the gendered chains of disaster

Around the world, women [1] are burdened with chains that lock them in a subordinate role within a hierarchical, male-dominate structure.

With the increasing severity of climate change triggering more frequent and devastating natural and man-made disasters, evidence suggests that some communities experience these events at more cataclysmic levels. The condition of women’s vulnerabilities are not only reproduced, but often worsened during and after these events in today’s world.

Inevitably, there is a “gendered nature” to all phases of a disaster. From exposure and preparedness, to emergency response and recovery, each phase involves resources, information, and networks that are socially constructed and distributed that inadvertently disadvantages women due to their relative lack of power and control in society.

2005’s superstorm Hurricane Katrina caused the largest displacement of persons in United States history (Peek et al, 2008). With New Orleans under mandatory evacuation, hundreds of thousands of residents sought temporary shelter throughout the region and United States. And despite social stratifications of race or class, women were primarily responsible for this relocation as an extension of their gendered roles as caretakers in the domestic sphere (Peek et al, 2008).

Intersectionality, the confluence of different identities such as gender, race, and class, compounds the difficulties of this relocation. During Hurricane Katrina, low-income African Americans primarily occupied the federally funded emergency shelters in Louisiana, Texas and Arkansas (Brodie et al, 2006). Unfortunately, relocation sites often provided more grief than relief in the wake of disasters. Shelters during Hurricane Katrina were overcrowded and understaffed due to the region’s overall under preparedness for such magnitude of a storm (Peek et al, 2008). There was a complete breakdown of law and order during early phases of relocation which created a dangerous environment for women (Thornton et al, 2007). Charmaine Neville, a displaced resident who sought haven in a school-turned-shelter recounts her experience (Thornton et al, 2007):

Though some offenses were reported (only 47 reported for this event) [2], all incidents were surely not accounted for which provides us with an inadequate understanding of the real statistics on crimes such as rape and sexual assault during the early stages of a disaster (Thornton et al, 2007). Beyond the societal stigmas inhibiting women from self-reporting those crimes in non-disaster scenarios, in several cases, there were even greater barriers to reporting during disaster scenarios. For many, there was no authority to report to and in some instances, when reported to a first-responder, the statements were not recorded due to more “life-threatening” priorities or the fact that reports had to be made in the locality where the assault took place (Thornton et al, 2007). This aligns with a common delusion that in the wake of an emergency, there are are more “important” issues that take precedent beyond women’s health.

In these evacuation shelters, another challenge for women is childcare. Generally, shelters are viewed as unsafe spaces for children where direct supervision is necessary (Peek et al, 2008). This pushes the caretaking role of a woman to an extreme, especially for those who do not have help or relief. Though some daycare support from volunteers is offered in some shelters, this is often not provided for all age groups so women with young infants or older youth have to provide their own child care. The chaos of the shelter itself also presents a quality of care issue as some mothers struggled with privacy and the unavailability of quiet spaces to nurse and put younger children down for naps (this is evident in shelters where large areas are used like arenas).

A daycare director in the Cajundome in Lafayette describes: 

Until now, I have been primarily speaking of the challenges women face with the assumption that women are primarily heterosexual. This limited lens fails to address the compounded disadvantage of those who do not follow a heteronormative lifestyle and are need of gender sensitive aid and gender neutral facilities (Doan, 2011). In fact, many of the women who were affected by the storm did not fit the traditional heterosexual image of “woman” (D’Ooge, 2008). For example, the lack of acknowledgement towards gender sensitive planning led to the ostracization of transgender women post-Katrina. Sharli’e Dominique, a transgender person who identifies as a woman, was arrested after taking a shower in the women’s restroom of Texas A&M University’s  shelter (D’Ooge, 2008). Not only was Dominique traumatically displaced into a shelter, she was also dehumanized for the simple act of taking a shower in a place aimed to be a haven from crisis. Another account describes different types of clothing being distributed for women and men that were explicit to gender stereotypes. These restrictions deny people like Dominique from receiving adequate aid.

This list of vulnerabilities within the site context of evacuation shelters begins to show the consequences of not addressing the role of gender in disaster and emergency planning. Through this analysis, we can begin to see the parallels between gender roles present in non-disaster times in society and roles that play out in disaster scenarios. A woman’s reproductive and caretaking role becomes extended and strained. The supportive, quiet role that women are traditionally subjected to is not recognized nor acknowledged in either scenario. On the other hand, men are expected to do the “real” work of protecting and saving society.

The inequality between men and women’s gender roles is apparent in the representation in positions of power, and control and leadership during the different levels of responses during  recovery. Fothergill (1995) points out that women are largely absent in the formal and higher levels of emergency management, a fact that  is reflected at the community-based level as well. The stereotype of “hysterical housewife” prevails at a societal level, causing little faith and legitimacy being questioned when women are in leadership. How can women’s needs be addressed and prioritized without women advocating on either level?

Ultimately, it is evident that the integration of intersectional gender analysis into vulnerability assessments is crucial to begin addressing the issues discussed above. With a vulnerability-oriented approach and further prioritization to understanding the needs of marginalized communities such as women, disaster planning can have larger impacts upon social transformation (Enarson, 2000).

Through this, the chains of gendered divisions of power and opportunity can be unlocked when the keys of empowerment are given to the women to whom they belong.