As the world out outside the window tries desperately to crawl back into the old ways, a

famous saying from Sun Tzu echoes as the days pass: “There is no instance of a nation

benefitting from prolonged warfare”. Of course, this is true in the current battle against the

COVID 19 pandemic, but it also describes the underlying issues within society that have yet to

be unveiled, one so relevant issue is the inefficient approach of authorities when it comes to

disasters. Despite natural disasters being present since the dawn of time, the traditional

homogenous approach to handling communities have been criticized by many researchers

through works and articles. Their focus is to drive home the idea that disaster risk, much like

everything, is a social phenomenon, and that its gendered, similar to daily life.

Works made by authors such as Ahmad, Enarson, and the like have focused their sights

on how using a gendered perspective on disasters allows societies to thrive by addressing

specific vulnerabilities and utilizing the strengths of each gender group. Each of the articles

focused on different aspects of disaster risk, giving the reader multiple viewpoints for a more

robust and thorough understanding.

The work of Enarson, Fothergill, and Peek, entitled “Gender and disaster: Foundations

and directions” introduced the readers to the gendered nature of disasters, particularly the

vulnerabilities and how it affects women. As a starting article, the work is easy to comprehend

and gets its point across. The discussion on the different theoretical frameworks that helped pave

the way to gender research allow the reader to understand the background of gender perspective,

and why it is important on the discussion of disaster risk. The article also delves into the

vulnerabilities of women that exist in society, and how it lowers their rates on survival when

placed in dire situations. By focusing on the vulnerabilities of women, it emphasizes the need for

a gendered way of addressing problems during disasters.

 United Nation’s article entitled “COVID 19: A Gender Lens” also focused on the similar

points made by Enarson et al., wherein existing vulnerabilities of women make it harder for them

to survive and thrive during the COVID 19 pandemic. Both articles touched on topics such as the

gendered nature of labor in society, increased risk of violence against women, and the complex

relationship between pre-existing gendered norms and disasters. With its focus mainly on the

current situation, the article brought up concerns regarding the immediate need of protective

wear for medical frontliners, the lack of financial support to get medical check-ups, and the

increased risk of domestic violence brought about by the prolonged lockdown.

As both articles focused more on how women are disadvantageous when it comes to

surviving disasters, it gives the readers the impression that women are merely passive watchers.

Although they briefly touched on the capabilities of women, it is but a small portion of the

articles. A greater emphasis on what women can contribute during disasters would show the

autonomy women have in society, and that they are not merely a helpless damsel in distress.

One such article that balances both the disadvantages encountered by vulnerable gender

groups and their capabilities in helping the community is the article by Gaillard et al. While the

last 2 works focused on the experiences of women, “Beyond men and women: a critical

perspective on gender and disaster” shifts its focus to gender minorities, specifically localized

gender minorities and their experiences during disasters. In the article, the authors put emphasis

on the concept that each culture has differing genders, and that their issues and vulnerabilities

differ according to their localized community, and therefore should be addressed appropriately.

Three specific localized gender minorities were focused on, describing their experiences on a

day-to-day basis, the stigmatization they face, and how these all play out when put in dire

situations. The detailed life of the gender minorities gives richness and context, making them feel
more human than statistic. Whereas Enarson, Fothergill, and Peek and UN’s articles gave

recommendations on how to better improve the lives of women, Gaillard et al. expressed the

need for inclusivity in disaster risk. Furthermore, the authors put equal emphasis on the

capabilities of the gender minority groups when faced with disasters. By equally discussing their

vulnerabilities and capabilities, the article portrays these groups powerful stakeholders that can

give aid to their communities.

Lastly, the article “Conceptualizing Disasters from a Gender Perspective” takes a more

theoretical look at disasters and gender, and how a gendered perspective allows for a more

holistic approach to disaster risk. Although the article thoroughly explains the need to abolish

ineffective short-term approaches to disaster risk because of its negative long-term effects on

women, it is a difficult article to comprehend from the perspective of a casual reader. Although

the need to delve deep into topics such as the deconstruction and reconstruction of societal

structures are good arguments of why disasters need to be seen from a gender perspective,

concepts discussed in the article were confusing to say the least.

Each article gave valid arguments on the discussion of using a gendered perspective on

disaster risk. As a common concern, gender perspective articles should be inclusive towards all

genders regardless of their dominant status in society. Optimizing government programs that

address the needs and concerns of women and ensuring they are least unaffected during disasters

should be a priority. Lastly, empowering women by giving them roles and authority on relief and

rescue programs will make them feel represented and valued, allowing them to become powerful

stakeholders within the community.

References
Ahmad, A. (2018). Conceptualizing Disasters from a Gender Perspective. In O’ Mathuna, D.P.
(Ed.), Disasters: Core Concepts and Ethical Theories, Advancing Global Bioethics.
DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-92722-0_8

Enarson, E., Fothergill, A., & Peek, L. (2017). Gender and Disaster: Foundations and New
Directions for Research and Practice. Handbook of Disaster Research, 205–223.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63254-4_11

Gaillard, J. C., Sanz, K., Balgos, B. C., Dalisay, S. N., Gorman-Murray, A., Smith, F., &
Toelupe, V. (2016). Beyond men and women: a critical perspective on gender and disaster.
Disasters, 41(3), 429–447. https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12209

United Nations Fund for Population Activities (2020). COVID-19: A gender lens. Retrieved
from https://www.unfpa.org/resources/covid-19-gender-lens