It is roughly 5 years since the COVID-19 pandemic. Dutch newspaper NRC has recognised that with a series of different pieces. Historian Dr Daniel R. Curtis (Erasmus School of History, Culture and Communication) has been interviewed on the subject of epidemic impacts on women, discussing the gendered pressures of COVID-19 but also placed it in a broader historical perspective.
Curtis suggests that disproportionate scientific focus has been on indicators of women’s mortality and wages, and too little on female access to wealth and resources; access to private and public spaces; experiences of abuse and violence; and furthermore, the stories and narratives developed about women and epidemics.
“Women and girls are affected differently than men during an epidemic. More research is needed on how and why women are hit so hard, so that we are better able to prevent or reduce these negative effects for women. Data that explicitly distinguish between men and women is largely lacking. We do have structural information on how disasters affect people, but “people” usually means men. Only recently have we started systematically collecting gender-specific data. Even during COVID-19, gender was hardly considered as a relevant theme.”
History remains the most important scholarly discipline for understanding the long-term dimensions of epidemic impact on women, beyond the immediate and short run. Daniel Curtis research focusses on the long term effects of epidemics and disasters, with a particular focus on gender inequality. He published three books and more than 40 scientific papers on the subject.
NRC's interview was led, conducted and devised by ESHCC alumni Süeda Isik, a former history student and now editor at NRC.
- Researcher
- More information
Read the full article from NRC here (payed content).
- Related content
