Which of the following would not have been the job of a poor working-class
woman?
A. Maid
B. Typist
C. Seamstress
D. Laundry worker

Respuesta :

Answer:

B. Typist

Explanation:

Typist needed special education which took money to get which also poor people could not get. A maid does not take any education or money to be a poor person could be. A seamstress just took skill instead of money which a poor person could do. A laundry worker you just need to know how to do laundry so a poor person could do it. In conclusion, typist is the most ideal answer. Hope this helps! :))

Typist not have been the job of a poor working-class woman. Thus, option (b) is correct.

What is the working-class?

An economic term known as "working class" is used to refer to people who are employed in low-paying, physically demanding, or positions requiring little expertise.

Women from the working class carry out vital tasks. A typist was not a job of a poor that a woman from the working class would have had. Poor class working women do secretarial labor, cleaning, cooking, and serving our meals.

Therefore, option (b) is correct.

Learn more about on working-class, here:

https://brainly.com/question/17396903

#SPJ5