Joint Centre for Disaster Research, Massey University, Wellington 6140, New Zealand.
Department of Primary Health Care and General Practice, University of Otago, Wellington 6242, New Zealand.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Oct 18;16(20):3984. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16203984.
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.
性别主流话语关注的是男女二元对立，尽管众所周知，在灾害中，不同的性取向和性别少数群体面临着额外的风险。鉴于关于灾害中性别少数群体的文献数量较少但在不断增加，本文旨在探讨性少数群体在灾害中的地位，并研究是否需要扩展二元定义。本文采用 Arksey 和 O'Malley 的方法进行了五阶段快速审查。检索了 2015 年 1 月至 2019 年 3 月期间在标题、摘要和/或文章正文中包含灾害和性别术语的同行评审英文期刊文章。检索范围包括 MEDLINE 和 Scopus 数据库。将研究中的相关信息在 Microsoft Excel 中进行图表化，并使用描述性分析方法总结结果。共确定了 729 条记录；排除了不符合纳入标准的 248 条记录，并删除了 166 条重复记录。共获取 315 条记录，并对其全文进行了审查。其中，只有 12 篇期刊文章包含了两个以上性别的相关内容。我们还认识到，性别术语与性术语可互换使用，两者之间没有明确的区别。我们建议灾害学者和从业者采用正确的术语，并将其对性别的定义扩展到二元之外；利用关于性别流动性和多样性的研究；并将其应用于灾害研究、政策和实践中。
