B because it has more detail
<span>Women are the main breadwinners in two-thirds of families across the country. - Valid reasoning. This does support the argument by showing the damage the unequal pay does not only to those women, but also to their families.
</span><span>Employers pay different workers different salaries based on skill level. - Invalid reasoning. Women don't demand to be paid more than the men who happen to have better skills, but simply to be paid equally when they have equal skills.
</span><span>Paying people different salaries for the same work is discrimination. - Valid reasoning. That is the basic argument, leveled up. It would be the same as paying all blue-haired men more than the brown or black-haired, when they are doing the same work, with the same skills.
</span><span>Women's incomes are needed for the survival of their families. - Valid reasoning. Just like in the first case, this one shows that this issue doesn't only concern women, but their families - finally, their husbands, the very ones who are paid better for equal work.
</span><span><span>Women are ready to fight back against pay discrimination. - Invalid reasoning. This doesn't have anything to do with the issue itself. It is just a reaction to it, but it doesn't support it.</span>
</span>
Watching the scene performed was a completely different experience from reading it. The performance emphasizes the body language and facial expressions of the actors as a means of conveying meaning. These elements are missing from the text of the scene and must be imagined by the reader.
