Market gender segregation: Difference between revisions
(Creating page) |
(Creating page) |
||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
[[File:market_gender_segregation.png|780x780px]] | [[File:market_gender_segregation.png|780x780px]] | ||
Visualization based on the [[How_to_cite_Segregation_Wiki| research]] | |||
For the complete network of associated segregation forms, see: | For the complete network of associated segregation forms, see: | ||
year of publication https://tinyurl.com/2235lkhw | * First year of publication https://tinyurl.com/2235lkhw | ||
Louvain clusters https://tinyurl.com/2d8wg5n3 | * Louvain clusters https://tinyurl.com/2d8wg5n3 | ||
* Betweenness centrality https://tinyurl.com/223udk5r | |||
* Disciplines where segregation forms first appeared https://tinyurl.com/244d8unz | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
==Notes== | ==Notes== |
Revision as of 13:41, 3 October 2024
Date and country of first publication[1]
2014
France
Definition
Gender segregation in the market refers to the division of products, services, and marketing strategies based on the perceived preferences and needs of specific genders. This can result in the creation of separate markets for men and women, where certain products or services are targeted exclusively towards one gender.
One example of market gender segregation is the separation of clothing and fashion lines. Many retailers and brands have distinct sections for men's and women's clothing, with different styles, designs, and marketing approaches. This practice assumes that specific genders have unique preferences when it comes to fashion and that they should be catered to separately.
Another example is the marketing of toys and games. Toy manufacturers often create gender-specific toys, such as dolls and cooking sets for girls and action figures and construction sets for boys. This type of gendered marketing perpetuates stereotypes about what is considered appropriate for each gender, limiting children's choices and reinforcing gender norms.
While market gender segregation can be based on assumptions and stereotypes, some argue that it is a valid marketing strategy that considers the varying preferences and needs of different demographics. However, others argue that it reinforces harmful gender stereotypes and limits individuals' freedom of choice. There is ongoing debate and discussion about the merits and effects of gender segregation in the market.
Synonyms
The following terms are synonymous with:
market gendered segregation.
References and literature addressing this segregation form under these synonymous terms can be found below.
See also
Related segregation forms
Market gender segregation is frequently discussed in the literature with the following segregation forms:
Visualization based on the research
For the complete network of associated segregation forms, see:
- First year of publication https://tinyurl.com/2235lkhw
- Louvain clusters https://tinyurl.com/2d8wg5n3
- Betweenness centrality https://tinyurl.com/223udk5r
- Disciplines where segregation forms first appeared https://tinyurl.com/244d8unz
References
Notes
- ↑ Date and country of first publication as informed by the Scopus database (December 2023).
At its current state, this definition has been generated by a Large Language Model (LLM) so far without review by an independent researcher or a member of the curating team of segregation experts that keep the Segregation Wiki online. While we strive for accuracy, we cannot guarantee its reliability, completeness and timeliness. Please use this content with caution and verify information as needed. Also, feel free to improve on the definition as you see fit, including the use of references and other informational resources. We value your input in enhancing the quality and accuracy of the definitions of segregation forms collectively offered in the Segregation Wiki ©.
Market gender segregation appears in the following literature
Eydoux A. (2014). Women during recessions in France and Germany the gender biases of public policies. Revue de l'OFCE, 133(2), 153-188. Presses de Sciences Po.https://doi.org/10.3917/reof.133.0153
Heo S., Yoon S., Chun J. (2019). Glass ceilings in Korea: A quantile decomposition approach. International Journal of Economics and Management, 13(2), 371-380. Universita Putra Malaysia.https://doi.org/
Coron C., Schmidt G. (2022). The ‘Gender Face’ of Job Insecurity in France: An Individual and Organizational Level Analysis. Work, Employment and Society, 36(6), 999-1017. SAGE Publications Ltd.https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017021995673