Talk:Gendered division of labour

This redirect is part of WikiProject Gender studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this redirect, or visit the project page for more information.Gender studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Gender studiesTemplate:WikiProject Gender studiesGender studies

To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Assess : see Unassessed Gender studies articles and Unknown-importance Gender studies articles
Cleanup : edit to see
Collaborate : see /Collaboration
Copyedit : edit to see
Deletion sorting : see /Sexuality and gender
Expand : edit to see
Infobox : see Gender studies articles needing infoboxes
Merge : edit to see
Notability : edit to see
NPOV : edit to see
Orphans : Brannon Masculinity Scale · Holy Virility · Media and gender · Michael Kaufman (author) · Women's education in Saudi Arabia
Photo : see Wikipedia requested photographs of gender studies
Split : History of feminism
Stubs : see Gender studies stubs
Translate : see /translation
Update : edit to see
Verify : Riot grrrl
Needs attention : see Gender studies articles needing attention

Sources

Current article seems reliant on only one source? Andycjp 08:00, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite

Not to be too criticial of someone elses work, or to go too feministy but I think this article is a good candidate for a rewrite or at least serious rephrasing. The first sentence was somewhat alarming- what is "appropriate...for men and women" has so many possible conotations which could not be interpreted as acceptable for NPOV or acceptable for an encylopedia. Does that mean there is work which is inapropriate for each gender too? I also have NO idea how the last sentence is relevant to the subject. This article is really concerning to me, and perhaps anyone with any sort of knowledge on this topic can help. 71.219.59.103 00:13, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite or delete

This article is just communist agitprop. It needs to be rewritten in a neutral point of view or deleted. JCDenton2052 (talk) 02:22, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article is essentially a fork of occupational segregation and should redirect there. MRSC • Talk 19:01, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]