For instance, are you going to suggest people should become more psychopathic because it's correlated with success?
Are you going to suggest all men take testosterone suppressants because that would reduce violence, risk taking and teenage pregnancy? If the outcome is all that matters, then why not right?
If what you need is testosterone suppressant to not hit me, yes I strongly prefer you taking it over me being beaten or me doing things I did not wanted to for fear of your aggression. It is better for you too, assuming cops and courts will do the thing they are supposed to - putting you in prison.
Fortunately, men generally don't need testosterone suppressant to not be violent. Adult men violence is choice and occasionally mental problem.
Teen pregnancy rates are again result largely of sexual education, girls better able to resist pressure to have unprotected sex and boys better knowing it causes problems to them too. There is literally nothing to gain by not using a condom in that situation.
All of these are kids making better choices. That absolutely should count for something.
False equivalency. "More violent" does not mean "violent". Kids rough housing are technically being violent. Are you really worried about that?
> All of these are kids making better choices.
Or it's kids not having natural impulses that are inherent to all human beings. And that would be a serious problem.
Difference against violence of past generation is NOT kids rough housing. It was real fights, real hits, real injuries. Real robbery, real violence toward (say) partners, real knife or real gun. Nice manipulative technique you used. But you know what? If there are less kids bullying other kids, that is good thing too. Because while "rough housing" between two consenting kids is fine, one kid bullying the other is often called rough housing by those who want to pretend every thing is fine.
Keeping control over natural impulse to not use condom, to have random sex, to take heroin, to hit other people is a good thing. We have many natural impulses that are better off to be controlled. All of these harm not just the person who is doing it, but others too.
It's anxiety that drives national-socialists for example. Do we want them to rise again? I don't think so!
Also your example with the psychopath is a very good one. Success and money are not the most important things in the world even when instragram & co are bloated with pictures of "happy", rich, dumb people who have nothing but their looks.
If men wouldn't have taken risks probably they'd never have left Africa in the first place.
These are positive changes. All of them. These were literally something bad about older generation. All these things have negative consequences on not just risk accepting person, but also to other people around.
If you are more anxious but less violent, then it is a good trade off.