Is Lyndon Johnson partially to blame for the rise in single-parent homes?

[TheReckoning]

In 1963, when Lyndon Johnson took office, about 20% of Children did not have a father in their home/their parents were unmarried when they were born.

Nowadays, that number is 40%.

Some people have suggested that Lyndon Johnson’s guarantee of government handouts if were a single parent disincentivized women from being married while having children, raising the percent of children raised without both parents.

Do you agree with theory? Did Johnson’s polices cause this?

Given how children without two parents end off typically significantly worse off than parents with two parents, this has been a concern for many.

[TheReckoning]

This is a grotesque idiocy that flies in the face of any serious social sciences research. All the empirical evidence suggests that a strong welfare system strengthens the family, which is why people who are genuinely conservative/traditional and not just creeps who get off on controlling others ought to support it.

What really caused the rise of single-parent households was, well, partly the sexual liberation and policies that came with it (which I do support, but I understand why socons take issue with them) but perhaps even more importantly, mass incarceration. Of course, given that OP is an ardent supporter of the latter, there's no point in taking his whining seriously here.

Were people seriously having significantly more premarital sex after the sexual revolution? That flies in the face of the idea that people will have as much sex and live as much hedonistic lives as they want, regardless of social stigma around that. That is the idea of most behind most socially progressive people.

[TheReckoning]

Exactly as vacuous, irrelevant and insubstantial a reply as I expected. No point in engaging.

FFS questioning just how much the sexual Revolution actually changed social behaviors-instead of the social perception of behaviors- is legitimate. Why are you so averse to anyone disagreeing with you?

[TheReckoning]

Exactly as vacuous, irrelevant and insubstantial a reply as I expected. No point in engaging.

FFS questioning just how much the sexual Revolution actually changed social behaviors-instead of the social perception of behaviors- is legitimate. Why are you so averse to anyone disagreeing with you?

Because you're sidestepping the entire point of the discussion (a discussion you yourself started) to get us on an irrelevant tangent based on some ridiculous strawman of "what progressives believe" (yes, most people are fully aware that changing cultural attitudes and actual policies is going to affect social behaviors, progressive or not).

That’s not true at all. For instance, most progressives say that demonizing teen sex/teaching abstinence-only sex education has no effectiveness at actually preventing teens from having sex, so comprehensive sex ed is the only way to go, because teens will have sex anyways.

[TheReckoning]

Perhaps it got more women a way out of abusive relationships.

Is there any evidence to suggest women are less likely to be in abusive relationships than they were in the 1960s?

[TheReckoning]

but perhaps even more importantly, mass incarceration. Of course, given that OP is an ardent supporter of the latter, there's no point in taking his whining seriously here.

Given how most people in prison are there for violent crimes, are those really the kind of people who want raising children? Quite frankly, I wouldn’t trust most of them around children at all.

[TheReckoning]

The modifications to ADFC (which was not a very well designed programme in the first place) were not, contrary to what is often assumed, part of Lyndon Johnson's 'Great Society' agenda but occurred during the Kennedy administration. In any event, while the social impact of those reforms to ADFC were demonstrably negative (even if the extent can be argued), all Western societies saw an increase in single-parent families during the 1970s and 80s, which means that the general pattern cannot be blamed on ADFC, even if we can say that it likely made a bad situation worse.

I’m not sure if you’re familiar with this, but do things like single mother benefits exist in the UK/most of Western Europe? When were those created? And are parallels to other Great Society programs common?