all my single ladies, all my single ladies

let's take a large population in the united states: single males and females. are we going to say that they are single because they arent going out to find others out there and they arent taking the intiative to find someone to be their significant other? or are we going to say they are all victims and they have all been hurt so they are too injured to find anyone else? there is no good way to label ALL of these single individuals, other than what they are: without a significant other. why do we have to have to label "vulnerable" in only a certain way? there are many ways a population could be vulnerable, i dont see why we have to pick just one.

in the situation above, i am taking being single as a negative (which may or may not be true for many, but that's another topic in itself). "vulnerable" is such a broad word in itself that i dont even know how it can be used to describe such a broad population. i think that it needs to be elaborated upon when being used, or maybe we should just stop trying to decide why these "vulnerable" populations are in their status quo. all i know is that they need help, and thats what we need to focus on.

people are single for different reasons, by choice or not, just like people are in their "vulnerable" situations, by choice or not. beyonce said if we liked it, then we should have put a ring on it. these "vulnerable/single" populations need a ring, and that ring is for us to help them out, no matter why they're single.