Quote:
Originally Posted by gmw
If you are prepared to accept that, at the start, the companies could not reasonably have predicted what would happen to the women, then you can begin to follow the path/logic for how they got further and further into such messy situations. This is not intended to excuse the outright lies and appalling behaviour that came later, but in understanding the progression it may become possible - in the future - to identify when this progression starts and to avoid it spiralling out of control as it did here (and in so many cases since, because no one has yet learned this lesson from history).
|
This is why you're driving me nuts!
To me, it's obvious where the progression starts--with the company willfully failing to provide any safeguards for the women who were dealing with a potentially dangerous substance. And you keep coming back and making excuses for them--they didn't know, it was something/ new, they thought it was safe in small quantities, etc. But they
should have known there was at least a possibility of the radium-infused paint being dangerous to the women who were ingesting it.
Did they know that it was going to affect these women as terribly as it did? No, most likely not. But it's the initial failure to take any steps to protect the women that led to the spiral of lies and denials and bad behavior.
Here's the lesson I see--that a company has a responsibility to its workers to make the workplace as safe as possible, to inform workers of potential hazards, to provide compensation if the workers become sick or injured as a result of workplace conditions. They did none of these things, not at the beginning and not at the end.
I'm baffled that you seem to think the companies had some valid, compelling justification that Moore fails to include. Perhaps she simply didn't see one; I know I don't.