 When \(A\) exploits \(B\), \(A\) gains some benefit from interacting with \(B\). We can see the relevance of the “benefit to \(A\)” by contrasting exploitation with other forms of wrongdoing, such as discrimination, abuse, and oppression. Let us say that \(A\) discriminates against \(B\) when \(A\) wrongly deprives \(B\) of some opportunity or benefit because of some characteristic of \(B\) that is not relevant to \(A\)’s action. There was a period in American history in which many women became public school teachers because they were denied the opportunity to enter other professions such as law and medicine. To the extent that society benefitted (in one way) from the pool of highly qualified public school teachers, the discrimination may have been exploitative, even if unintentionally so. But if \(A\) refuses to hire \(B\) solely because of \(B\)’s race, then it would be odd to say that \(A\) exploits \(B,\) for \(A\) does not gain resources from the wrong to \(B\).