Redundancy: Humans are sociable creatures, and are socialized within the context of society.
Why do we feel sad for drunks? As opposed to feeling sad for the suburban wife who blindly takes part in a recipe routine of actions\activities that categorize her as part of a social community? Drunks also are part of a social community. This community, characterized by its inconsistency due to the wild nature of alcohol, is very different to the suburban\bourgeois community, which is one characterized by heavily soldered legitimation. What makes one social condition\status more acceptable than the other? The latter plays into the major field of modernity and capitalism; it is actually an outgrowth of urbanization\industrialization and ensuing urbanized poverty (did fear of the poor lead the rich to the outskirts?). Thus, the suburban wife is a pawn in the game of capitalism – she has a defined role which is a life akin (almost to a T) to that of her ‘social class’ compatriots. The drunk woman, in opposition, perhaps plays a major role in the capitalist scheme since she subsidizes the liquor companies, which are leading contributors in Modern Economy. Yet, this contribution, which is paradoxically endorsed by the government, is also belittled, perceived as a broken path which does not contribute, other than monetarily, to the well being and up-bringing of the modern capitalist society of greed of consumption, and power. Thus, drunks are looked down upon as failures, people that have failed to make themselves useful in the predefined order of a societal institution. They are deviants. And as such, all deviants are worthless to society, until a revolution proves otherwise.
“There are good Drunks everywhere, that may be the only constant on earth. Not just drunks, but fucking great drunks, reliable drunks. Drunks are reliable (depends on the perspective, of course). Alcohol distributors can always count on their faithful drunks. This puts everything in perspective. If one can speak of drunks as subjectively reliable, one can most likely assume that any statement may be of valid portent.”