Male or female, does it matter?: A qualitative study on Swedish aid workers and gender

Male or female, does it

matter?

A qualitative study on Swedish aid

workers and gender

Bachelor thesis in Peace and Development Studies

Author: Fanny Andersson Supervisor: Susanne Alldén

Abstract

Aid workers are one of the corner stones in development and consist of both female and male employees in the sector. Female aid workers have been studied within the “Women in Development” agenda but since the agenda shift to “Gender and Development” male aid workers have been concluded more in the study of aid workers and gender. Despite the shift, there is still an inaccurate image of aid workers and gender since there is a lack of the illustration on positive and negative attributes aid workers face because of their gender. The objective of this study is to remove prejudice of aid workers and their gender by exploring advantages and disadvantages that male and female aid workers encounter in their work. By using the

theoretical framework hegemonic masculinity of Raewyn Connell concepts such as gender roles and gender norms are discussed in order to explore aid workers perception on gender. The thesis is conducted as an abductive field study of Swedish aid workers, working within the international sphere. The data have been collected through semi-structured interviews with both female and male aid workers. The data emerging display five main themes;

characteristics of aid work, advantages and disadvantages, norms and norm-breaking, other factors and safety, to be the ground for aid workers and their

perception on gender.

Key words

Aid workers, Gender, Hegemonic Masculinity, Gender norms

Acknowledgments

By way of introduction, I would like to direct a big thank you to all my respondents that have participated in the study. I appreciate the time they have taken to be interviewed and their interesting and sincere answers on their experiences. You have all given me new perspectives and this research

would not have been possible to conduct without you. I hope I have been able to contribute a realistic illustration of your reality. I would also like to give thanks to my tutor at the Faculty of Social Science at Linnaeus

University and all others that have supported me through the time of writing this essay.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Interview guide

Tables

Table 1.1: Respondents, their gender, their age and geographic location of employment

Table of contents

Introduction and research problem ... 1

1.1 Relevance ... 2

1.2 Objective ... 3

1.3 Structure of the study ... 4

1.4 Limitations and delimitations ... 4

Earlier research ... 6 Theoretical framework ... 9 3.1 Hegemonic masculinity ... 9 Methodology ... 13 4.1 Methodological framework ... 13 4.2 Sample ... 13 4.3 Respondents ... 15 4.4 Ethical considerations ... 16 4.5 Interview guide ... 17 4.6 Interviews ... 17 4.7 Transcription ... 18 4.8 Analytical method ... 18

4.9 Reliability & Validity ... 19

Research findings ... 21

5.1 Characteristics of aid work ... 21

5.2 Advantages and disadvantages ... 23

5.2.1 Advantages ... 24

5.2.2 Disadvantages ... 26

5.3 Norms and norm-breaking ... 28

5.3.1 Female norms ... 28 5.3.2 Male norms ... 30 5.3.3 Breaking norms ... 31 5.4 Other factors ... 32 5.4.1 Ethnicity ... 33 5.4.2 Age ... 34 5.4.3 Organisation ... 35 5.4.4 Education/position ... 35 5.5 Safety ... 36 5.5.1 Mental health ... 36 5.5.2 Physical health ... 37 Analysis ... 38 6.1 Removing of prejudice ... 38

6.2 Advantages and disadvantages ... 40

6.3 Hegemonic masculinity and aid workers’ gender ... 43

Conclusions and recommendations for further research ... 47 References ... 50

Introduction and research problem

”Until aid workers are taken seriously as mediating actors, the frustration of both policy makers and aid recipients about why projects fail will

continue…” this statement is quoted in Fechter and Hindman’s first chapter

in their book Inside the Everyday Lives of Development Workers (2011). This quote explains the contemporary view on international aid workers according to Fechter and Hindman, who argues that the perception of

development workers are somewhat romanticized and does not recognize the internal and external difficulties they are facing in their job. Aid workers are corner stones in development and the bridge between policies and

implementing change. An aid worker may in essence be an engineer or a teacher but with the same goal to develop vulnerable countries and its inhabitants (Fechter & Hindman 2011, p. 1-5). Previous research on aid workers have focused on categories such as race and ethnicity but have had less focus on gender. Since the Gender and Development agenda

(continuously referred to as GAD) was implemented, more research has developed gender as a centre of attention. However, as Fechter (2015, p. 551), as well Cornwall (2009, p. 8) and Chant & Gutmann (2002, p. 269) argues, gender is often referred to women and the issues women are facing in the development discipline. This in turn lead to men often being labelled as being the problem and women the helpless ones in development. Feminists have criticized the failure of Women in Development (WID) programs to not be gender sensitive enough by portraying men and women as such, since it does not address the grassroots problem of the development paradigm correctly (Cornwall 2009, p. 8).

At the one end of the development paradigm stand those who administer development i.e., aid/development/humanitarian assistance/relief workers. As previously noted, the present-day view on aid workers are idealized and

not recognized properly (Fechter & Hindman 2011, p. 1-5). Not until

recently, development workers have been recognized within the GAD agenda but resembling to the general GAD paradigm, most research on gender and aid workers favours the female perspective. Subsequently, previous research have characterized most of the issues aid workers face as ”female aid worker issues” (Gritti 2015, p. 453). This is no chock since women in development work, faces stresses male participants do not according to Fechter (2015, p. 551-57). For example, women have a harder time settling with a family because of the constant mobility and the burden of being the main family planner. Other examples include sexual harassment, both at work and on the field. However, Fechter (2015, p. 551) recognize that her research is mostly based on the female approach and may therefore neglect some of the

problems male aid workers face.

Does this mean that female aid workers do not experience positive attributes or that male does not face any negative one? That is what this study will seek to explore.

1.1 Relevance

The recent recognition of the need to be a shift from gender being equal to women, to gender being equal to both men and women in the GAD paradigm have resulted in an increase of studying gender issues that refers to both sexes. In development, male and masculinity and the problems as well solutions connected to the sex is more and more identified as of today. However, as Cornwall argues (2009, p. 8) in order to achieve gender sensitive development, grassroots issues need to be tackled. Therefore, it is relevant to conduct more research that is gender responsive in the field of aid workers in order to improve it in development programs as well, since aid workers are those conducting the implemented development programs and its policies at the located area. Previous research display that both male and

females face difficulties in the field of being an aid worker. However, there is still a much smaller amount of research concerning the difficulties males face and furthermore the advantages one may face because of their gender. Lastly, the previous research does not cover if it is possible for humanitarian workers to change the gender role norm, they are placed within society in order to simplify the work and tasks to be done. This is three important points to get a better understanding for aid workers and their gender, all to be covered within this study.

1.2 Objective

The objective of this thesis is to explore Swedish aid workers and their perception on gender. More precisely to understand what difficulties, but also advantages, female and male development workers are facing in their field of work. This is studied in order to remove the prejudice of female and male aid workers as the previous research on the topic have visualized. Second, the thesis discusses concepts such as hegemonic masculinity, roles and norms in order to grasp if there is a possibility for aid workers to oppose gender norms. Lastly, with the help of the concepts above, the thesis aims to understand if the difficulties aid workers oppose is based upon social constructions and assumptions. The questions the thesis will answer are as followed:

! What advantages may the aid workers gender role produce in their field of work?

! What difficulties are aid workers facing, because of their gender role, while conducting their everyday work?

1.3 Structure of the study

The study comprises of seven chapters with a different number of sections. In the second chapter, earlier research will be presented in order for the reader to comprehend what have been studied before. The third chapter will outline the theoretical framework which will be used as a ground for relevant questions to ask in the interview guide. The theory will discuss concepts such as hegemonic masculinity, roles and norms. Furthermore, the theoretical framework will be linked to the earlier research so the reader may understand how the theory is linked to the subject of the study. The fourth chapter is concerning the methodology and introduce the methods used, the sample of respondents, the respondents themselves and how the data is collected. Lastly chapter four also explores how the data will be analysed. Chapter five

introduce the research findings, and the findings are explored in a number of themes in order for the reader to easily follow through. The sixth chapter analyses the findings and explain in the beginning which components the findings are analysed with. The last chapter, chapter seven, summarize the study by concluding important aspects and give suggestions to further research within the topic.

1.4 Limitations and delimitations

This study faces both some limitations and delimitations that will be outlined. The first limitation with the study, as will be investigated in the “sample” chapter, is the fact that because of the difficulty reaching out to respondents from other countries the study overall only focuses on Swedish respondents. Therefore, the study may miss out valid conclusions from other respondent countries. Although, since Sweden have a high emphasis on questions of equality the sample of Swedish aid worker should be seen as fitted for this essay. This is because the importance of having a sample that are aware of gender issues.

men and aid work, it has to be considered the plausibility that male aid workers do not face as severe issues in the aid sector as women. Hence, the narrow previous research and a larger focus on women.

Delimitations of the study is that the research will not pay attention to other factors that may influence aid workers, for instance class, race and age. Second of all, the study will only focus on the two “primary” gender I.e., referring to male and female and does therefore exclude other gender identities such as LGBTQ. The reason why this approach is chosen is because it will be coherent with earlier research within the GAD paradigm.

Earlier research

As already concluded, there is a high emphasis on women’s vulnerability when speaking about development and the reason for this is because aid and policies have aimed at those most vulnerable at site, often including women. Nonetheless, vulnerability appears different depending on if you are a male or female and likewise those providing development. I.e., aid workers are also vulnerable and faces difficulties in humanitarian crises, although it might differ from those living in the area. Tom Arcaro, author of Aid Worker

Voices have studied male and female aid workers with the intention to see

difficulties as well advantages of one’s gender in the aid work industry. His study on aid workers has a majority of females in the survey, not an equal representation but which also indicates that there is a large number of women in the aid sector. Conclusion from his research is that male development workers have overall a more positive sight on their gender than females. Female respondents agree that they often face difficulties being respected by other men both at their workspace and in the field of work. Some of the male respondents agree that being male in the development world comes with respect especially when speaking to authorities. Although, both the female and male respondents of Arcaro’s study agree that being woman is easier when working out in the field sometimes. For example, the female respondents believed that by being a woman it is easier building up trust among the locals and it is easier with language barriers in relation to children. Additional, one male respondent focusing on maternal health acknowledges as a man it can be hard to get ”full access” to women in cultural contexts (Arcaro 2015).

When it comes to studying the physical and psychical difficulties

humanitarian workers face, research suggest different perspectives for men contra women. According to Insecurity Insight’s report from 2011, male aid workers are to a larger extent in risk of security threats such as being injured

or killed while women face sexual threats and are exposed of crimes. Further, males are more at risk in the rural areas while women are more exposed in urban (Wille & Fast 2011, pp. 2-4). When it comes to sexual threat’s, women are over-representant as victims and they face sexual harassment both within and outside aid work. Male aid workers report that they have never been approached by women with sexual glances while their female co-workers have encountered it several times. These risks are highly physical stressors, but aid workers face psychical stressors as well, women especially. Women does not only have to worry about their safety but experience mental stressors from trying to establish validation from colleagues and local authorities. For example, women sometimes find themselves being faced with overly friendly treatments from colleagues and being unsure how to approach male colleagues when they are positioned in a power position within aid work. The reason for this, is because the culture may not accept women to claim top positions and therefore the female aid workers have to be careful how they present themselves in these situations. In order to not step one someone’s toes.

According to one survey, there are especially difficult for women in some contexts. For example, in Islamic countries with a male dominate society. Furthermore, women experience outside stress from their gender role by being expected to balance their career and private life in the right way of the cultural constructions. Males does not struggle with these factors because of the ”macho” culture in many developed countries. The macho-culture creates restrictions on women and therefore benefit male aid workers (Gritti 2015, pp. 449-462).

The macho culture may however not always be in favour for male humanitarian workers. Research show that not only is there a lack of

psychological support system in the aid work industry but, it is also hard for males to access these support systems because of the stigma and norms of males lacking the need of help (Cockroft-Mkay & Eiroa-Orosa 2018).

Previous research display that both male and females face difficulties in the field of being an aid worker. However, there is still a much smaller amount of research concerning the difficulties males face and furthermore the advantages one may face because of their gender. Lastly, the previous research does not cover if it is possible for humanitarian workers to change the gender role norm, they are placed within society in order to simplify the work and tasks to be done.

Theoretical framework

The theoretical framework consists of concepts emerging out from the R.W. Connell’s feminist approach such as hegemonic masculinity, roles and norms which will be discussed in order for the reader to conceive a better

perception on the social constructs that may influence the gender paradigm within the aid worker field. The theoretical framework is suitable for the thesis since it explains the norms men and women are perceived to follow, as well explains the difficulties one can face if they are located within the feminine or masculine paradigm and discuss the possibilities for aid workers to overthrow the gender norms.

3.1 Hegemonic masculinity

”When men are present only as a background category in a policy discourse about women, it is difficult to raise issues about men’s and boys ’interests, problems, or differences” feminist researcher R.W. Connell states speaking

about men, masculinity and development (Connell 2005, p. 1806). She argues a large proportion of feminist research have focused on women because of the historical disadvantage’s women face, but in recent decades more research about male and men’s studies is conducted through the feminist approach. Connell believe that in order to fully understand gender inequality in development it is equally important to study those who hold power in social construction as well those who are excluded from them in order to understand gender and the relationship between gender (Connell 2009, Ch. 11).

Regardless of the name hegemonic masculinity the concept does not solely refer to males and their masculinity. Rather, the concept explains the patriarchal world order and how women and men stand in relation to each other in that particular world order. According to Connell, hegemonic

masculinity is established in relation to four other nonhegemonic

masculinities. First the masculinity who complicit to hegemonic masculinity because of the realization that unequal gender relations may benefit. The second nonhegemonic masculinity is the masculinity that is seen as more feminine or in modern terms titled deviant or queer. Third, some

masculinities are lesser because of external factors outside gender relations. Lastly, the masculinities that are formed as an answer to social

discrimination in form of political or economic absence. These four

masculinities legitimize the hegemonic masculinities. Although, it should not be misunderstood as those conforming to the different types of masculinities legitimize that there is a superior masculinity per se. Rather, what the four types of masculinities does, is that they explain that there is a masculinity within the power structure that is seemed to be the most “qualified” (Messerchmidt 2019, pp. 86-87).

Additionally, the concept refers to an ideal of gender emerging from social structures. The ideal, which will be referred to as gender norms in this essay, are based on ”sex roles” or as it will be used in this essay, gender roles. Gender roles are part of “role theory” and is based on the assumption that humans learn their gender role while maturate and perform their role in social constructions later in life. Based on gender roles Connell (2009, Ch. 11) argue that gender norms are taken form and only a few can with their specific role perform within the norm, hence only a few people can claim the top position of power. The basic principle of hegemonic masculinity is that based on the ideal or norm, some masculinities have the advantages in the cultural and social aspect.

Therefore, those who relates to this type of masculinity is at the top of the hierarchy and inevitable because of the norm women, who is considered to be feminine in social structures, becomes

subordinated in the world order since they cannot compete with the existed norm. As we can see in previous research on the topic of gender and aid workers, gendered norms can be a trap for both men and women. For women it can be the norm of being a family planner and not a career worker and for males it can be the norm of being macho and not be able to seek help or assistance in work.

Important to note is that despite that some masculinities are considered to be the prime form of the hierarchy; Connell argues that the hierarchy is a never-ending game and those at the top can always be competed by those who are subordinated. The reason for this is because hegemonic masculinity is based on alliances between the superior and subordinated groups and if the

alliances (i.e., silent agreement) are to be broken other groups can claim the top position (Jämställ.nu 2014). As Arcaro (2015) notice in his study, based on the context aid workers are placed in, masculinity or being male is not always equivalent to the top of the hierarchy. In some contexts, the subordinated group, I.e., women, can claim the top position based on the cultural and social constructions.

Furthermore, and worth mentioning, types of femininities can also have a higher status than some masculinities because of other social factors such as sexuality, class, age or ethnicity etc. The reason for this is because the term “hegemony” refers to cultural and historical aspects of the world order. Therefore, in some contexts gender may not solely be the only explanation for the order of power (Jämställ.nu 2014).

The theoretical framework outline above is used in the study as a guideline to strengthen my findings. The theory is suitable for the study since, despite the fact that hegemonic masculinities today are varied, they still legitimate unequal gender relationship between men and women, masculinity and femininity, and also between masculinities. With the help of the theory the

study seeks to find out if there are gendered norms based on one’s gender role. And, if the gender norms may be in favour or not for my respondents working with aid. Furthermore, presuming from the theory, it serves as a lens to see if hegemonic masculinities are common within the field of aid work and may be explanatory to if and why men and women face different

difficulties and advantages. Lastly, since the study seeks to understand if aid workers have the possibility to move beyond the gender role norm the theory is highly plausible since hegemonic masculinity refer to a hierarchy that is never-ending and fluctuating.

Methodology

4.1 Methodological framework

The chosen methodology for the thesis is a qualitative, abductive case study. The case study is a study on Swedish-employed, male and female aid

workers. According to Bryman (2012, pp. 66-70) when conducting a case study, the researcher is interested in complexity within that certain case. Conducting research on the case of Swedish aid workers and gender are selected since gender and equality between male and female is a highly mentioned subject in Sweden. Therefore, Swedish aid workers are selected as starting point for the case study with the expectation that it could give me a good perspective on male and females perception on the subject of matter. The study is conducted through an abductive approach by using the

theoretical or conceptual framework in order to draw on understandings on the subject of matter. The reason why this approach is used is because the study does not seek to generate or test the theory used in the framework. Rather, by using an abductive approach the researcher seeks to understand the research objective through the participants’ eyes. Through the theoretical frameworks and the concepts explained within it, the theory lens guides the researcher to which questions are vital to ask the respondents. The theoretical framework is in other words helping to understand the empirical findings but not necessary determine that the theory is an absolute truth. Lastly, as the study seek to acknowledge aid workers perspective on gender, an abductive approach is therefore necessary to use (Bryman 2012, pp- 400-401).

4.2 Sample

The study is using a purposive sampling approach, more specifically the criterion sampling as a first approach when seeking for respondents. The second sampling approach used is snowball sampling. The criterion sampling has been used since the study seek to sample individuals that fulfil two

specific criteria; the gender criteria and international employed criteria (Bryman 2012, pp. 419). Therefore, respondent sample consist of aid workers, working internationally through NGOs or humanitarian/aid organizations. The initial thought was to sample both local aid workers working for an international humanitarian organization or an aid worker working for a national aid organization but work abroad. Although, because of difficulty to come in contact with aid workers working and living outside Sweden, the respondent sample consist overall of Swedish aid workers who are or have been internationally deployed. With the exception of one

respondent who is not Swedish but however had been employed by Swedish aid organisations. On account of this, one has to bear in mind that results could be different if the study had respondents from other countries as well. Additionally, the sample consist of either aid workers working with

humanitarian aid or developmental aid, and therefore, answers may also differ because of their different employment.

Respondents needed to fulfil the two criteria; gender and international employed. However, in order to come in contact with respondents the snowball sampling technique is used. E-mails to several aid organisations is sent with an explanation of the sampling criteria and a request to put forward the email to aid workers within the organisation that fulfil the criteria. The snowball sample technique is suitable according to Bryman (2012, pp. 424) when researchers seek “hard-to-reach” populations and as a researcher with limited network of contacts in the aid industry, snowball sample is the most appropriate technique to reach the respondents. Furthermore, snowball sampling would arguably be the best approach when trying to reach aid workers outside Sweden. Sadly, because of bureaucracy and ethical reasons, organisations did not have the possibility to put forward the request of interviewing to their local staff seated in their international offices.

on female respondents, the quota of respondents will be an equal

representation of both male and female respondents in order to ensure an accurate picture of the gender paradigm in aid work. Respondents sample will consist of 5-10 people (Bryman 2012, pp. 277-279).

4.3 Respondents

Table 1.1 Respondents, their gender, their age and geographic location of employment

Eight aid workers have been interviewed in this study. All respondents have been working several years in the field of either humanitarian aid or

development aid. See table 1.1 observe that the aid workers are referred to a number in order to remain anonymous, only age, gender and the respondents’ geographic location whereas they have conducted their aid work, is

displayed. Table 1.1. show that there is an equal gender distribution between the aid workers, furthermore the age ranges from 27-46 years among the respondents. Geographic location is outlined in order for the reader to comprehend if answers differ or resemble depending on where the respondents’ have had their basis while conducting their work. As can be seen in the table down below the majority of respondents are/have been

Interview respondent

Gender Age (y/o) Geographic location No. 1 No. 2 No. 3 No. 4 No. 5 No. 6 No. 7 No. 8 Male Male Male Female Female Female Male Female 46 38 34 34 38 39 38 27

West Africa/Middle East South America Central Africa/Middle East Europe/Africa Central Africa/Europe Middle East Middle East/Europe Africa/Europe

employed as aid worker in Africa, Middle East and Europe. Only one out of eight is stationed in South America.

In case of quotation in the results, only the interview number will be displayed as for example “*quote*” (Respondent no. 1).

4.4 Ethical considerations

When conducting research through respondent interviews it is important to consider the ethical considerations as a researcher. In order for the

respondents to feel secure and to legitimize the research the interviews begin by explaining the topic of the study as well the reason why it is

studied. Furthermore, since the research topic seeks to understand private information from the respondents, they are given the opportunity to be anonymous in name and the research only conducts information such as age and gender since this is two variables that will not make it possible to trace back to the respondents. The study does not name who the respondent is working for so that respondents feel safe to discuss certain issues without having to worry that their superiors or colleagues will be able to trace them back. In the beginning of the interview, respondents are aware that the interview is recorded only for the use of transcription. Lastly, since the study is concerning personal and sensitive topics for the subjects, it is important as a researcher to take into consideration that respondents may not want to answer all questions. Therefore, questions of subjects’ witnesses are also asked in order for respondents to shift focus from only personal experiences to general experiences within their field. This is chosen in order to gain enough information to the study without pressuring subjects on personal information.

4.5 Interview guide

The interviews are semi-structured and consist of open-ended questions. Using semi-structured interviews in this study is important since it will be possible to explore new difficulties aid workers face. The reason for this is because much previous research has adopted a female perspective and interview questions asked to aid workers have therefore been angled in favour of this perspective. In order to minimize the female bias in the interviews, a semi-structured approach is therefore vital. Additional, as a researcher with limited knowledge of working as a development worker, semi-structured interview lets the respondents raise questions of concerns whereas the researcher has little knowledge of. The questions are personal since the study seek to collect personal experiences and thoughts, but as mentioned earlier, respondents are aware they do not have to answer questions from a personal view if they are uncomfortable. The interview guide is structured with general questions of the respondents’ background and their background within the field of aid work. The second part of the interview guide start off with an explanation of the two core concepts that is discussed in the interviews – gender roles and gender norms and questions concerning the concept in relation to aid work. The last section covers more personal experiences from the respondents but yet in relation to their work. Questions have emerged by using the theoretical framework as a guide. Despite a structured interview guide, me, as an interviewer reserve for changes in the structure during the interview and interviews do not

simultaneously follow the script. Although, no respondent is left out of any of the questions in the face of changed structure. See appendix 1.1 for the complete interview guide.

4.6

All interviews are held digitally through either a video conferencing platform or through phone. Conducting the interviews through video conference is

applicable because of two things. First, since many of my respondents work internationally it would not be possible to travel to their place of resident for an interview. And two, videocall makes it possible to observe and interview “face to face” which is of vital interest since the interviews are

semi-structured and search to be more of a personal meeting between the respondent and the interviewer.

Respondents decide the time and date for the interview and prior to the interview they receive an email with the study’s purpose, ethical

considerations and time frame of the conduct of the interview. Interviews last about 45-90 minutes and all interviews is conducted in Swedish, except one that is conducted in English.

4.7

All interviews are recorded and transcript as soon as possible after. In order to transcript answers into text some editing have been made but the content remain unchanged. Irrelevant content has been removed or replaced with “---” in the transcript. Other marks in the citations are “…“---” which stands for pause, and [] marks that something is happening, or visualised from the respondent. Citations that have been asked to be deleted have not taken part of the transcript and is neither to be citated in the essay.

4.8 Analytical method

There are several ways to analyse qualitative study results according to Bryman (2018, Ch. 24) but because of large amounts of text some form of coding is often conducted. The interviews in this study are analysed by using thematic analysis. Researcher’s use thematic analyse in order to find themes. Themes are found by placing sub-categories, found within the transcripts, into general themes.

After reading through the interview transcripts several times, sub-categories are formed based on the study’s purpose and the research questions. Because of a large number on sub-categories,

general themes are created and clustered some of the categories together that have similarities with the general themes. From the interviews, five general themes are found. These five are: characteristics of aid work, advantages

and disadvantages, norms and norm-breaking, other factors and lastly, safety. Characteristics of aid work refer to the everyday life of aid workers;

what are the work tasks, who do they meet, colleagues, struggles etc.

Advantages and disadvantages display what the male and female

respondents may find as easier concerning their job or what they may struggle with in their job because of their gender. Norms and norm-breaking indicate to the norms aid workers have to live up to based on their gender and also how aid workers may try to break these norms. According to the responses it may be more than gender that matter in aid work, these categories are discussed under the theme other factors. The last theme,

safety, refer to both the physical and psychical threats aid workers face in

their field of work.

The five different themes are all to be explained further and strengthened through quotations in the “result” chapter. By analysing the themes in relation to the theoretical framework and in consideration to the research objective and earlier research it will be possible to draw conclusions and display the life of male and female aid workers.

4.9 Reliability & Validity

Bryman (2012, pp. 279-81) talk about the importance of the concept’s reliability and validity, in order to legitimize a study. Reliability refers to the possibility to repeat a study, but in this qualitative study it is hard to achieve reliability since it is conducted in social settings and social settings could always change in time. Validity refers to how well the study actually

measure what we want to know, i.e., does the study actually measure aid workers in relation to gender? The higher the validity is the more accurate is the measuring of the study.

In order to raise the validity in this study the interview guide is adopting concepts and themes referring to earlier research and the theoretical

framework. This is adopted in order to be able to ask relevant questions that connects the study to the respondents. Furthermore, the interviews are

conducted privately and go through all ethical considerations which probably makes it easier for the respondents to answer honestly. However, it has to be acknowledged that stories from respondents are not to be seen as an absolute truth. The reason for this is because stories can be told in a variety of ways as well stories can differ depending on the person who tells it and who is

listening to the stories. The researcher should also be considered in the debate of validity. Interpretations of results could differ depending on the researcher. And, in the case of this study it has to be mentioned that the researcher’s gender may create biases towards the female respondents. This is always the case whereas the researcher can associate with respondents and therefore me, as a researcher, have to bear in mind to look at the study from an objective approach, which have been done to the greatest of my ability.

Research findings

This chapter presents the empirical findings from the interviews with aid workers. As mentioned in the methodology chapter, empirical data is

presented through themes. Five themes are presented through subcategories, each theme is described shortly before presenting the respondents answers.

5.1 Characteristics of aid work

Respondents were asked to explain what they are working with and how a “typical day” within their field of work could look like. A majority of the respondents agreed that no day is the other one alike when being employed as an aid worker. Respondents working with development aid often carried out more administerial work, while those working in the humanitarian aid often had more practical tasks out on the field. Respondents worked with a variety of occupations, reaching from medical humanitarian aid, sexual health and reproduction teaching, reporting of conflicts, policy advising, to volunteering in refugee camps, only to mention a few of the occupations. Furthermore, respondents worked as well on a variety of levels, some were conducting volunteering while others were team or country manager for employees. Depending on their work task, respondents met a variety of people as well. Some worked closer with for example patients or local implementers while others worked among decisionmakers on local, regional or international levels.

Respondents was later asked if they liked their job as an aid worker and answers differed a bit. Most aid workers said they like their job because it was “interesting” and “challenging”, they got to work closely with people and were interested in development questions. Some respondents also noted that being an aid worker made the proud and strengthen their feeling of being a fellow human being. Additionally, many were also aware that being an aid worker was a big part of their identity since it is a job where they both work

and live in different contexts then they are used to. Living and experiencing other countries was one of the main reasons why respondent no. 7 liked his work. He believed that much of his administrative work tasks could be done in Sweden as well, but he felt that the cultural experiences and the life he lives abroad makes the aid work much more pleasant.

However, both the male and female aid workers, more particularly five out of the eight respondents explained the negative side of their work as well:

“Eventually, you would also like a “normal” life with kids and a family at a safe place. It is not an easy task to combine with being out in the field that often and intensively.” (Respondent no. 4).

Many respondents agreed with the statement above and explained that many of their work operations are not safe or stable enough to combine with a family life. Furthermore, both male and female respondents witnessed that there is a certain painted picture displaying female aid workers as “the single woman”, a woman who does not want children and will forever stay single. Despite this generalization of female aid workers, most respondents

answered that this is not the case even if you are female or male, it is more a matter that lack of safety and stability is the reason why many aid workers does not start a family while being employed as an aid worker out in the field. Not simply because they do not want a family because they are an aid worker.

Except the difficulty to start a family while being employed abroad, another negative aspect of the aid work is that it puts a lot of pressure on your mental health:

“I have had fatigue symptoms and I have realized I cannot work as much out in the field as I used to do. It is not healthy for me.” (Respondent no. 3).

Respondent no. 3 believe that mental exhaustion is not mentioned enough in the field of aid work and that aid workers often suffers from mental pressure during work. Other’s agreed that the issue is not brought up or noted and that especially male aid workers may have a harder time talking about mental issues occurring from the work, than women does. Respondent no. 4 and no. 3 argued that it might be easier for women to be more open about mental health and exhaustion since in a normative sense it is more acceptable for women to feel and react stronger on traumatic events than it is for men. Lastly, three out of eight respondents sometimes felt that work could be hard because they felt insufficient because of a large workload or unable to help because a lack of resources or funding or because there is sometimes too much bureaucracy. The three respondents were aware that this was issues that were out of their control but still mentioned that it made them feel helpless together with the feeling of people depending on you. Concerning the bureaucracy, one respondent felt that aid work could sometimes be inflexible because you have certain rules or manuals you have to follow and take in concern. The respondent toned out that bureaucracy can be very different depending on the work culture among colleagues and in different hierarchies. In some aid cultures whereas it is a strong hierarchy, rules on how and who to contact can make one’s work difficult and protracted since the worker is not allowed to contact a person directly concerning a subject of matter because of the hierarchy rules.

Despite some negative aspects concerning the characteristics of aid work the overall experience from the respondents was that they were happy and satisfied being employed within the field of aid work.

5.2 Advantages and disadvantages

One of the main purposes of the study is to find out both advantages and disadvantages with aid workers’ gender. Naturally, several interview

questions touched upon this topic, nevertheless most respondents got into the topic spontaneously while just talking about their job tasks or when they talked about the life of an aid worker. Below, both male and female

respondents’ advantages and disadvantages are outlined. Respondents answer are not divided between male or female categories since many of the female advantages went hand in hand with male respondents’ answers on

disadvantages, and vice versa.

5.2.1 Advantages

Both the male and female respondents expressed one big advantage in their work based on their gender. All four male respondents agreed that being a man made it easier to earn respect and be listened to. The male respondents all agreed that female colleagues were often neglected when speaking and that they, as males, had sometimes have to put forward the word of the female colleague in order for their opinion or thought to be heard.

Respondent no. 3 and no. 7 explained that women often had bigger issues gaining respect when it came to hierarchies where a male was in top of that hierarchy. Respondent no. 3 believed that the root of this issue is that many leaderships is based on patriarchy and therefore male aid workers have an easier time gaining respect within that leadership based on the principle of patriarchy. Respondent no. 7 recognized that despite talking about, what he referred to as being seen in the aid world as “feminine questions”, he got respect and believed that especially men listened extra to him because he was a man himself advocating for this. He believed that if a female colleague would have talked about these issues to a group of men, they would not have taken it as serious.

Female respondents corresponded that being a female was an advantage when it came to the personal connections you have to the people you work with or work for. They all agreed that women tend to be the ones people

turns to concerning tough experiences and issues. Most respondents argued that women and children often turned to other women, but respondent no. 4 believed that men as well turned to women about issues, more than they turned to other males. However, respondent no. 4 believed that it possibly could be because she is a Western woman rather than just strictly being a woman per se.

Male and female respondents portrayed other advantages as well, but which were not consistent between the other respondents. Other advantages male aid workers experienced was professional experiences:

“I had a job in the middle east, a chief position, a woman was not even allowed to apply for that position in that country.” (Respondent no. 3).

Two of the other male respondents saw the same pattern as respondent no. 3. They had both witnessed and were aware that it is easier for men to claim top positions within aid work. One of the respondents told that even if aid

organisations have an equal distribution between male and female

employees, there is only a few of those female employees that have a chief position.

Respondent no. 2 displayed a different advantage in aid work. He believed that being a male had made it easier for him to focus on his work and achieve his goals since he did not have to worry about some factors that women have to worry about. These factors included such as threats, bullying and sexual allusions.

Females too believed their gender gave them professional advantages. Two out of four female respondents declared that as a woman you are more likely to be employed within the aid work-sector, however not in chief positions most of the time. The two respondents argued that a lot of the matters in aid work, are seen as best handled by a female and therefore they could apply for

some positions that males could not. Furthermore, respondent no. 5

explained that some aid organisations only employ women, and in that sense, females have a big advantage because males are not even able to work within organisations as such. Respondent no. 8 agreed that women are employed in a higher extent but argued that it would sometimes be better if organisations employed more men. Her argument for this was that receivers of aid would benefit if they were in contact with male role models since the view of many men are that they are “predators” and violent. She meant that this is not the case for all men, and it would be nice to change that preconceived notion in aid recipient countries.

5.2.2 Disadvantages

Many of the disadvantages goes hand in hand with the main advantages’ male and female aid workers experiences. Namely, the female respondents felt that they were not respected and listened to as much as male aid workers. And the male respondents agreed that it could be harder for them to talk to aid recipients and develop a more personal connection with people.

Other disadvantages that female aid workers encounter was such as having to claim themselves and trying to be as rational as possible in order to gain respect among colleagues.

“It has to be factual and well-grounded if you are to put something forward, do not act on your feeling, since that is something… we women are

associated with” (Respondent no. 5).

Female aid workers do also have to bear in mind how they are approached when it comes to their appearance. Respondent no. 8 witnessed that co-workers to her did not gain respect because of the way they looked. Furthermore, she noticed that as a woman you cannot wear either to comfortable clothes or short skirts, or you will be judged upon.

One of the female respondents confessed that she had several times been yelled at for speaking her mind. She explained that it could sometimes be confusing because most of the times the desire was not to silence her, but rather for the male colleagues to claim that it was not possible for a woman to put a man in place. Lastly, respondent no. 8 expressed that she was sometimes left out from tasks because it was a “man’s job”. She did not believe it was to be condescending against her, but rather that they did not believe she was physically able to do certain tasks.

All male respondents except one believed they faced disadvantages based on their gender. Except feeling like people did not turn to them or trusted them as much as women in certain questions, one respondent believed that especially in conservative environments he needed to be accompanied by a woman who could speak on his behalf, which made it harder for him to work in these environments and with certain question. And therefore, he rather worked with questions and issues that were more “manly” in a sense.

Another male respondent, who worked in the field expressed that it could be difficult in some contexts for him to perform his job since he was not always allowed to approach female aid recipients without permission from the female’s male guardian such as her husband or father. It could also be harder for the male respondents to establish a good relationship with female

colleagues since in some contexts they were not allowed to talk privately to female staff. In order to speak to the female staff, the male aid workers needed another person to be present. Along with this factor, some women in some contexts wore full-covering clothes because of religious or cultural purpose, this made it even more difficult for the male respondents to

establish a relationship with the female staff since they were not able to look them in their eyes while talking to them.

Other than facing issues as a male aid worker when approaching female aid recipients and colleagues, two other disadvantages were brought up from the

male aid workers perspective. Firstly, respondent no. 3 mentioned that males can be seen as a threat in different situations. And sometimes, bringing along a male aid worker during a field mission could put others at risk too.

Respondent no. 3 believed that women tend to be better at disarming in threatening situations since people tend to see women as calmer and, in those contexts, there is highly valued to respect women in professional situations. Secondly, one respondent felt that it could be hard to bring up certain issues concerning men’s violence against other men and women. He wishes that it was something that male aid workers could talk more freely about since it is something aid workers often encounter. However, he felt that women often had to bring up such issues but wishes more males would talk about it in the aid sector.

5.3 Norms and norm-breaking

When discussing gendered norms and norm breaking with the respondents it became clear that many of the female and male norms are connected just as the case with gendered advantages and disadvantages. However, in order to make it clearer what the respondents argued to be the gendered norm for them, female norms in the field of aid work are outlined first, followed by the male norms and lastly results on how the aid workers try to break the norms are presented.

5.3.1 Female norms

All female respondents agreed that there were certain norms based on the female gender although, some of the respondents had more experience of it than others. Respondent no. 8 mentioned that norms are everywhere and most of the times it is colleagues that put women in a gendered norm. She had been told from one of her male colleagues that she sometimes “behave

like a man”. Respondent no. 8 explained that she did not mind the expression itself however, she argued that being told this has a negative sound to it. Being told you “behave like a man” because you are confident and show strength should not be seen as a manly attribute, rather it is a personal attribute that both women and men can possess. She did not like or agreed that women should be categorized as weak unless they did not act like a man. Respondent no. 8 further explained that in her field of aid work it is highly characterised for women to be a caring person who should therefore work with issues concerning children and exposed people. She believed this is something that should not only be referred to as a female objective, but automatically is because of the norm.

Respondent no. 6 had encounter with norms in leader positions. She had noted that female leaders should be softer and more diplomatic than men usually are. Furthermore, if she tried to act more tough and as “a man”, that type of leadership was not as welcomed because she is a female.

Other norms that the female respondents had experienced that they were to follow was that they often were referred as sensitive or emotional. This norm could both be positive or negative depending on the context. For example, one respondent believed that it was more acceptable for her to be traumatised and vulnerable in tough situations that put pressure on oneself. However, for another respondent it was a negative norm since the preconceived notion of being emotional made her more careful to express disagreement. She did not want people to think she was acting upon her feelings just because she was not satisfied with a decision or a task.

The last female norm mentioned from the respondents was that as a woman you are perceived to be the primary family planner. Two out of four of the female respondents explained that there is a notion that women above 30 should begin to consider starting a family. They had never been told this

upfront, although they believed they encountered this vision more often than men do.

5.3.2 Male norms

The female norm of being the primary family planner were also something one of the male respondents agreed on. He strongly believed that people perceived him as being the primary income source for his family but not the primary family caretaker. He explained this by providing an example of parent leave in his work. Mothers are allowed 3 months of parental leave; fathers are only entitled to five days parental leave. If fathers want to be home more, they are required to present a recommendation letter for their chiefs. He believed this was a clear example that men are not supposed to be caring and share family values as much as women are perceived to do. Another attribute that is strongly connected to the sense of females being emotional, were that two out of four male respondents believed that as a man you should not be emotional in aid work. This could be difficult since these two respondents believed that an aid worker is often exposed to traumatised situations and may therefore have the need to be emotional, even if they are men. Furthermore, there is also a norm that men are perceived to be:

“---the one talking in meetings and brining up topics. I think it is anticipated that men should have a big confidence, be well-articulated and be able to talk to anyone. With the extension that males should not show fear --- be strong, dominant and knows what he wants.” (Respondent no. 2).

Lastly, one respondent revealed that one of the most prominent male norms for field workers is that males are “vagabonds”. He referred a vagabond to a person who have a lot of sexual partners, takes risks and are an adventurer. He mentioned that it is a very stereotypical picture of males that is not entirely correct, he did not refer himself as a vagabond for example.

5.3.3 Breaking norms

Respondents were asked if there was a possibility for them to break stereotypical gender norms and if so, how did they try to challenge the norms? All respondents agreed that it was possible to break norms however, many of the respondents were unsure at a beginning if they had actively changed norms or if it rather was a matter of personality change. One female respondent believed that by “acting as a guy” she changed the norm of being seen as weak and, by doing so she believed that she sometimes was safer at work and in her personal sphere outside work too. Respondent no. 8 tried to break norms when someone told her she could not do a task because of her gender, by showing she was actually capable of fulfilling the task.

Furthermore, the general view of norm breaking, both among the male and female respondents, was that it could be more damaging for females to break norms than men. Although, one of the respondents did not agree. The

respondent believed that some norms was actually easier to break for women than for men. The explanation for this was that women have often had the need to break norms to fit into patriarchal structures while men often have benefitted from them. Therefore, some norms could be harder for men to break with the argument that it is not necessary for them to do so in order to thrive.

Breaking norms for males tended to be that the male respondents tried to challenge the difficulties that their female colleagues face. They also tried to talk openly about equality and gender issues in order to remove the stigma that equality is only a “woman’s issue”. The male respondents who did this recognized that breaking these norms were often received with positivity, although not always taken as serious since they were foreigners advocating for these topics. One of the male respondents did not believe that women would face norm-breaking with enthusiasm in the same way as men do. He believed that if a woman would break norms, it would be seen as negative rather than positive.

Last but not least, the majority of the respondents agreed that despite adopting certain means to break norms, it was ultimately easier for them to break them because they were Swedish aid workers, foreigners. The aid workers stood out from the crowd most of the time in other contexts as well and therefore, breaking gender norms was often accepted for them to do.

5.4 Other factors

“it is like you have a third gender, in some contexts. First and foremost, you are a representant for the organisation. Secondly, you are seen as Westerner or white. Thirdly, you might be seen as a woman or a man.” (Respondent no.

6).

A recurrent term and theme during the interview were the discussion of intersectionality, i.e., different factors that decides if you are the superior or the subordinated in power. Just as the hegemonic masculinity theory suggest, gender may not be the only explanation for power hold. Therefore,

respondents were asked to reflect upon the possibility that other factors, except gender, might influence their work as well.

Eight out of eight respondents agreed that ethnicity was one big cause for how an aid worker is treated. One mentioned sexuality, being homosexual are in many contexts not allowed or respected and hence often something aid workers have to hide to themselves. Two respondents mentioned that age matter too, in regard to earning respect among co-workers. Furthermore, as the quotation in the beginning of this chapter explains, one’s organisations may matter how people treat the aid workers. Lastly, education/the position within the career is of importance if you want others outside your

5.4.1 Ethnicity

All respondents mentioned during the interview that they believed to have had easier to gain respect and conduct certain tasks because of their ethnicity. One respondent noted that aid work is based on a lot of “white privilege” and “white saviour complex” referring to that it is a sector that have always been controlled by Westerners and white people. The colour of aid workers skin had often given the respondents professional advantages despite their gender. Respondents believed that being a white person made them respectful and important in others eyes. Furthermore, respondents could sometimes feel bad about this privilege because they were well aware that their skin colour sometimes mattered more than their competence or earlier achievements compared to other aid workers. Some examples that the respondents shared during the interviews were that they had access to certain meetings that locally employed were not allowed to participate in. Others witnessed about different rules for western employees and other employees. A westerner employed can much easier access to be internationally employed while locals have harder to becoming international staff. The root cause for this issue is that many local aid workers within international organisations lack

representation and support in power structures.

Ethnicity did not only give the respondents professional advantages, but the respondents ethnicity also made it easier for them to not follow gender stereotypes and be “different” from the norm. Three respondents declared that being a foreigner makes it more acceptable to challenge gender norms since gender norms may differ in the country the aid worker come from. Therefore, many did not see gender norm-breaking from white aid workers as something shocking but rather quite normal, since white aid workers are regardless “different from us”. Additional, not only was it more acceptable for white aid workers to challenge gender norms, it was also possible for others to start questioning norms because the aid workers way of

norm-breaking was seen to be acting out of knowledge and expertise. A belief the aid workers themselves claimed not to be true, they were often not acting out of expertise on the subject, but rather acting on what they were used to, concerning these norms.

One of the eight respondents expressed a negative outcome of ethnicity and skin colour. The respondent noted that being white in some context could also hurt you. The explanation for this was that in some contexts white persons can be seen as exotic and people may therefore want to grab the white aid worker. The respondent strengthens this explanation by confess that white women have been sexually harassed since it is sometimes seen as an achievement to have had a physical encounter with a white woman.

5.4.2 Age

Two out of eight respondents agreed that another factor that matter in the field of aid work is the aid worker’s age. The younger you are the harder it is for the aid worker to gain respect among colleagues and the people they meet while conducting their work. The older the aid worker are the easier it is according to one respondent:

“--- I am thinking about an older colleague. It was clearly noticed that anytime she stepped into a room she radiated such authority. It did not matter who was in that room, man as woman, young as old, she got everyone to listen to her from the beginning.” (Respondent no. 7).

The question about age however could differ a lot depending on the culture. One of the two respondents mentioned that in some contexts and cultures she could be seen as too young to be even working, and when the respondent moved out of that culture she could be seen as too old to still be working and that the respondent should start thinking about a life outside the aid sector.

Therefore, was the age factor very fluctuating in matter, depending on context.

5.4.3 Organisation

The employer could matter for the aid worker in two ways. First, if the aid worker was employed by a large aid organisation, they got respected only by being an employee of that organisations. Other factors such as gender, age and ethnicity did not really matter in those contexts then according to one of the respondents. Secondly, two out of eight respondents agreed that the organisation makes you safer as an aid worker. By being employed by a well-known organisation, people respected you and your private sphere and therefore, some of the aid workers were often less exploited of crimes. Both of the respondents that mentioned organisation as an important factor also discussed that they would probably have a completely different experience of aid work if they were locally employees or employed by another, smaller organisation.

5.4.4 Education/position

The last factor that was valued in the aid sector was the aid workers

education or position within the aid organisation. However, ethnicity played a role in this too since there are a perceived notion of white aid workers to be highly educated and with an experience of expertise in aid. Your work position often gained respect since there is a common pattern within aid that two employees cannot claim the same position. Therefore, it was easily displayed where the aid worker was positioned in the hierarchy and the amount of respect their work position “deserved”.

5.5 Safety

The last theme identified from the interview with the study’s respondents is safety. Most of the respondents were aware that they were at risk sometimes, however the risks differed depending on the aid workers gender and the environments they performed their work. Despite that one of the

subcategories of safety have already been mentioned before, namely mental health, this chapter seek to construe how aid workers mental health and physical health is affected and how they differ between gender.

5.5.1 Mental health

As an aid worker you often experience trauma and stressful situations that put pressure on your mental health. As already mentioned earlier, mental health issues were according to some of the respondents not noticed enough despite the fact that aid workers experience it. Out of the eight respondents, two reported that they suffered from mental health issues. The two

mentioned health issues were fatigue syndrome and empathy exhaustion. Fatigue syndrome referred to feelings such as numbness and difficulty to feel either happiness, sadness or anger. One of the two respondents mentioned that empathy exhaustion was common among aid workers. The reason for this is because as an aid worker you meet a lot of people in difficult

situations that requires the aid worker to be a decent human being, showing empathy. Performance this for a long time can result in empathy exhaustion, i.e., that the aid worker is drained of empathy and have a harder time

understanding another person’s situation.

The two respondents agreed that mental health issues are more common among female aid workers. Not in that sense that females experience it more often, rather that because of the norm it is more acceptable for women to express and feel mentally exhausted.

5.5.2 Physical health

Eight out of eight respondents discussed safety and physical health. The male as well female respondents agreed that female aid workers are often more exposed of physical health threats than male aid workers. The explanation for this is because female aid workers are often more vulnerable both at work and after work since they are an “easier target” than most males. Women are especially more vulnerable when it comes to sexual violence whereas the male respondents declared that they are often faced with violence, robbery, killing and shootings. All of the respondents knew at least one female colleague or another female aid worker who had been exposed of sexual violence or sexual harassment. Neither of the respondents neglected the fact that male aid workers may be exposed of this too, however no one personally knew a male aid worker who had experienced it.

Furthermore, the male respondents believed that their physical appearance could sometimes avert potential threats whilst women did often not have that advantage when it came to physical appearance. Additional to this, and concerning appearance, female respondents noted that they had to think about their appearance and the way they dressed in order to provide security for themselves. The male respondents did not mention that clothing would be an issue for their safety. One of the female respondents and one of the male respondents agreed that as a woman you have restriction on the freedom of mobility because of the danger’s women may face as an aid worker. According to the respondents, it was an unspoken rule that females should not move without the accompany of a male.

Lastly, men would sometime face dangers that women did not. The reason for this is because males are sometimes placed in contexts where women are not allowed. Therefore, male aid workers did sometimes experience

themselves seated in situations neither of the female respondents had been situated in.

Analysis

The following chapter presents the empirical data in an analytical way with regards to research objective. I.e., to generate a comprehensive

understanding on gender and aid workers with regard to removing prejudices on aid workers’ gender. The empirical findings are analysed with the

research question as a ground and compare the findings with the earlier research in order to understand both male and female aid workers perspective on gender and gender norms. Furthermore, the study is using an abductive approach and does therefore neither seek to generate theories or test a theory. The theoretical approach is rather used in the analyse to understand if the empirical findings have any ground within the theory, but with the

reservation that the empirical data may not correspond fully or at all with the theory.

The analysis is mapped out as followed; analysis in relation to the research objective, analysis of the empirical data in regard to the research questions and the last section analyse the empirical findings with the theoretical framework of Raewyn Connell as the standpoint.

6.1 Removing of prejudice

As mentioned in the beginning of this essay, earlier research on aid workers and gender have particularly focused on women and left out male aid workers in the GAD paradigm. Furthermore, male aid workers have often been displayed as the “problem” in aid work since research suggest they do not face as severe issues as women. In addition to this, women in aid work are automatically labelled as “helpless”. The main research objective with this study was therefore to remove the prejudice of male and female aid workers by evaluating both advantages and difficulties they face when distributing aid. As the empirical findings display advantages and