Kathryn Krase, Leina Luzuriaga, Donna Wang, Andrew Schoolnik, Chantee Parris-Strigle, Latoya Attis and Petra Brown
Repercussions to everyday life caused by the COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately impacted certain segments of the population, including older adults, communities of color and…
Abstract
Purpose
Repercussions to everyday life caused by the COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately impacted certain segments of the population, including older adults, communities of color and women. The societal response to reduce the impact of the pandemic, including closing schools and working from home, has been experienced differentially by women. This study explored how individual challenges and coping mechanisms differed for women as compared to men.
Design/methodology/approach
This study used an anonymous, cross-sectional, online survey early in the COVID-19 pandemic. Convenience, snowball and purposive sampling methods were used. Data were collected in June 2020 targeting adults living in Canada and the USA, with a total of 1,405 people responding, of which, the respondents were primarily women, White and with high education levels.
Findings
The results of this study confirm previous research that women struggled more to adapt to the pandemic and felt less prepared than men during the COVID-19 pandemic. Further, this study found significant differences in the sources of information and support used by women as compared to men.
Originality/value
The findings of this study not only confirm past research but also highlight that practice and policy responses to this pandemic, and future research on national level crises need to be targeted by gender, so that different needs are effectively addressed. Additionally, this article also identifies sources or challenges, as well as support, in order to inform and strengthen such responses.
Details
Keywords
The boundaries of Little Italy are not precise, and have shifted over time. In the 19th century, the district extended south of Canal Street into the area identified by Jacob Riis…
Abstract
The boundaries of Little Italy are not precise, and have shifted over time. In the 19th century, the district extended south of Canal Street into the area identified by Jacob Riis as the “Mulberry Bend,” and described as “the foul core of New York’s slums.”3 By the 1960s, Little Italy had retreated across Canal Street, as the Italian population began to leave the neighborhood for other areas in the city. For the purposes of this paper, Little Italy shall be understood as comprising three census tracts in New York City’s Manhattan county, numbers 41, 43, and 45. This area, lying within a short walking distance of City Hall, is roughly bounded by Canal Street on the south, Bowery on the East, Broadway on the west, and East Houston street to the north. Nicknamed the Mulberry District, it became the first and largest Italian enclave in the United States between 1870s and 1924. While there had been an Italian community in New York for generations, historian George Pozetta has argued that the winter of 1872–1873 was pivotal in the development of this community, when more than 2000 poor Italian immigrants, arrived at Castle Garden, the immigrant reception center, unable to care for themselves.4 These immigrants were quickly fitted in to the preexisting Italian community, taking advantage of the contacts provided by the bossi, typically northern Italian men who had arrived earlier, to find jobs in such local enterprises as groceries and saloons, and with American employers. Once the new comers settled, a process of chain-migration began. By the later 1870s, the bossi were acting as agents for gangs of labor sent out from New York to work in other areas across North American. As a result, the Mulberry district became a sort of transshipment point for Italian labor.