Children of two parent homes have similar life outcomes across racial groups. So do children of single mothers. That, not racism, accounts for all but less than 5 percent of the difference in life outcomes between blacks and whites.
The innocent babies & toddlers all too often become delinquents in school. Uncle Sugar makes a lousy father for discipline, for role model, for caring.
We need more ideas like Robert's. Gov't paid lifestyle coaches and assistants to help guide the young who haven't really gotten such guidance from their parents - victims of poor parenting.
But we also need to blame the adults who were victims as kids. Teen girls without fathers all too often have promiscuous sex ... making them sluts. Which is a shame.
A shame for society, and a shame for them - and we need to return towards more shame to blame those who have shameful behavior. That's the job of culture, not gov't. "Don't blame the victim" - is used as an excuse for bad, shameful, slutty behavior.
Most Black kids are going to be raised by sluts, and there are even more slut-raised White kids.
Love is sex+commitment. Those having sex outside of marriage should be shamed more; they may have been victims when kids, but they've become moral agents as adults.
Giving cash to those who need it because of their lifestyle, but who don't change their lifestyle, will not help most of them end their lifestyle based poverty.
The government's carrot & stick incentives mostly reward morally hazardous promiscuity, since orgasms feel so good, and the poverty welfare is only a little less comfy than a low-wage low-skill work. Party & hook up once or twice during the weekend, maybe more thru the week.
Each local community should be defined by the boundaries of the gov't High School. Those high schools with the most kids whose parents are not married should be receiving more cash -- and some of the additional cash (never less cash! Freeze ok, but no cuts) should go to the responsible young adults who do NOT have kids; and some to those who are married and "don't need it" (as much). The ones making socially optimal, success oriented choices, should be getting 80% as much as the sluts who sleep around and get knocked up, usually carelessly.
In a no-welfare state, being responsible is it's own reward - and leads to a more comfy life, to those who work and get married before having kids; sometimes still even before having sex. We should try more gov't cash rewards to those who graduate high school; those who get married before having kids; those who don't get married but avoid getting pregnant (no reward for sex + abortion). Of course, being responsible almost always means being "less needy". Gov't cash incentives should help more folk be responsible.
If it's enough cash to move away, the gov't cash should
I need to correct part of my previous post.My comment on the Baltimore schools was not accurate. There were 23 schools where not a single student passed the state proficiency test in math. Total of nearly 2000 students. System wide in Baltimore city schools, 93% of all students between 3rd and 8th grade could not read, write or do math at level. I regret the error, but the point is the same especially on a system wide perspective.
Practical ideas , I would definitely support even if it meant higher taxes. The two parent advantage becomes even greater if it is passed down through generations. That means that a child not only has two parents to support them but has 4 grandparents too. I have seen how this can play out. My son's wife comes from a 2 parent family and they have purchased the home that my son, daughter in law and 3 grandchildren live in. It is not a gift, they act as a lender but they were able to buy the home within hours of seeing it because of the ability to pay cash. Also my son and daughter in law have built in emergency baby sitters at a quick call because there are 4 grandparents to call on. The same thing has happened to my daughter and son in law who just got married and unexpectedly had a baby 11 months later. The apartment they rented was just too small so again the in laws jumped in and purchased a home for them to rent. Also my daughter has to work on Sunday which is impossible to find a sitter for so I am taking over the Sunday sitting responsibility. She and her husband are not convinced yet that her going back to work is the best idea but she has that choice because a) a grandparent can step in to babysit and b) she has a husband that can support them. So this is a type of generational wealth and support that can only come from two parent households being passed down generation to generation. On both sides of the family this has been true for as long as anyone knows.
Oh Monty, in reality, the only place for you and a big black horse, will be with a broom and shovel, cleaning up after the parade.
As far as the 12 gage goes. You might want to limit whatever that beverage is in that paper sack before waving that thing around. No telling how many tent walls that will blow through, frightening your neighbors. Not to mention a ballistic traumatic amputation, ruining your Hush Puppies, and getting to know a podiatrist on a first name basis.
Maybe the tide is beginning to change. Long way to go. Practical ideas here. I would suggest however, there needs to be a much more aggressive approach to improving the education for these people most in need. Family culture needs to change on education. Certainly does not help when schools focus on indoctrination and gender issues vs the basics..or systems that prevent school choice as Ian and Sowell have clearly discussed. If there was ever a huge warning flag on the state of public education, look no further than Baltimore city schools. $1.6 billion budget and not a single, yes that’s single , student passed the state math proficiency test at high school level. How sad. Robbing the kids futures
Along with policy options for promoting family and school choice how about implementing a single sex school option especially for boys who lack positive male role models. They need to learn how to be a successful man and the steps to take to get there, surrounded by and lead by successful men.
1) What does it mean for something to be a privilege? I always thought a privilege was something that you were given and did not work for or earn. As a married person, I can attest that marriage is not that. It is a choice that has to be worked on/for every day to be successful. It takes sacrifice, give and take, communication, and a lot of work overall. So, what is a privilege? And, how far do we want to take this idea? Is having both legs a privilege? Both eyes? Do we have walking privilege? Sight privilege? And, if so - how is ANY of this dialogue/wordsmithing helpful to those who need help?
2) Why is this a black-centric thing? Is single parenthood somehow easier for the single white mother in Appalachia? A single white father? A single Hispanic mother in rural Texas? A single Asian mother? Father? Is it somehow less penalizing for their kids?
While I share your distaste at the indiscriminate weaponizing of the word "privilege" I believe in this context it is useful as it is applied to the *child* of a married couple -- who did nothing to merit or earn being born into such a household, just as the child of the single mother did nothing wrong but yet was born into suffering.
Until we stop incentivizing the dissolution of working class families in America by preferentially funding single motherhood and penalizing the presence of a second income in the home, we will continue to reap the bitter fruit of sixty years of this failed "War on Poverty." We can fashion a real "social safety net" if we will finally make an honest assessment of the disastrous ROI of the 25+ $$TRILLIONS$$ we have spent, and continue to spend on the same terrible policy choices that have devastated the very institution that served American blacks so well through the century of ACTUAL "systemic racism" that followed the abolition of chattel slavery. I am ever the optimist, but the longer we delay the more intractable becomes the toll to real people, and the greater moral purchase is afforded our ideological enemies who seek to jettison every cultural institution to be remade in their own frightful design.
It would more likely be me riding on a tall black horse and strapped with a Remington 12-gauge shotgun watching you in a chain gang picking cotton under the hot sun and humidity in the Mississippi Delta. Spiral, "Please officer... can I have a drink of water?" 😂😂😂😂
Maybe black communities need something akin to a *somewhat* more progressive, and certainly less patriarchal Oath Keepers for black men. Because if 3/4 of black babies are born to unwed mothers, and I'm guessing not all of them are born to college-grad mothers who can even consider the option of a college grad husband/father, then there's a serious problem with black men that white people can't fix with progressive policies.
That said, marriage is falling everywhere and young white women aren't marrying much either. Men overall are falling behind, now graduating less than women from college, including, apparently black men (remember the days when they said women & blacks were too stupid for college?) Young white men are falling behind too. It's a 'black thing' on one level, and it's a 'male thing' on a higher level.
I agree with you that it’s a male thing at a higher level. Not that I like or support the victim mentality but why is it acceptable to say that women are the victims in this context. Sure, unwed women are having babies but aren’t many of these babies boys who than grow up without fathers? Are they not victims?
The education system is run by women and occupied mostly by women. Maybe that’s why women are doing better than men in school and higher ed? Where are the male role models supposed to come from? (Maybe the streets?)
Men, these days, are vilified as misogynistic, oppressive, irresponsible, dead beats, etc, Couple that with the message that society is racist where black people can’t succeed and you get a society where the only place boys CAN be successful and valorous is in gangs and outside of mainstream society. IMO
Young peoples' brains aren't fully formed until they're 25 so they make a lot of bad decisions early on. Yes, I agree, the kids are the biggest victims. Certainly men get beaten up an awful lot by women, rhetorically, not figuratively, and that's driven the rise of the Andrew Tate wannabes and the trans movement and its obsession with infiltrating women-only spaces. I'm not sure where the male role models are to come from but I'm up for suggestions, because I think we need more strength and power from both sexes. Powerful doesn't have to mean 'power over others' but *power over one's self* and one's choices. We need fewer male and female victims. We'll be personally powerful in different ways but working together we can begin solving our most pressing problems.
I'm up for suggestions if anyone wants to visit me at growsomelabia.com and drop some suggestions. I'm working on improving the website but the whole point is to help women, and everyone else, reclaim their power, or maybe reinvent it. The professional victims are at the far side of each extreme on the left and the right. I believe there are a LOT more of us - non-extremists on both sides of the divide - than there are on the extremes.
Just read today that Trump wants Republicans and his sycophant supporters to 'burn it down' if they don't get EVERYTHING they want with a government shutdown. The 'burn it down' mentality sounds EXACTLY like what we hear on the far left. The extremes remind me of the pigs in the final scene of Orwell's Animal Farm - they and the farmers resemble each other more and more.
We need to come together to defeat them both. Saying that got me deplatformed most recently on CounterSocial. And I realize I've strayed far from the original premise of this thread which is irresponsible black men (and just men) but it's the *responsible* ones on both sides of the divide who will bring an end to the madness and provide better role models. Regardless of colour.
Along with policy options for promoting family and school choice how about implementing a single sex school option especially for boys who lack positive male role models. They need to learn how to be a successful man and the steps to take to get there, surrounded by and lead by successful men.
I come from 2 perspectives, the first perspective is from growing up in a single parent HH. I could see how growing up without a father affected my brother. He did okay but he had some good role models through friends with 2 parent HHs.
The second perspective is from raising a son. He had 2 parents in the home but his father was not such a great role model but he was there and provided good advice (even though he didn’t follow his own advice.) My son also had good friends with 2 parent HHs and other adult men who were good role models.
My son and brother did not make great decisions (nor did I) a lot of times but we were able to get through without any life changing consequences. Without good role models in young men’s (and women’s) lives, there is a good chance they will find themselves in situations that cause serious problems that will affect the rest of their lives.
I see absolutely no real policy solutions aimed at addressing the problems facing young men and boys while they are in school and young enough to make a difference. They mainly focus on what to do after they have made bad decisions and get arrested. It’s like people expect these kids to turn 18 and magically be responsible fathers and members of society without any training whatsoever.
Good points, and an interesting take on the single-sex school, which we have already, albeit private ones. I would want to see a mixed bag of it, because boys and girls have to learn how to get along. Girls have to learn how to speak up and not let boys answer all the questions. Boys need to learn how to stand down. And both need to learn not to bully. And yes, both need good role models (although I have a jaundiced view for how good a role model any nun or priest is).
We are in an age, though, where humans overall are in a stage of almost perpetual arrested development. People could be responsible adults and fully expected to act like it at 18 or 20, get married, raise a family, and they did. A better, longer education puts off adulthood for many until the early to mid twenties. But there were also certain expectations we had for young people. My growing feeling is that too-permissive parenthood is beyond many of our problems (esp the 'trans kid' craze, which seems to be found mostly in liberal families because conservatives tell their kids the truth, "No, you can't be a girl, you're a boy, and you can't change that.") There's plenty to criticize in conservative parenting too - they famously aren't tolerant of their gay kids, either - but gay kids are real and more pervasive than 'trans kids', which, if you remove the gay men, the autogynephiles, and the politicals trying to get laid or destroy women's right to say no to anything, you're left with that very tiny number of probably genuinely 'trans people' who don't outgrow it.
"Meanwhile, support for the war in the Ukraine and social services for undocumented immigrants devour massive chunks of the federal budget." As far as I know, our support of Ukraine (whether one approves of it or not) still amounts to only a small fraction of the federal budget, so I don't think it is a limiting factor on our ability to spend on education and other services for poor families.
Spending on migrants too. Hard to imagine an economist who doesn't realize that 70% of spending is "mandatory" for things like Medicare and Social Security. The US government should, but based on recent history does not really face many trade-offs in spending more $ on anything. https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/spending/
Perhaps propaganda like that which encouraged women of all stripes to become single mothers, either by having a baby out of wedlock, or by kicking the father out for not living up to her expectations, could be disseminated, i.e. with the data that Cherry cites. I've been attempting to discuss this with left-leaning friends and it's amazing to me how resistant they are to what ought to come across as fact to any observer. Two parents are better than one and certainly better than one on welfare.
A friend of mine (white, upper middle class) had a baby with a guy she hooked up with. She gave him the 'it's mine and you don't have to be involved' line, to which he sagely responded, 'Oh no, I'm the father and I'm going to be involved.' So they tried cohabitation and even after a few discussions on why she left the guy, I can't get it straight what was so wrong with him. Regardless, he fought for his parental rights and so the kid has gone back and forth between her home and his father's home. Frankly, when I look back on how my own childhood would have gone had my parents divorced, I can't wrap my brain around being shuttled from one household to another. People were just starting to jump on the no-fault divorce bandwagon at the time (70s) and the only plus seemed to be that the kids whose parents were divorced were drinking, smoking, and having sex before anyone else. They also had the coolest clothes in as the competition between parents heated up.
Anyway, going back to my case study, my friend has cycled through about ten boyfriends in the interim. This son of hers has seen one man after another enter his life and leave again. One can't help wondering what a boy / child learns about relationships from this.
Hence we have the current young generation not bothering to get married or have kids.
Where has Mr. Cherry been since 1965? Everything in his article HAS BEEN ATTEMPTED, and to a considerable degree, over the past 5+ decades with virtually no positive impact on the larger society. This article adds absolutely nothing to the overall discussion.
Inner city black voters continue to support politicians --most recently Ms. Hochul in New York, for example-- that continue to allow this gargantuan mess to remain in place since it pleases key political constituencies....all together now: teachers unions and educrats come to mind.
It is time to face up to spirit of General Sternwood's aphorism from RChandler's classic (The Big Sleep): Anyone who continues to make stupid decisions in the face of life's harsh realities deserves all that he gets.
It becomes obvious that although enlightened academics and economists understand that the basis for a middle class life is high school graduation, a job and marriage before having children, the children don't know it. Somehow, despite resistance from politicians, teachers' unions, and progressives in general, local school boards composed of caring parents must force a curriculum which instills this knowledge into the students' consciousness. We need the children to have a "how to succeed in real life" course, like the "outdated" home economics , etc., courses. Skip the drag queens.
Mmmm hmmmm. The State does NOT like nuclear families. You break up the family through several means, how about economic hardship coupled with welfare promises? How about generational shift? How about feminism? How about making everyone stupid and irresponsible and self centered through a variety of media and new age messaging and then introduce "no fault divorce"?
And then who raises the kids? The State in State run schools with State run curriculums with blue haired transgender freaks filling the children's heads up with nonsense.
Feelings and emotions replace rationale and reason, costumes replace math, manufactured cultural issues replace economic and class issues, the child is led so astray as to reject family and immerse themselves in a pre-consrcibed community as replacement, drop in a gallon in a safe bucket, the perfect consumer.
Children of two parent homes have similar life outcomes across racial groups. So do children of single mothers. That, not racism, accounts for all but less than 5 percent of the difference in life outcomes between blacks and whites.
I'll happily concede that the five percent includes racism.
The innocent babies & toddlers all too often become delinquents in school. Uncle Sugar makes a lousy father for discipline, for role model, for caring.
We need more ideas like Robert's. Gov't paid lifestyle coaches and assistants to help guide the young who haven't really gotten such guidance from their parents - victims of poor parenting.
But we also need to blame the adults who were victims as kids. Teen girls without fathers all too often have promiscuous sex ... making them sluts. Which is a shame.
A shame for society, and a shame for them - and we need to return towards more shame to blame those who have shameful behavior. That's the job of culture, not gov't. "Don't blame the victim" - is used as an excuse for bad, shameful, slutty behavior.
Most Black kids are going to be raised by sluts, and there are even more slut-raised White kids.
Love is sex+commitment. Those having sex outside of marriage should be shamed more; they may have been victims when kids, but they've become moral agents as adults.
Giving cash to those who need it because of their lifestyle, but who don't change their lifestyle, will not help most of them end their lifestyle based poverty.
The government's carrot & stick incentives mostly reward morally hazardous promiscuity, since orgasms feel so good, and the poverty welfare is only a little less comfy than a low-wage low-skill work. Party & hook up once or twice during the weekend, maybe more thru the week.
Each local community should be defined by the boundaries of the gov't High School. Those high schools with the most kids whose parents are not married should be receiving more cash -- and some of the additional cash (never less cash! Freeze ok, but no cuts) should go to the responsible young adults who do NOT have kids; and some to those who are married and "don't need it" (as much). The ones making socially optimal, success oriented choices, should be getting 80% as much as the sluts who sleep around and get knocked up, usually carelessly.
In a no-welfare state, being responsible is it's own reward - and leads to a more comfy life, to those who work and get married before having kids; sometimes still even before having sex. We should try more gov't cash rewards to those who graduate high school; those who get married before having kids; those who don't get married but avoid getting pregnant (no reward for sex + abortion). Of course, being responsible almost always means being "less needy". Gov't cash incentives should help more folk be responsible.
If it's enough cash to move away, the gov't cash should
I need to correct part of my previous post.My comment on the Baltimore schools was not accurate. There were 23 schools where not a single student passed the state proficiency test in math. Total of nearly 2000 students. System wide in Baltimore city schools, 93% of all students between 3rd and 8th grade could not read, write or do math at level. I regret the error, but the point is the same especially on a system wide perspective.
Practical ideas , I would definitely support even if it meant higher taxes. The two parent advantage becomes even greater if it is passed down through generations. That means that a child not only has two parents to support them but has 4 grandparents too. I have seen how this can play out. My son's wife comes from a 2 parent family and they have purchased the home that my son, daughter in law and 3 grandchildren live in. It is not a gift, they act as a lender but they were able to buy the home within hours of seeing it because of the ability to pay cash. Also my son and daughter in law have built in emergency baby sitters at a quick call because there are 4 grandparents to call on. The same thing has happened to my daughter and son in law who just got married and unexpectedly had a baby 11 months later. The apartment they rented was just too small so again the in laws jumped in and purchased a home for them to rent. Also my daughter has to work on Sunday which is impossible to find a sitter for so I am taking over the Sunday sitting responsibility. She and her husband are not convinced yet that her going back to work is the best idea but she has that choice because a) a grandparent can step in to babysit and b) she has a husband that can support them. So this is a type of generational wealth and support that can only come from two parent households being passed down generation to generation. On both sides of the family this has been true for as long as anyone knows.
Oh Monty, in reality, the only place for you and a big black horse, will be with a broom and shovel, cleaning up after the parade.
As far as the 12 gage goes. You might want to limit whatever that beverage is in that paper sack before waving that thing around. No telling how many tent walls that will blow through, frightening your neighbors. Not to mention a ballistic traumatic amputation, ruining your Hush Puppies, and getting to know a podiatrist on a first name basis.
Maybe the tide is beginning to change. Long way to go. Practical ideas here. I would suggest however, there needs to be a much more aggressive approach to improving the education for these people most in need. Family culture needs to change on education. Certainly does not help when schools focus on indoctrination and gender issues vs the basics..or systems that prevent school choice as Ian and Sowell have clearly discussed. If there was ever a huge warning flag on the state of public education, look no further than Baltimore city schools. $1.6 billion budget and not a single, yes that’s single , student passed the state math proficiency test at high school level. How sad. Robbing the kids futures
Along with policy options for promoting family and school choice how about implementing a single sex school option especially for boys who lack positive male role models. They need to learn how to be a successful man and the steps to take to get there, surrounded by and lead by successful men.
I have two questions:
1) What does it mean for something to be a privilege? I always thought a privilege was something that you were given and did not work for or earn. As a married person, I can attest that marriage is not that. It is a choice that has to be worked on/for every day to be successful. It takes sacrifice, give and take, communication, and a lot of work overall. So, what is a privilege? And, how far do we want to take this idea? Is having both legs a privilege? Both eyes? Do we have walking privilege? Sight privilege? And, if so - how is ANY of this dialogue/wordsmithing helpful to those who need help?
2) Why is this a black-centric thing? Is single parenthood somehow easier for the single white mother in Appalachia? A single white father? A single Hispanic mother in rural Texas? A single Asian mother? Father? Is it somehow less penalizing for their kids?
While I share your distaste at the indiscriminate weaponizing of the word "privilege" I believe in this context it is useful as it is applied to the *child* of a married couple -- who did nothing to merit or earn being born into such a household, just as the child of the single mother did nothing wrong but yet was born into suffering.
Until we stop incentivizing the dissolution of working class families in America by preferentially funding single motherhood and penalizing the presence of a second income in the home, we will continue to reap the bitter fruit of sixty years of this failed "War on Poverty." We can fashion a real "social safety net" if we will finally make an honest assessment of the disastrous ROI of the 25+ $$TRILLIONS$$ we have spent, and continue to spend on the same terrible policy choices that have devastated the very institution that served American blacks so well through the century of ACTUAL "systemic racism" that followed the abolition of chattel slavery. I am ever the optimist, but the longer we delay the more intractable becomes the toll to real people, and the greater moral purchase is afforded our ideological enemies who seek to jettison every cultural institution to be remade in their own frightful design.
You know if Monty was a horse, he would be on the way to the glue factory.
It would more likely be me riding on a tall black horse and strapped with a Remington 12-gauge shotgun watching you in a chain gang picking cotton under the hot sun and humidity in the Mississippi Delta. Spiral, "Please officer... can I have a drink of water?" 😂😂😂😂
Maybe black communities need something akin to a *somewhat* more progressive, and certainly less patriarchal Oath Keepers for black men. Because if 3/4 of black babies are born to unwed mothers, and I'm guessing not all of them are born to college-grad mothers who can even consider the option of a college grad husband/father, then there's a serious problem with black men that white people can't fix with progressive policies.
That said, marriage is falling everywhere and young white women aren't marrying much either. Men overall are falling behind, now graduating less than women from college, including, apparently black men (remember the days when they said women & blacks were too stupid for college?) Young white men are falling behind too. It's a 'black thing' on one level, and it's a 'male thing' on a higher level.
I agree with you that it’s a male thing at a higher level. Not that I like or support the victim mentality but why is it acceptable to say that women are the victims in this context. Sure, unwed women are having babies but aren’t many of these babies boys who than grow up without fathers? Are they not victims?
The education system is run by women and occupied mostly by women. Maybe that’s why women are doing better than men in school and higher ed? Where are the male role models supposed to come from? (Maybe the streets?)
Men, these days, are vilified as misogynistic, oppressive, irresponsible, dead beats, etc, Couple that with the message that society is racist where black people can’t succeed and you get a society where the only place boys CAN be successful and valorous is in gangs and outside of mainstream society. IMO
Young peoples' brains aren't fully formed until they're 25 so they make a lot of bad decisions early on. Yes, I agree, the kids are the biggest victims. Certainly men get beaten up an awful lot by women, rhetorically, not figuratively, and that's driven the rise of the Andrew Tate wannabes and the trans movement and its obsession with infiltrating women-only spaces. I'm not sure where the male role models are to come from but I'm up for suggestions, because I think we need more strength and power from both sexes. Powerful doesn't have to mean 'power over others' but *power over one's self* and one's choices. We need fewer male and female victims. We'll be personally powerful in different ways but working together we can begin solving our most pressing problems.
I'm up for suggestions if anyone wants to visit me at growsomelabia.com and drop some suggestions. I'm working on improving the website but the whole point is to help women, and everyone else, reclaim their power, or maybe reinvent it. The professional victims are at the far side of each extreme on the left and the right. I believe there are a LOT more of us - non-extremists on both sides of the divide - than there are on the extremes.
Just read today that Trump wants Republicans and his sycophant supporters to 'burn it down' if they don't get EVERYTHING they want with a government shutdown. The 'burn it down' mentality sounds EXACTLY like what we hear on the far left. The extremes remind me of the pigs in the final scene of Orwell's Animal Farm - they and the farmers resemble each other more and more.
We need to come together to defeat them both. Saying that got me deplatformed most recently on CounterSocial. And I realize I've strayed far from the original premise of this thread which is irresponsible black men (and just men) but it's the *responsible* ones on both sides of the divide who will bring an end to the madness and provide better role models. Regardless of colour.
Here’s my suggestion from below...
Along with policy options for promoting family and school choice how about implementing a single sex school option especially for boys who lack positive male role models. They need to learn how to be a successful man and the steps to take to get there, surrounded by and lead by successful men.
I come from 2 perspectives, the first perspective is from growing up in a single parent HH. I could see how growing up without a father affected my brother. He did okay but he had some good role models through friends with 2 parent HHs.
The second perspective is from raising a son. He had 2 parents in the home but his father was not such a great role model but he was there and provided good advice (even though he didn’t follow his own advice.) My son also had good friends with 2 parent HHs and other adult men who were good role models.
My son and brother did not make great decisions (nor did I) a lot of times but we were able to get through without any life changing consequences. Without good role models in young men’s (and women’s) lives, there is a good chance they will find themselves in situations that cause serious problems that will affect the rest of their lives.
I see absolutely no real policy solutions aimed at addressing the problems facing young men and boys while they are in school and young enough to make a difference. They mainly focus on what to do after they have made bad decisions and get arrested. It’s like people expect these kids to turn 18 and magically be responsible fathers and members of society without any training whatsoever.
Good points, and an interesting take on the single-sex school, which we have already, albeit private ones. I would want to see a mixed bag of it, because boys and girls have to learn how to get along. Girls have to learn how to speak up and not let boys answer all the questions. Boys need to learn how to stand down. And both need to learn not to bully. And yes, both need good role models (although I have a jaundiced view for how good a role model any nun or priest is).
We are in an age, though, where humans overall are in a stage of almost perpetual arrested development. People could be responsible adults and fully expected to act like it at 18 or 20, get married, raise a family, and they did. A better, longer education puts off adulthood for many until the early to mid twenties. But there were also certain expectations we had for young people. My growing feeling is that too-permissive parenthood is beyond many of our problems (esp the 'trans kid' craze, which seems to be found mostly in liberal families because conservatives tell their kids the truth, "No, you can't be a girl, you're a boy, and you can't change that.") There's plenty to criticize in conservative parenting too - they famously aren't tolerant of their gay kids, either - but gay kids are real and more pervasive than 'trans kids', which, if you remove the gay men, the autogynephiles, and the politicals trying to get laid or destroy women's right to say no to anything, you're left with that very tiny number of probably genuinely 'trans people' who don't outgrow it.
"Meanwhile, support for the war in the Ukraine and social services for undocumented immigrants devour massive chunks of the federal budget." As far as I know, our support of Ukraine (whether one approves of it or not) still amounts to only a small fraction of the federal budget, so I don't think it is a limiting factor on our ability to spend on education and other services for poor families.
Spending on migrants too. Hard to imagine an economist who doesn't realize that 70% of spending is "mandatory" for things like Medicare and Social Security. The US government should, but based on recent history does not really face many trade-offs in spending more $ on anything. https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/spending/
Perhaps propaganda like that which encouraged women of all stripes to become single mothers, either by having a baby out of wedlock, or by kicking the father out for not living up to her expectations, could be disseminated, i.e. with the data that Cherry cites. I've been attempting to discuss this with left-leaning friends and it's amazing to me how resistant they are to what ought to come across as fact to any observer. Two parents are better than one and certainly better than one on welfare.
A friend of mine (white, upper middle class) had a baby with a guy she hooked up with. She gave him the 'it's mine and you don't have to be involved' line, to which he sagely responded, 'Oh no, I'm the father and I'm going to be involved.' So they tried cohabitation and even after a few discussions on why she left the guy, I can't get it straight what was so wrong with him. Regardless, he fought for his parental rights and so the kid has gone back and forth between her home and his father's home. Frankly, when I look back on how my own childhood would have gone had my parents divorced, I can't wrap my brain around being shuttled from one household to another. People were just starting to jump on the no-fault divorce bandwagon at the time (70s) and the only plus seemed to be that the kids whose parents were divorced were drinking, smoking, and having sex before anyone else. They also had the coolest clothes in as the competition between parents heated up.
Anyway, going back to my case study, my friend has cycled through about ten boyfriends in the interim. This son of hers has seen one man after another enter his life and leave again. One can't help wondering what a boy / child learns about relationships from this.
Hence we have the current young generation not bothering to get married or have kids.
Utter nonsense!!!
Where has Mr. Cherry been since 1965? Everything in his article HAS BEEN ATTEMPTED, and to a considerable degree, over the past 5+ decades with virtually no positive impact on the larger society. This article adds absolutely nothing to the overall discussion.
Inner city black voters continue to support politicians --most recently Ms. Hochul in New York, for example-- that continue to allow this gargantuan mess to remain in place since it pleases key political constituencies....all together now: teachers unions and educrats come to mind.
It is time to face up to spirit of General Sternwood's aphorism from RChandler's classic (The Big Sleep): Anyone who continues to make stupid decisions in the face of life's harsh realities deserves all that he gets.
It becomes obvious that although enlightened academics and economists understand that the basis for a middle class life is high school graduation, a job and marriage before having children, the children don't know it. Somehow, despite resistance from politicians, teachers' unions, and progressives in general, local school boards composed of caring parents must force a curriculum which instills this knowledge into the students' consciousness. We need the children to have a "how to succeed in real life" course, like the "outdated" home economics , etc., courses. Skip the drag queens.
Mmmm hmmmm. The State does NOT like nuclear families. You break up the family through several means, how about economic hardship coupled with welfare promises? How about generational shift? How about feminism? How about making everyone stupid and irresponsible and self centered through a variety of media and new age messaging and then introduce "no fault divorce"?
And then who raises the kids? The State in State run schools with State run curriculums with blue haired transgender freaks filling the children's heads up with nonsense.
Feelings and emotions replace rationale and reason, costumes replace math, manufactured cultural issues replace economic and class issues, the child is led so astray as to reject family and immerse themselves in a pre-consrcibed community as replacement, drop in a gallon in a safe bucket, the perfect consumer.