This category is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
This category is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism articles
This category is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupations, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OccupationsWikipedia:WikiProject OccupationsTemplate:WikiProject OccupationsOccupations articles
If there's a women by occupation category, then why not have a men by occupation category, and homologous subcategories for male equivalents of the female ones? We don't seperate English actors as a category between that and the non-existent English actresses category, although we do have a category for female guitarists. Could someone explain to me why it is necessary to have this sex distinction, without the categories for males?--HisSpaceResearch 05:57, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Here is another example of where the female/male split was seen as a bad thing. Isn't having categories for women but not for men a double standard? Please give me your views on the matter if you have any... personally, I don't see much need to divide categories by gender/sex at all really in the majority of cases.--HisSpaceResearch 06:26, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I guess we do have Category:Men, Category:Women and all their subcategories...--h i ss p a c er e s e a r c h 11:14, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Some women categories are relevant (for instance Category:Female bullfighters) that's why there is a women by occupation category. There is also men categories when it is relevant (Category:Male models, male singers, Eunuchs, and so on). In some occupations, gender is really relevant (generally for historical interest, or when the involvement of a gender in an occupation is atypical). In my opinion, this type of categorization is ok when it is a subject of studies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.36.179.105 (talk • contribs) 13:17, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
