While acknowledging that there are greater employment opportunities for Latin American women in cities than in the countryside, social science theorists have continued to argue that urban migration has unequivocally hurt women's status. However, the effects of migration are more complex than these theorists presume. For example, effects can vary depending on women's financial condition and social class. Brazilian women in the lowest socioeconomic class have relatively greater job opportunities and job security in cities than do men of the same class, although there is no compelling evidence that for these women the move to the city is a move out of poverty. Thus, these women may improve their status in relation to men but at the same time may experience no improvement in their economic standing.

In addition, working outside the home, which is more common in urban than in rural areas, helps women in the lowest socioeconomic class make contacts to extend exchange networks—the flow of gifts, loans, or child care from those who currently have access to resources to those who do not. Moreover, poor women working in urban areas actively seek to cultivate long-term employer-employee relations. When an emergency arises that requires greater resources than an exchange network can provide, these women often appeal for and receive aid from their wealthy employers. However, the structure of many poor women's work - often a labor force of one in an employer's home - makes it difficult for them to organize to improve their economic conditions in general.

Not surprisingly, then, Latin American women in the lowest socioeconomic class differ in their opinions about the effects of urban migration on their lives. Some find urban living, with access to electricity and running water, an improvement and would never return to the countryside. Others, disliking the overcrowding and crime, would return to the countryside if there were work opportunities for them there. Thus, urban life has had both negative and positive impacts on women's lives. In general, urban migration has not provided economic prosperity or upward mobility for women in the lowest socio-economic class, despite their intelligent and energetic utilization of the resources available to them.


In the first paragraph, the author refers to the experiences of Brazilian women most probably in order to


support an earlier assertion made by social science theorists about the effects of urban migration

provide an example of one area in which urban migration has failed to improve Latin American women's lives

substantiate the claim that the effects of urban migration cannot be easily characterized

illustrate the effect that urban migration has had on the economic status of Latin American women

compare the effect that urban migration has had on the economic status of Latin American women with its effect on the economic status of Latin American men

考题讲解

此讲解的内容由AI生成,还未经人工审阅,仅供参考。

正确答案是 C。

本文的第一段指出社会科学理论家已经承认拉丁美洲城市的女性就业机会比乡村更多,但仍然认为城市迁移一定会损害女性地位。作者引用了巴西女性的经历,以此来证实城市迁移影响女性是更加复杂,不能简单地概括,而这正是选项C所描述的。选项A和D都描述了城市迁移的经济效应,而文中并没有提及;E比较了城市迁移对拉丁美洲女性和男性的经济效应,而文中也没有提到。因此,正确答案是C。

展开显示

登录注册 后可以参加讨论

快来第一个发言吧
DaQuan-RC