Beyond Binary: (Re)Defining "Gender" for 21st Century Disaster Risk Reduction Research, Policy, and Practice.

Ashleigh Rushton,Kevin Blanchard,Lesley Gray,Justin Canty

doi:10.3390/ijerph16203984

Abstract

The dominant discourse of gender focuses on the binary of woman/man, despite the known additional risks for diverse sexualities and gender minorities in disasters. Given the small but growing body of literature concerning gender minorities in disasters, this paper sets out to explore the place of sex and gender minorities in disasters and to examine whether a binary definition needs to be extended. A five-stage rapid review was undertaken following Arksey and O’Malley’s method. Peer-reviewed journal articles in English language were sought that included disaster and gender terms in the title, abstract, and/or body of the article published between January 2015 and March 2019. The search included MEDLINE and Scopus databases. Relevant information from the studies were charted in Microsoft Excel, and results were summarized using a descriptive analytical method. In total, 729 records were identified; 248 that did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded and 166 duplicates were removed. A total of 315 records were sourced and their full text was reviewed. Of those, only 12 journal articles included content relative to more than two genders. We also recognized that sex and gender terms were used interchangeably with no clear differentiation between the two. We recommend that disaster scholars and practitioners adopt correct terminology and expand their definition of gender beyond the binary; utilize work on gender fluidity and diversity; and apply this to disaster research, policy, and practice.

Highlights

The dominant discourse of gender within disaster focuses on the binary of woman/man or female/male [sic]
This paper addresses this gap by providing useful instruction to minimize exclusion and marginalization of sex and gender minorities (SGM) in disaster research and management plans
When reviewing the full-text articles for the purpose of this review, we determined that “LGB” was related to sexuality and not gender; we included papers that used the acronym LGBT, given the fluidity of “T”, which may identify as a gender beyond the binary [53]

Summary

Introduction

The dominant discourse of gender within disaster focuses on the binary of woman/man or female/male [sic]. There is limited research documenting gender minorities’ experiences and health implications in disasters; what is written predominately identifies the heightened marginalization and exclusion that gender minorities face pre- and post-disaster [1,2,3]. There is a gap in understanding the importance of applying appropriate gender terminology in disaster research, policy, and practice. This paper addresses this gap by providing useful instruction to minimize exclusion and marginalization of sex and gender minorities (SGM) in disaster research and management plans. The predominant focus on women within gender and disaster scholarship is warranted and the research provided evidence that the social constructions of gender work to exclude and marginalize people. Given that there is specific gender and disaster research that highlights how gender influences people’s disaster experience and health outcomes, we would argue that minority genders outside of the binary must be considered

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion