Global response to COVID-19 compared to hysterical female overreaction
By isabelle // 2024-09-29
Copy
 
Governments around the world undoubtedly overreacted to COVID-19. From blanket lockdowns to completely stripping people of their health freedom, the whole reaction to the virus was far more extreme than the situation warranted – and conservative commentator Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute think tank has likened the response to the reaction of a stereotypical “hysterical woman.” She said that COVID-19 was “the very embodiment of the female worldview which is unable to balance risks and benefits.” Although people of both genders are vulnerable to letting their emotions get the better of them during trying times, the collective response was so strongly emotional that it is hard to fathom how it even happened when we had so many facts early enough to prevent thrusting the world into unnecessary economic and psychological chaos. Data from Italy in the early days of the pandemic made it clear that the average age of people dying from the virus was 80. While advanced age doesn’t make it any easier to accept the loss of a loved one, it does mean that a blanket response was not warranted and pointed to the groups that did deserve our focus when it comes to prevention and protection. Moreover, we knew that most of the victims had three or more comorbidities. This group of individuals is nowhere near large enough to justify isolating everyone from their loved ones, closing down businesses for months, and barring people from attending events or dining in restaurants  or going to church because they chose not to get a vaccine. Some of the reaction to the virus came across as placing feelings over facts, and that also ties into the stereotype of women following their emotions instead of slowing down and engaging in more rational thinking about the longer term.

Manipulation and guilt trips over getting vaccinated

Moreover, the fear and manipulation that were used to get people to comply with increasingly overreaching initiatives had “mom guilt trip” written all over them. This could be seen in, for example, the vaccine slogans that played on people’s emotions, saying that if you don’t get the jab for yourself, you should at least get it to “protect” those around you. How many times did we hear some variation of “Don’t kill grandma” during the vaccine rollout? Many people feel they were bullied into getting the jab, particularly those who had serious reservations about the safety of these untested vaccines but complied to avoid losing their jobs. It did all seem to have a “mean girl” tone to it much of the time, with many people reporting being ostracized by coworkers, friends and even family members for not following what the “in crowd” was doing and rolling up their sleeves. Schools around the world were closed based solely on “worst-case scenarios” that failed to take the bigger picture into consideration. Maternal instinct might drive some women to want to avoid risks at all costs, particularly when it comes to their children, but the facts made it abundantly clear that young people had almost no risk from the virus and suffered psychologically and academically as a result of school closures. Why did we act like young people were at risk when the facts said otherwise? The idea of a virus that could wipe out humanity is indeed a disturbing one and has long provided fodder for books and movies. When COVID-19 first started to make headlines, there was plenty of reason to panic, but once we started to see the bigger picture and understand the real risks, the fact that the hysteria over the virus actually gained steam rather than subsiding resulted in damage to society that could endure for decades to come – not to mention the price millions of people will pay in terms of their health after being bullied or guilted into getting COVID-19 vaccines. Sources for this article include: Revolver.news TheTimes.com
Copy