Introduction / Context:
This question probes reasoning about equal employment opportunity (EEO). A strong argument must be relevant, non-discriminatory, and logically connected to the policy. We examine whether the reasons genuinely support or oppose equal opportunity for women in all fields.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- I asserts capability parity.
- II cites household responsibilities as a reason to deny EEO.
- III endorses women’s participation in the public sphere.
- We consider arguments on generic policy grounds (laws, fairness, capability, choice), not individual circumstances.
Concept / Approach:
- Equal opportunity is about fair access, nondiscrimination, and merit-based selection.
- Household roles vary by person and can be shared or supported; they are not principled grounds to restrict opportunity.
Step-by-Step Solution:
I is strong: Capability is central to opportunity; denying equal access because of gender contradicts merit and fairness.II is weak: It stereotypes women and treats private domestic arrangements as a legitimate barrier to public opportunity. This is neither necessary nor sufficient to oppose EEO.III is strong: It supports inclusion and access, which are fundamental aims of EEO policies.
Verification / Alternative check:
Workplace policies accommodate caregiving through leave, flexible schedules, and support; equal opportunity remains intact.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only I: Undervalues III’s valid inclusion rationale.Only I and II / Only II and III / All: Each incorrectly credits II’s stereotyped claim.
Common Pitfalls:
Confusing “equal opportunity” with “identical outcomes”; EEO ensures fair access, not guaranteed selection.
Final Answer:
Only I and III are strong
Discussion & Comments