The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Nakon 01:33, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gender-identity/role (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There already exist a page on Gender Role and a page on Gender Identify. This page is superfluous and stubbish, while the other two articles are much more well fleshed out. Finally, the two are separate subjects and a hyphenation of them into a single term does not make sense. Timothyjosephwood (talk) 05:38, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD cannot be processed correctly because of an issue with the header. Please make sure the header has only 1 article, and doesn't have any HTML encoded characters.—^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:45, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed header. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 14:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This is indecipherable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paperpencils (talk • contribs) 10:22, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above and lack of sources. ~Mable (chat) 14:38, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as duplicate of Gender role and Gender identity. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 14:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC) + 14:44, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:27, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:28, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I am finding where this is actually being used in academic works ([1], [2], [3], [4]) so there is some credence to it being used, so it may be better for this to redirect to one of the two articles if this is not kept. However the question here is where to redirect. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:26, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• A person may have a gender "identity/role". For example, if I identify as a female and I play a societal role of a female. However, I may be a female and play the societal role of the male. One is what you self-identify as; the other is what society expects you to be. They are very different concepts. If there is a redirect at all I think it should redirect to a disambig page with both gender role and gender identity. Timothyjosephwood (talk) 05:56, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The article is poorly written (confusingly defines the topic), but gender-identity/role is a concept separate from either gender identity or gender role. It is a minor concept in sociology, but seems notable. Here are some refs:

• Eli Coleman (1991). John Money: A Tribute. Psychology Press. p. 13. ISBN 978-1-56024-190-4.
• Colette Chiland (1 January 2003). Transsexualism: Illusion and Reality. SAGE Publications, Limited. p. 5. ISBN 978-1-4129-0264-9.
• Joseph W. Ciarrocchi (1 January 1993). A Minister's Handbook of Mental Disorders. Paulist Press. p. 160. ISBN 978-0-8091-3403-8.
• John Money (1986). Lovemaps: Clinical Concepts of Sexual/erotic Health and Pathology, Paraphilia, and Gender Transposition of Childhood, Adolescence, and Maturity. Ardent Media. p. 284. ISBN 978-0-8290-1589-8.

I think the above should be proof enough that the concept is engaged with in academic literature to the extent that its notability is clear. @Timothyjosephwood, Maplestrip, and Hisashiyarouin:--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:13, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

While it is true that each source you offer uses the term Gender Identity/Role, they all also go on to offer a separate definition of each. Furthermore, while Money himself offered two separate definitions to begin with, the world has somewhat moved on since then. Gender role has come to mean not just the actions you do to express your gender identity; it is also the expectations that society has of you as a particular gender, which you may or may not fulfill (or a perceived gender you may or may not actually identify as). Gender identity has very much moved on from male/female/androgynous, so much so that they number of "genders" people claim to be is almost comical. (I mean, does anyone really take something like pangender seriously?) Timothyjosephwood (talk) 08:01, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at some of the sources, it seems notable that all of them are somewhat dates - most are over 20 years old, the newest being 12 years old. However, I'm still not sure what the term "gender identity/role" is supposed to mean other than the connection between one's gender identity and the gender role they take up. Is there more to this term? Why would it be notable next to the two articles on identity and role?

And yeah, I identify as bi-gender and really can't wrap my mind around the concept of pangender... ~Mable (chat) 09:16, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In the context of 1955 it makes sense to speak of them (two distinct terms) by bunching them together because the radical thing wasn't the terms themselves but the principle that there is something about sex, like sex, but not quite the same as sex...something socially created that wasn't necessarily a 100% "check down pants/up skirt and by Jove there you have it". Now we take the social constructive dialectical interrelational glipity glop as a given, the terms are obviously distinct, however related. Also if you notice, all the sources using them together are referencing Money directly and simply adopting his usage. Timothyjosephwood (talk) 11:32, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I am of the mind that the Bigender and Pangender articles should be merged into the Genderqueer article, which already partly covers them. Reasons for the merging are seen at Talk:Genderqueer/Archive 1#Merge proposal. Flyer22 (talk) 09:30, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: As this topic is sufficiently covered in the Gender identity and Gender role articles, this article is a needless WP:Content fork. I saw this recreation two years ago, and noted it to someone via email; the only reason that I didn't revert is because I didn't feel like getting into a debate with Ranze (talk · contribs), the editor who restored the material and who was involved in various circumcision, female genital mutilation and men's rights disputes (note Talk:Men's rights movement/Article probation), and other disputes. I see nothing in the article that should be salvaged. Flyer22 (talk) 07:22, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as a content fork. Carrite (talk) 16:47, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.