bstempleton@watmath.UUCP (Brad Templeton) (11/01/85)
Don't for a *minute* think that this question concerns justification of
slavery. It is instead a question that the SA debate has brought up in
my mind.
Say you had two countries, and within those countries some identifiable
groups (women/men, white/black). What if:
In country A, men and women both make an average of $5,000 per year.
In country B, men make an average of $30,000 per year and women an average
of $10,000 per year.
While there are lots of other factors to consider, the question is:
Which country treats women better?
--
Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software, Waterloo, Ont. (519) 884-7473jchapman@watcgl.UUCP (john chapman) (11/01/85)
> Don't for a *minute* think that this question concerns justification of > slavery. It is instead a question that the SA debate has brought up in > my mind. > > Say you had two countries, and within those countries some identifiable > groups (women/men, white/black). What if: > > In country A, men and women both make an average of $5,000 per year. > > In country B, men make an average of $30,000 per year and women an average > of $10,000 per year. > > While there are lots of other factors to consider, the question is: > > Which country treats women better? > > > -- > Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software, Waterloo, Ont. (519) 884-7473 It seems to me the answer to that question depends on your definition of "better" which in turn depends on what one considers important in life. Personally (if the situatiuon above is as follows) given the choice of being "poor" but considered an equal (with all the commeasurate benefits) or being "richer" but considered/treated as an inferior I think I would rather be "poor". -- John Chapman ...!watmath!watcgl!jchapman Disclaimer : These are not the opinions of anyone but me and they may not even be mine.