> oh well? They'll get over it.

Alienation and ostracization is not something to be taken lightly.

I mean back up for second…

We know that kids on social media are suffering depression and etc.

So… if you keep your kid off of that drug, you are saying they’re not going to be accepted by the addicts and peers that are suffering?

Ok? Good?

We know what conformity to the group of damaged friends can do to a kid.

I’ll be okay raising the social outcast if the society is this damaged.

> We know that kids on social media are suffering depression and etc.

We know it raises likelihood, that doesn't mean they're all depressed and anxious across the board, and those afflictions are on a gradient. Younger generations appear to be optimizing for it more effectively.

It doesn't make sense to cast society at large as "suffering and addicted". Downstream from that, the downsides of sheltering your children from society loom larger than their being socialized among peers who use social media.

> I’ll be okay raising the social outcast if the society is this damaged.

You do that.

> > I’ll be okay raising the social outcast if the society is this damaged.

> You do that.

You don't hear really about Amish kids killing themselves. Maybe there's something there.

You don't really hear about a significant segment of the population killing themselves.

Neither are good.

Kids having problems because of social media sucks.

Kids having problems because they don't have social media and gets peer pressure because of it also sucks.

Eh, no they won't really get over it. I interact with plenty of people in their thirties and fourties who still have a chip on their shoulder because they were "losers" in highschool.

I mean, I'm not saying they should keep using it or stop.

I'm just saying what happens when you force "individual responsibility" onto parents and children, without addressing the root societal problem.

I agree 100% that using social media is unhealthy.