Talk:Gendered division of labour

Sources

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

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)

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)

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