Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Bernie Sanders: White People Don't Know What It's Like To Live 'In The Ghetto' [View all]Igel
(37,264 posts)Many want to regulate things like tobacco, alcohol, too much salt and sugar because statistically they predispose people to bad outcomes. In some case we ban substances, restrict them by age, or make sure there are big signs to discourage people.
It's possible to mitigate a lot of the effects of these things. Drink in moderation, have a designated driver. Exercise to undo the effects of too much sugar. Etc. Doesn't matter, there's a strong correlation with a strong causal connection, so we discourage the behavior. Don't drink and drive. Don't eat too much salt. Avoid sugar.
It's the same with a lot of out-of-wedlock births. The outcomes are generally worse. How much worse depends on your situation: If you're a single mother, college educated, professional job, with one kid in a stable long-term unmarried relationship the consequences aren't all that bad compared to a two-biological-parent family. If you're a high school grad working minimum wage with a temp boyfriend overnighting at times, the consequences can be truly (statistically) damning for the kid in terms of education, income, family structure.
Sadly, pointing out a statistical generalization is usually taken as a personal affront. Rather like saying that the person who puts salt on his Big Mac is consuming too much salt only to have him in your face because he thinks you've said he's fat, lazy, and will be dead of a heart attack by morning. NYC publicized some of the statistical generalizations a few years ago in PSA posters and had a firestorm of aggrieved, offended people descend upon it.
Because of this odd trait, we can say discouraging things about some behaviors. Others, well, hey, it's fine. All those stats aren't true, they're just made up by hurtful, hateful people.