't lose sight of the vulnerabilities of women & girls. Disease outbreaks DO affect women & men differently, which is why it's necessary to have gender-specific talks on how to address this.

And before I'm vilified again for what it is I'm saying: I'm not proposing that conversations inclusive of both genders should not be had, but rather proposing that we can have both the more general, and more specific, conversations. As long as we ARE actually having them both.