3. WOMEN, INEQUALITY AND VULNERABILITY Women are not inherently vulnerable to human rights violations or to the impacts of crises. In fact, the CEDAW Committee cautions against this oversimplification and the categorization of women and girls as “passive ‘vulnerable groups’ in need of protection from the impacts of disasters”, as this is a negative gender stereotype “that fails to recognize the important contributions of women in the areas of disaster risk reduction, post-disaster management and climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies.”49 Understanding which people or groups of people are in vulnerable situations and, therefore, at risk during emergencies requires analysis of a number of complex and interrelated physical, social, economic, cultural, political and environmental factors, and of the resources and assets that are available to women and men, girls and boys in the context of a specific crisis. For women and girls, underlying discriminatory gender norms, practices and societal structures create inequalities and lead to marginalization. These factors then position women and girls in more vulnerable situations before, during and after emergencies. This is not to say that all women are more vulnerable than men, nor that men and boys do not also experience specific vulnerabilities in times of crisis. Rather, such factors as women’s lower economic status, their role in unpaid household and care work, their limited political influence and the risks they face of gender-based violence are examples of aspects of vulnerability that are characteristic for women on the whole, but not necessarily for all women. Likewise, as pre-existing structural inequalities mean that many women become vulnerable during particular emergencies, some groups of women experience more profound disadvantage and marginalization before a crisis, that then places them at even greater risk for harm and human rights violations during and after emergencies. The intersection of gender with other characteristics, such as socio-economic class, national or ethnic origin, disability, sexual orientation, age or health status, mean that some women, or groups of women, are in situations of greater vulnerability and, thus, face the greatest risks of harm. What appears to have been missing during the coronavirus pandemic, as has been the case in previous emergencies, is gender-sensitive and multi-dimensional vulnerability analysis. This type of analysis would have shed light on the potential gender-specific risks associated with COVID-19 and with the measures that were adopted to address the crisis, specifically the impact of those measures on human rights and fundamental freedoms. 49 CEDAW Committee, “General Recommendation No. 37 on the Gender-Related Dimensions of Disaster Risk Reduction in the Context of Climate Change”, op. cit. note 36, para 7. 17