Response Post March 22

Cynthia Enloe discusses how international companies like Nike have been taking advantage of oppressed people abroad by using their lower rates of pay to have a wider margin of profit. The practice is not new and, although there are some shocking stories and figures, I don’t think this scenario is unfamiliar to most Americans. What was more shocking to me was the mentioning of Nike’s advertising platform championing human rights, particularly women’s rights. The hypocrisy and deception is truly unbelievable and wouldn’t be allowed in a million other markets of our culture. It sounds silly, but the company should have to make their business practices more publicly known in these cases. Think about it, the government enforces that all of our food is labeled and held to a standard of safety for the consumer. The same is true for movies we watch (subject to a rating system and public censorship), products we buy (blow dryers tell you not to use them in tubs or showers), even toys have to be labeled for age appropriateness. We go to such extreme measures to keep our consumers safe; why is it unreasonable to have these same sort of notifications or standards systems in place to protect workers, here or abroad?

All of that considered, it is always very complicated to get our government to step in and limit the actions of corporations, especially large and successful ones like Nike with all of their financial and legal resources. But what really motivates and perpetuates this atrocity is the consumer. One cannot really blame Nike for taking the entirely legal opportunity to gain money; morality is dissipated in companies this large and no one feels responsible for the actions of the whole. But the consumer can change the actions of the company. The most absurd thing about all of this is that people are willing to pay as much as they do for a brand name regardless of their means of production.

The other thing I found interesting in these articles was how women are forced to view one another as enemies. We have discussed this in a few of our other readings, namely Douglas, and it seems to be present in most of the issues even if it isn’t mentioned. It amazes me how much competition motivates our society. It is in the name of competition that Nike seeks out cheaper, albeit unfair labor – in order to outperform competitors. And it is in the name of competition that women are compelled to view one another as threats to their jobs instead of as support systems to better their situation. It is a great victory for the large companies and for the patriarchal systems to have the lower classes divided and competing with one another rather than united competing against the powerful minority.