Shame - can it be effective as a Public Policy?

[DGS49]

Anyone not a Democrat can see that the greatest contributor to the major social ills of our society, namely, poverty (aka "inequality"), crime, addiction, incarceration, unemployment, educational failure, and despair in the U.S. is illegitimacy. With the national bastardy rate at 40% and climbing, the statistics continue to point to the intact nuclear family as the greatest boon to social and economic success. As one salient example, children born into an intact family (Mother and father married, and both present in the home) are only one-seventh as likely to live in poverty as children living with a single parent. Statistics on whether those children will drop out of school, be in trouble with the law, abuse alcohol or controlled substances, produce more illegitimate children of their own, and so forth, pretty much follow the same pattern.

And yet, it has become dogmatic in our culture that it is unacceptable to criticize the behavior of the biological mothers and fathers, or to withhold any public benefit (i.e., to remove any incentive) from people who produce illegitimate offspring.

It is said that this is a form of "blaming the victim," or punishing the innocent children. Thus, we have the conundrum of being unable to punish or dis-incentivize the behavior that is literally our greatest social problem.

But could we shame them? Effectively?

Could a President pursue a 4-year-long campaign to stigmatize the young men (mainly) who father, and the young women who birth these millions of illegitimate offspring?

Take out billboards that say, "Being a sperm-donor is not the same as being a Man."

"Good people do not produce children that they cannot support and nurture."

"'Love Child' my ass."

And so on.

It would also be worth noting (to the target audience) that being socially responsible does not even require that one change one's behavior - just use some sort of reliable B.C.

When I was growing up the illegitimacy rate was a tiny fraction of what it is today because (a) getting pregnant while single was disgraceful, and (b) young men felt obliged to marry a girl that they knocked up. Also, being on welfare was considered disgraceful across the entire spectrum of the American population, and no one wanted to be in that situation, especially due to voluntarily action. This is why Patrick Moynihan's study was so shocking to many people; it documented the fact that in some "Negro" neighborhoods it was socially acceptable to have bastard children with the full expectation that they would be provided for by the Government. People were SHOCKED. Not so long ago. And now this is considered a value-neutral "lifestyle choice."

Need one say, "Bullshit"?

Could shame - as a public policy - work today?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Family changes didn't move the jobs overseas and bust the unions.

 

[Sonny Clark]

Anyone not a Democrat can see that the greatest contributor to the major social ills of our society, namely, poverty (aka "inequality"), crime, addiction, incarceration, unemployment, educational failure, and despair in the U.S. is illegitimacy. With the national bastardy rate at 40% and climbing, the statistics continue to point to the intact nuclear family as the greatest boon to social and economic success. As one salient example, children born into an intact family (Mother and father married, and both present in the home) are only one-seventh as likely to live in poverty as children living with a single parent. Statistics on whether those children will drop out of school, be in trouble with the law, abuse alcohol or controlled substances, produce more illegitimate children of their own, and so forth, pretty much follow the same pattern.

And yet, it has become dogmatic in our culture that it is unacceptable to criticize the behavior of the biological mothers and fathers, or to withhold any public benefit (i.e., to remove any incentive) from people who produce illegitimate offspring.

It is said that this is a form of "blaming the victim," or punishing the innocent children. Thus, we have the conundrum of being unable to punish or dis-incentivize the behavior that is literally our greatest social problem.

But could we shame them? Effectively?

Could a President pursue a 4-year-long campaign to stigmatize the young men (mainly) who father, and the young women who birth these millions of illegitimate offspring?

Take out billboards that say, "Being a sperm-donor is not the same as being a Man."

"Good people do not produce children that they cannot support and nurture."

"'Love Child' my ass."

And so on.

It would also be worth noting (to the target audience) that being socially responsible does not even require that one change one's behavior - just use some sort of reliable B.C.

When I was growing up the illegitimacy rate was a tiny fraction of what it is today because (a) getting pregnant while single was disgraceful, and (b) young men felt obliged to marry a girl that they knocked up. Also, being on welfare was considered disgraceful across the entire spectrum of the American population, and no one wanted to be in that situation, especially due to voluntarily action. This is why Patrick Moynihan's study was so shocking to many people; it documented the fact that in some "Negro" neighborhoods it was socially acceptable to have bastard children with the full expectation that they would be provided for by the Government. People were SHOCKED. Not so long ago. And now this is considered a value-neutral "lifestyle choice."

Need one say, "Bullshit"?

Could shame - as a public policy - work today?

That is so ridiculous and out of bounds, that it's not worth the time to explain why it's ridiculous and out of bounds. Surely you didn't intend for folks to take that rant seriously, did you?

 

[DGS49]

So you are unable to explain why it is ridiculous and out of bounds?

You could just use the normal Liberal play-book and call me a bigot.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Sometimes shame works, and sometimes it doesn't. For example Dubya has exiled himself in shame. So it worked there. But Cheney doesn't have any sense of shame, and still spouts off his bullshit from time to time. So the OP's strategy is clearly shoddy.

 

[toxicmedia]

Anyone not a Democrat can see that the greatest contributor to the major social ills of our society, namely, poverty (aka "inequality"), crime, addiction, incarceration, unemployment, educational failure, and despair in the U.S. is illegitimacy. With the national bastardy rate at 40% and climbing, the statistics continue to point to the intact nuclear family as the greatest boon to social and economic success. As one salient example, children born into an intact family (Mother and father married, and both present in the home) are only one-seventh as likely to live in poverty as children living with a single parent. Statistics on whether those children will drop out of school, be in trouble with the law, abuse alcohol or controlled substances, produce more illegitimate children of their own, and so forth, pretty much follow the same pattern.

And yet, it has become dogmatic in our culture that it is unacceptable to criticize the behavior of the biological mothers and fathers, or to withhold any public benefit (i.e., to remove any incentive) from people who produce illegitimate offspring.

It is said that this is a form of "blaming the victim," or punishing the innocent children. Thus, we have the conundrum of being unable to punish or dis-incentivize the behavior that is literally our greatest social problem.

But could we shame them? Effectively?

Could a President pursue a 4-year-long campaign to stigmatize the young men (mainly) who father, and the young women who birth these millions of illegitimate offspring?

Take out billboards that say, "Being a sperm-donor is not the same as being a Man."

"Good people do not produce children that they cannot support and nurture."

"'Love Child' my ass."

And so on.

It would also be worth noting (to the target audience) that being socially responsible does not even require that one change one's behavior - just use some sort of reliable B.C.

When I was growing up the illegitimacy rate was a tiny fraction of what it is today because (a) getting pregnant while single was disgraceful, and (b) young men felt obliged to marry a girl that they knocked up. Also, being on welfare was considered disgraceful across the entire spectrum of the American population, and no one wanted to be in that situation, especially due to voluntarily action. This is why Patrick Moynihan's study was so shocking to many people; it documented the fact that in some "Negro" neighborhoods it was socially acceptable to have bastard children with the full expectation that they would be provided for by the Government. People were SHOCKED. Not so long ago. And now this is considered a value-neutral "lifestyle choice."

Need one say, "Bullshit"?

Could shame - as a public policy - work today?

I thought you made up the term "national bastardy rate"...but it's actually a word.

Shame is a great tool to cure all ills.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Shame as public policy can't work because most rightwingers are shameless.

 

[toxicmedia]

Shame as public policy can't work because most rightwingers are shameless.

Don't know if I'd go that far, but they're workin' on it.

The 60's revolution made social pariahs out of chauvinist racist segregationists. Many of whom were the fathers/mothers and grandfathers/grandmothers of southern and Midwestern "so called conservative" Tea Party/Pseudo Independent-Libertarian voters, who all vote Republican.

But in the name of a fight against the cry baby PC crowd...they're trying to make all that bigotry okay again, and packaging it as "defending traditional values"

The road to hell is paved with good intentions

 

[g5000]

Every time I have shamed the rubes on this forum for copying and pasting lies from their hack partisan media sources, they go right back for refills of their piss cups.

QED. Shame doesn't work. You have to have shame for shame to work. Some people just don't have any.

 

[Camp]

So you are unable to explain why it is ridiculous and out of bounds?

You could just use the normal Liberal play-book and call me a bigot.

It is counter to principles of freedom and liberty and instead supports faith based beliefs. It pits specific religious beliefs against competing religious beliefs and opens the door for violation of the separation of church and state.

 

[g5000]

The divorce rate is very low in Afghanistan. We should be more like Afghanistan. We need to put our women back under the yoke so they are too dependent and not allowed to leave their husbands.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Shame as public policy can't work because most rightwingers are shameless.

Don't know if I'd go that far, but they're workin' on it.

The 60's revolution made social pariahs out of chauvinist racist segregationists. Many of whom were the fathers/mothers and grandfathers/grandmothers of southern and Midwestern "so called conservative" Tea Party/Pseudo Independent-Libertarian voters, who all vote Republican.

But in the name of a fight against the cry baby PC crowd...they're trying to make all that bigotry okay again, and packaging it as "defending traditional values"

The road to hell is paved with good intentions

99% of rightwingers are at least as intolerant of differing views as any of the worst of the so-called PC crowd.

The reason you don't hear about rightwing 'PC' on conservative college campuses is that they are so exclusionary of liberalism that the left can't get a foot in the door far enough to create a controversy...

...although I recall I think it was Liberty University where students protested a Romney visit because he's a Mormon...lol

 

[g5000]

Shame as public policy can't work because most rightwingers are shameless.

Don't know if I'd go that far, but they're workin' on it.

The 60's revolution made social pariahs out of chauvinist racist segregationists. Many of whom were the fathers/mothers and grandfathers/grandmothers of southern and Midwestern "so called conservative" Tea Party/Pseudo Independent-Libertarian voters, who all vote Republican.

But in the name of a fight against the cry baby PC crowd...they're trying to make all that bigotry okay again, and packaging it as "defending traditional values"

The road to hell is paved with good intentions

99% of rightwingers are at least as intolerant of differing views as any of the worst of the so-called PC crowd.

The reason you don't hear about rightwing 'PC' on conservative college campuses is that they are so exclusionary of liberalism that the left can't get a foot in the door far enough to create a controversy...

...although I recall I think it was Liberty University where students protested a Romney visit because he's a Mormon...lol

Romney should be ashamed of being a Mormon!

 

[g5000]

Women should be ashamed for leaving the kitchen.

Homos should be ashamed for leaving the closet.

Mistresses should be ashamed for leaving the apartment.

Negroes should be ashamed for leaving the plantation.

We need the good times back!

 

[Derideo_Te]

Extremist rightwingers don't feel shame for illegally invading Iraq or causing the national debt to sky rocket because they gave massive tax cuts to the wealthy so obviously shame is completely ineffective as a public policy.

It doesn't even stop them from electing people like David Vitter.

 

[Moonglow]

So your t

So you are unable to explain why it is ridiculous and out of bounds?

You could just use the normal Liberal play-book and call me a bigot.

So your tyranny needs an outlet?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Shaming the poor is just one part of the strategy of the GOP money interests to get people to look down the economic ladder for someone or something to blame for what they perceive to be their woes.

When you're looking down, you aren't looking up.

 

[Moonglow]

Women should be ashamed for leaving the kitchen.

Homos should be ashamed for leaving the closet.

Mistresses should be ashamed for leaving the apartment.

Negroes should be ashamed for leaving the plantation.

We need the good times back!

When a man was a man and nobody else mattered....

 

[NYcarbineer]

Well, in all fairness, shaming was at least part of what defeated Mike Pence and the Indiana Bigots. A small part, though.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If shame works so well, why doesn't Mike Huckabee try it on the Duggars?

lol