Oooh, just had to pop back in to throw something psychomerlogical into the mix. In Transactional Analysis they talk about 'games' and 'life scripts'.
In the model, your life script is the way you (usually not very consciously) expect your life to go. It's not always good - it could be a mix of 'I'm very clever', 'I'm great at caring for people' with 'No-one appreciates me' plus god knows what else.
'Games' are rituals or patterns you act out with one or more other people. Every game has a 'payoff' that reinforces your life script. And people are uncannily good at finding others whose life scripts and games interlock with theirs.
So, in this model, someone with a life script that includes 'No-one appreciates me or puts me first' could end up playing a lifelong game with someone whose life script includes 'I deserve to put myself first all the time'. And that game could be played out via housework.
TA doesn't suggest that people actively choose to put themselves in these situations, or that they enjoy it as such - just that people can, by virtue of their backgrounds and early experience, find themselves in these positions.
In answer to the OP, then. Despite the best efforts of feminism, I think a large proportion of women are still more likely to end up with a life script that includes 'I must put others' needs first...and I will resent it' than is the case for men. Perhaps the equivalent game for men is 'I must prove I'm top dog - somewhere - even at the cost of pissing my nearest and dearest off'. That, then, gets played out via a game that could be called 'Put the bins out', the outcome of which is often 'Oh I'll do it then '. For her, the game is reinforcing the 'putting others first and resenting it' script, for the other it's the 'proving I'm top dog at the expense of relationships'. In both cases, the payoff of the game 'You put the bins out then' is reinforcing the life script, and in neither case is it conscious. Both people could be consciously keen to sustain a mutually supportive relationship, but have these other things going on as well, without realising it.
I suppose what I'm saying is that it's all very well to talk at a rational level about what should happen, but until you look at what's going on underneath, ie why people slip into these patterns and where the patterns come from, you probably won't get beyond recurring and not very productive arguments.