Question About Sweatshops


Dglgmut

Recommended Posts

I am not trying to prove anything or persuade anyone. I am simply stating that I do not understand something. A question is not an argument.

Ok...then you tell him:

How to Argue Using the Socratic Method

The Socratic method can be used to show someone that they are wrong, or at least imprecise, by getting them to agree with statements that contradict their original assertion. Since Socrates believed that the first step to knowledge was recognition of one's ignorance, it's not surprising that this method focuses not so much on proving your point but on disproving the other person's point with a series of questions (elenchus), resulting in their aporia (puzzlement). This method is used in law school to teach students critical thinking skills, and it is also used in psychotherapy, management training, and classrooms.

http://www.wikihow.com/Argue-Using-the-Socratic-Method

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great, you've proved that questions can be used to argue. That's not what I'm doing, I am actually looking for an answer.

I got that and you have obviously argued quite well to convince me of that.

My question to you is what if there is no "answer?"

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're making assumptions that are not supported by the data you've provided. You said,"... on average, [women] are bringing home more money than their husbands." Your data shows that sweatshop workers make a higher hourly wage than average. It shows nothing about how much married women make in comparison to their husbands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I guess that is an assumption. But of course many women who work in sweatshops have a male partner, and if this man makes the average national income or less, than the woman would be making more. I don't see it as much of a leap.

What I find odd is the idea that while many women are making more than many men, they are still facing sexism and oppression.

Maybe it's not that odd... I don't know. It just struck me as strange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you arrive at these "of course" statements. By the very nature of these illegal/quasi-legal businesses, accurate data is difficult to discover. Reports indicate that many of these workers are very young, as in 8 years old.

Are the Apple factory cities in China part of the data, you know, the ones that allegedly have suicide nets for the workers?

But of course many women who work in sweatshops have a male partner, and if this man makes the average national income or less, than the woman would be making more. I don't see it as much of a leap.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The children that work in sweatshops are usually brought in as helpers, not opperaters. And many of the children are brought in by their parents. Again, I'm not here to teach anyone anything. If you can't accept that many of the women working in sweatshops have a family or at least a partner, I don't really expect any contribution from you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The children that work in sweatshops are usually brought in as helpers, not opperaters. And many of the children are brought in by their parents. Again, I'm not here to teach anyone anything. If you can't accept that many of the women working in sweatshops have a family or at least a partner, I don't really expect any contribution from you.

I wouldn't either.

However, when I have one, I will post it.

When I have a question, I will ask you.

When I get some actual facts, I will post them.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On top of making unsupported assumptions, you're applying third world rationality to a first world situation. You assume a particular woman and her husband exists, and then you give them thoughts and behaviors that they might not have if you put them in the proper context.

If I accept your assumption, I can also say these are families who might otherwise have to sell their children into prostitution for survival. The only ways in which I can imagine it would matter to a family like that if the mom makes $1 a day and the dad makes .75 a day are all positive ones. Yes, it would probably be hard for dear ol' dad to take an emasculating job, if it were even offered to him though it probably wouldn't be, and it may be a blow to his ego to have his wife making a little more money than him, but if the family can eat and no one has to sell their bodies to do so? Win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now