Tag: secret

Victoria’s Secret, one of the biggest brand names in retail, has been around for many years, known for selling lingerie. Victoria’s Secret has branched out from exclusively selling lingerie to now carrying make-up, fragrances, purses, shoes, clothing, and bathing suits. Within the past few years, the company has expanded to the global markets. They now have stores in major cities including London, Dubai, and Munich. Being one of the top grossing retail stores, Victoria’s Secret, uses foreign sweatshops to irresponsibly manufacture their products. The lingerie store was harshly criticized for their sweatshops’ working conditions and unfair wages. The utilization of sweatshops puts the company’s name to shame and gives them a negative reputation. Victoria’s Secret should not be allowed to run sweatshops because it is morally and ethically wrong.

Victoria’s Secret was publicly attacked for their working conditions being unacceptable. On “The O’Reilly Factor,” Bill O’Reilly interviewed the national labor committee director, Charles Kernaghan. He specifically questioned Kernaghan about Victoria’s Secret sweatshops’ working conditions. Kernaghan begins by saying, “The workers are working from 7 a.m. in the morning until 9 p.m. or 10 p.m. at night. So they’re going 14 to 15 hours a day, seven days a week. They get one day off every three or four months” (Kernaghan). The amount of time the workers put in are more than an average full time person puts in which is unfair. He not only points out their long, unfair hours but goes to say that the “sweatshop that houses miserable conditions.

Where right now in Jordan it’s freezing. There is no heat or hot water in the dormitories…there’s no water about two or threes days a week” (Kernaghan). It is also unfair for them to be living in such poor conditions where having no heat or water could affect their health conditions and in turn affect their working production. Such conditions have them “work under the shadow of death, and experience struggle and frustration in work” (Genesis 3:17-19). The working conditions are so horrible that it begins to affect the workers mentally. Workers that are negatively affected mentally is considered mental abuse and “in practice, sweatshops promulgate mental…abuse” (Arnold and Hartman 2003). The people are treated horrible and are not treated in the way that should be. They do not have the essential survival needs for living conditions, which makes it seem that the workers are not even treated as human beings. “The Oxford Declaration on Christian Faith and Economics” suggests, “people should never be treated in their work as mere means.

We must resist the tendency to treat workers merely as costs or labour inputs” (The Oxford Declaration 4). The workers should have better working and living conditions considering that they are working long hours for the company. Working in such poor conditions points to the conclusion that they are “treated in their wok as mere means.” They are not treated as means to ends. It is morally wrong and unethical the way the company treats their workers mentally and physically by providing poor living and working conditions and having them work long hours.

It is unethical and morally wrong for the employees in sweatshops to be working such long hours and not get paid enough. On “The O’Reilly Factor,” Kernaghan continued on to point out that even though the workers are working a lot of hours, “they are cheated of about 40 percent of their wages. They get three-and-a-half minutes to make a pair of underwear, for which they’re paid 4.5 cents” (Kernaghan). They should not be paid depending on the limited time they have to make one pair of underwear but they should be paid by either how many pairs of underwear they make or by an hourly rate. They are paid so little for the amount of the effort and production it takes to make products like that.

It is wrong that “people are often pushed into a narrow range of occupations which are often underpaid, offer little status or security, and provide few promotional opportunities and fringe benefits” (The Oxford Declaration 4). It is not acceptable for people to be working long, hard hours and get paid poorly while receiving poor living conditions such as no water or heat. They should be getting better working and living conditions as benefits for being employed in these factories. It goes to say that the company’s choice of under paying their employees “fail[s] to reward work fairly” making it unjust and wrong (The Oxford Declaration 4). Having been being attacked for poor living and working conditions and the workers being underpaid, it gives Victoria’s secret a poor reputation and bad name.

Victoria’s Secret being exposed to the world for their sweatshops had others look further into their company to expose them even more in an unfavorable manner. Victoria’s Secret was being investigated even more and a department called Venture 47 found that the company was faking time and wage accounts for the sweatshop employees (Batchelor). Fraudulence and deceitfulness is morally wrong and unethical in business and shall not be done.

Steven Greenhouse from The New York Times, wrote an article about it stating that “wage violations were so widespread…that the factory…cheated its workers $5.3 million” (Greenhouse). The company could have paid them their fair wages but decided to falsify their records and eventually get publicly humiliated even more. In Fighting Sweatshops by Richard Appelbaum, he talks about how “there is always the danger that manufacturers, fearful of bad publicity or even sanctions, will shift production away from problematic factories rather than work with them to improve conditions” (Appelbaum 10). This supports the idea that once there is problems in these factories having to do with conditions or wages; it leads to the giving the company a bad reputation.

There are multiple reasons as to why sweatshops are unethical and morally wrong but there are some people who argue that sweatshops are ethical and morally right. Some might argue that even though working in a sweatshop with underpaid wages, it still provides a job for someone rather than no job. In “Stitching Lingerie Improves Women’s Lives in South India” by Charukesi Ramadurai, she discusses how she went to one of the sweatshops for Victoria’s Secret and saw the benefits for the worker’s of working in a sweatshop. She even talked to someone about how they feel working in the sweatshop and the woman positively replied that she was “very happy to have found a job and a purpose in life” (Ramadurai).

She argues that it is better to have a job rather than no job and to have to wake up every day knowing she has something to do. Those supporting sweatshops propose, “sweatshops are attractive to people in places with few employment options, a lack of social services, and impoverished living conditions” (Calkins and Radin 265). Supporters also add on to say that working for sweatshops is not mandatory and that it is voluntary. Supporters also ask the question as to what is considered a sweatshop.

Although there is supporting ideas of sweatshops being okay and that Victoria’s Secret should still have them, there is still the counter argument that they are not okay and that Victoria’s Secret should not have them. The definition of “sweatshops are places of employment with low pay, poor working conditions, and long hours,” which argues with the supporters’ argument of what is considered a sweatshop (Powell and Skarbek 1). These underpaid, unfairly treated sweatshop employees’ are violated “of basic human rights as people are exploited for their labor” (Calkins and Radin 261). There are so many health and safety hazards, fear, and physical and mental abuse which is part of basic human rights (Calkins and Radin 262). Sweatshops being unethical and morally wrong are strongly supported by “The Oxford Declaration on Christian Faith and Economics” stating, “Many workers suffer greatly under the burden of work.

In some situations people work long hour for low pay, working conditions are appalling…health and safety regulations are flouted” (The Oxford Declaration 4). It proves to show that Calkins’ and Radin’s argument is even more supported. In “Improving the Conditions of Workers, Harrison and Scorse believe that sweatshops are morally wrong and unethical and that the sweatshops can be fixed to become no long sweatshops and/or become ethical and moral. Their rationalization of this idea is “if we could pressure multinational corporations to significantly improve the working conditions and wages…companies…would no longer be…unlimited pools of cheap labor” (Harrison and Scorse 2). An anonymous person of The New York Times also further attests by adding, “until it treats its workers better, it has no chance of becoming a just and stable society” (China, the Sweatshop).

When it comes down to being morally and ethically wrong in business, Victoria’s Secret needs to get rid of their sweatshops. The company is unethical in terms of their working conditions and hours, wages, and working environment. The criticism of their unmoral and unethical actions led to giving Victoria’s Secret a bad reputation and name. Their choice of utilizing sweatshops has led to further exploitation and investigation of unmoral and unethical actions in their company.

Works Cited
Appelbaum, Richard P. and UCSB. “Fighting Sweatshops: Problems of Enforcing Global Labor Standards.” Institute for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Research, 16 Aug. 2000. Print. 3 Mar. 2014.
Arnold, D. G. and L. P. Hartman. “Moral Imagination and the Future of Sweatshops.” Business and Society Review 108 (2003): 425-461. Print 3 Mar. 2014. Calkins, Martin and Tara J. Radin. “The Struggle Against Sweatshops: Moving Toward Responsible Global Business.” Journal of Business Ethics 66 (2006): 261-272. Print. 3 Mar. 2014.

“China, the Sweatshop.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 5 Jul. 2010. Web. 3 Mar. 2014.
“Director of the National Labor Committee on Investigation Into the Lingerie Giant’s Manufacturing Standards.” The O’Reilly Factor. Fox News. 4 Dec. 2007. TV transcript.
Greenhouse, Steven. “Apparel Factory Workers Were Cheated State Says.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 24 Jul. 2008. Web. 3 Mar. 2014. Harrison, Anne and Jason Scorse. “Minimum Wage Legislation and Anti-Sweatshop Activism.” Improving the Conditions of Workers? 2006. Print. 3 Mar. 2014. “N.Y. Officials: Factory for Big Retailers ‘Paid Sweatshop Wages’.” CNN. CNN, 23 Jul. 2008. Web. 3 Mar. 2014.

Powell, Benjamin and David Skarbek. “Sweatshops and Third World Living Standards: Are the Jobs Worth the Sweat?” Journal of Labor Research 27.2 (2006): 263-274. Print. 3 Mar. 2014.
Ramadurai, Charukesi. “Stitching Lingerie Improves Women’s Lives In South India.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 21 May 2012. Web. 3 Mar. 2014.

In Michael Foucault’s reading on “Panopticism” he breaks down the social/economical systems and explains that society’s mentality on the law system. He answers the “why question” in a way certain individuals act and think as they do. Many times his explanation is much branched off into a different level of thinking. In one paragraph in “Panopticism”, a disciplinary mechanism is described, which is considered the best way for one person to be punished, in the new knowledge and learning is gained by every individual. But in “Our Secret” by Susan Griffins she carefully constructs and describes history, particularly WWII through the lives of several different people. Such as David Bartholomae and Anthony Petrosky who had a difficult time grasping her concepts that says, “Griffin writes about the past on how we can know it, what its relation to the present, why we should care. In the way she writes, she is also making an argument about how we can know and understand the past.” Griffin strikes all of these aspects in her essay. What is most compelling about the essay is how she incorporated personal, family, and world history into a good story of narrative, without ever losing the factual evidence the story provides.

In the paragraph on page 182 in Ways of Reading, Foucault explains how he feels a person should be disciplined and he looks at it from different angle to really understand. “This enclosed, segmented space, observed at every point, in which the person inserted a fixed place, in which the slightest movements are supervised, which all events are recorded in an uninterrupted work of writing links the center and periphery, in which the power is exercised without the division, according to a continuous hierarchical figure, that a person is constantly located, examined, and distributed among the living beings, sick, and the dead that constitutes a compact model of the disciplinary mechanism.” In the first sentence of the paragraph a description of how closely watched and evaluated the individuals are. All movement, all actions, everything would be analyzed. This is how he feels a disciplinary mechanism should be and is a key model to follow. Disciplining that way would make the individual a better person, which I believe; “exercising power without division” is an example.

In her essay, Griffin incorporates stories of people from totally different backgrounds, upbringings, including herself, all to describe the accounts of one time period. Each person history is somehow connected with the next, and each story contributes equally to the bigger picture of history. Griffin puts three types of histories in her text; personal, family, and world history. In her personal history, she describes her life, and childhood, which is intertwine with her family history. However, she not only talks about her histories, she talks about the histories of the other characters in the essay to bring across the world. One of the technique’s that Griffin uses to help the audience understand her concepts, is explaining two other story lines while telling her main story. The first on is description of a cell. Throughout the essay italicized sentences explaining the complex of a cell being placed randomly between passages. The description beings with a nucleus, and as the story progresses, so does the nucleus. She tells what happens to the nucleus, and how the inner cells work on developing a nucleus, which gave rise to many of other cells, that will eventually become an embryo. The other story line, were also italicize sentences, goes through the making and beginning of missiles.

“The plague is met by order; its function is to sort out every possible confusion that is of the disease, which is transmitted when bodies are mixed together, that the evil is increased when fear and death overcome prohibitions.” Disease definitely confuses the society when two or more people come together and embrace there disease. Evil becomes very overwhelming when it cannot be controlled or prevented; with the help of the plague everything becomes more controlled. “It lays down for each individual his place, his body, his disease, and his death, his wellbeing, by means of an omnipresent and omniscient power that subdivides itself in a regular, uninterrupted way even to the ultimo determination of the individual, of what characterize him, of what belongs to him, of what happen to him.” The plague served as some sort of god to most of the people.

It breaks everything down and describes “omnipresent and omniscient power.” Act as keeping an eye on the person that sort the test, show how an individual would react knowing that they are being watched regardless if they believe it or not. Just how they would adapt to their own surroundings. What are the most compelling aspects about Griffin essay is the way she combine personal, family, and world, and etc. The reading is a novel, which helps the audience to understand the concepts with a clear and complete overall view of her world. Two other authors, Richard Rodriguez, and Ralph Ellison, who wrote about their life experience that’s better understood as an historical text that is view through the eyes of Griffin. Rodriguez explores his own educational history that called “The Achievement of Desire” and Ellison depicts his own journey and personal growth which is called “An Extravagance of Laughter”. Both their writing are seen through Griffin’s perspective, can be opened and examined from a different view, helping the people understand with more of a lucid view of history and what it is really about.

“The mixture of the plague brings into play its power, which is on the analysis.” In this sentence it describes the strength that is considered power. Learning can only make you more intelligent and the more you know the broader you understand would be which in your mental state would make you stronger. “A whole literary fiction of the festival grew up around the plague: suspended laws, lifted prospect, individuals unmarked, abandoning their statutory identity and the figure which they had recognized, allowing some different truth to appear”. When the individuals were changing their personalities to fit into the containment, as I said earlier in the essay, their trying to adapt to their environment. But their also political dream of the plague, that got reverse.

Not the collective festival, but strict divisions; not laws transgressed, but the penetration of regulation into even the smallest details of everyday life through the thoughts of complete hierarchy that assured the function of power; the masks were put on and off, but the assignment for each person was their “true” name, “true” place, “true” body, and “true disease”. This sentence talks about a different side of the plague, the “political side”. Instead of analyzing the people was forcing out the power to handle certain individual. This was the dream of many that instead of interaction and strict regulation of everything done.

The separated story lines are placed in the story to explain the background and the past of everyone. The background and past are factors in developing the present and future, and the characters in the story and tendency to try and forget their past, but not realizing that there are no escapes. Griffin illustrates the technique with Heinrich Himmler, a prominent Nazi figure during WWII. In every detail, she describes Himmler’s childhood, and the harsh ways of his father. She also trace his life, and evident there’s always a maker; base from his childhood that affect the decision made later on in his life. Griffins merely do this to help provide understanding on such behavior develops. The art of this technique being effective, however, that Griffin interconnects all three stories so the audience to understand other authors and texts. Richard Rodrigues is one author that already go through history, from an educational standpoint. He discusses his childhood, and how coming from a working class family improved his learning process. He examines a bit about his family history and personal history as well.

Rodriguez traces his family back to Mexico, their move to America, and the struggle of keep up with the America living lifestyle. He examine what was it like growing up in a Mexican American household. As he gets older he began to not like his background and roots at an early age. He was working on many ways to discard the Mexican persona and develop a stronger American one. Rodriguez hides himself behind an image of what he thinks he should be, but not who he really is. The aspect of his family and personal history into his world history. Both family and personal history with his family’s migrating to America. While the war was not in America, they had to endure racism and hardships in the comings to the United States. Another author that was looked at in the eyes of Griffin was Ralph Ellison’s “Extravagance of Laughter’s”. What was interesting about these two essays were not only that the histories, but a lot of the major themes were implied in the essays. Ellison has a vast personal history that surrounds by world history; however there is not too much evidence of his family history.

His personal history begins in the south to the north in the early nineteenth century. He talks about accounts of racism that occur in both places, which fall into a larger picture in world history. He remembers racism happening throughout the country at the time. Ellison combines so much personal history and world that became so difficult to distinguish that his personal history effected world history. One of the themes that stayed incorporated throughout both essay was constant effort to hide the truth. Ellison had difficult time admitting and realizing his true place in society. He wore “marks” to cover how he felt in certain situation that he was in. When Griffins talks about her family, she also speaks of a mask as well. She says, “I think of it now as a mask, not an animated mask that expresses the essence of the inner truth, but a mask that falls like dead weight over the human face, make face, making flesh a stationary object”. Both Ellison and Griffin felt trapped in there mark, and it took there self-dignity in freeing themselves of the mask. It hit Ellison during a play and it hit Griffin after learning about her family history.

All three authors are in a sense of historians. They write events that are in the past, which make it about history. The work they do are very good work, others use their writings as guideline of writing events in an historian context. The themes about finding the truth within one’s self are throughout working, and different types of histories are explored, making these text much more than just history. Ralph Ellison once said, “The way a person expresses both the agony of life and the possibility of conquering it through is the sheer toughness of the spirit. They fall short of tragedy only in that they provide no solution; offer no scapegoat but the self”.

“The plague as a form at once real and imaginary, of disorder had as its medical correlative disciple. Behind the disciplinary mechanisms can be read the haunting memory of “contagious” of the plague can be used as effective way disorder”. The plague can be used as an effective way to discipline; it is how they would use it to effect even if it would be possible. Each author demonstrates the toughness of theirs spirit, and it is up to the person to decide whether history will repeat itself or not. They all did the part in providing solutions for history.

Work Cited

Foucault, Michel. Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the Prison Ways of Reading/(New York: Vintage Books 1995) Tenth edition. pp. 195-228

Griffin, Susan. “Our Secret”. Way of Reading Eds: David Bartholomae and Anthony Petrosky. Tenth edition. Boston. New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s 2002.