Yo, Is This Ageist?

“Ask a Senior”

The local farmer’s market planning board is trying to market to males, kids and olders. Of the last group,  the planners recognize that the condo units that cater to 55+ often provide transportation to events. I was able to nix their ideas of providing special games for seniors, recognizing the ageism in that and explaining that the market with its music and shopping is already entertaining. Then, they suggested setting a table up to “ask a senior” a question, manned by that same population, and expecting an interesting story in response. On the one hand, that complements the knowledge base that many of the more experienced population has garnered, but it scares me that it could backfire. Yo, is this ageist?

Good work nixing the “fun games for seniors” plan! (I’m forever pointing out that activities should be planned around shared interests, not age groups.) “Ask A Senior” feels only slightly less cringe-y. White it’s true that older people have more life experience, that doesn’t make us more adept at random conversations, nor more knowledgeable on a given topic than a younger person might be.

If the goal is to lure more older shoppers to the farmers market, how about canvassing local olders and condo residents about what it would take? “We don’t need to have it fun to attend,” said one person I asked. “Put flyers at the 55+ places.” Must-haves include shade, seating, toilets, and transportation—and who doesn’t love a discount? 

 If the goal is to reduce ageism and build community, we know that bringing older and younger people together really works. (Take it from “Connecting generations,” a toolkit from the WHO’s Global Campaign to Combat Ageism.) How about setting up a bench for serendipitous conversations, or stories about the neighborhood? (Here are some examples). Encourage youngers and olders to take a seat. Give a prize to conversations that bridge the widest age gap. Report back!

“the emergence of cantankerousness with age”

I’m wondering about a comment found in this Guardian advice column: “…sometimes pivots into negativity are just the souring of a soul, the emergence of cantankerousness with age”, says the columnist. But is there a link between ageing and cantankerousness or a “souring of the soul”, or is this just ageist?

Research shows the opposite: most people grow more content as they grow older. We also grow less inclined to suffer fools and less likely to worry about what people think of us. But that’s not exactly a “souring of the soul.” Some people are cantankerous and disillusioned. They come in all ages, though: it’s because of their temperament and circumstances, not a function of how old they happen to be.

iPhone for Seniors

I came across these two magazines yesterday and I was just…floored. Not iPhones For Beginners or iPhones For People Who Just Crawled Out From Under A Rock, but…IPhones For Seniors and iPhone: Seniors Edition. It seems to perpetuate this myth that Seniors are clueless about technology. 

Firstly, you’re entitled to your feelings. Secondly, you’re entitled to feel insulted, because these publications do indeed reinforce the myth that technically inept olders are clutching their rotary phones. It’s ageist, it’s false, and it’s harmful.  

Thanks, tho, for making me laugh out loud with iPhones For People Who Just Crawled Out From Under A Rock.

In Fallen Leaves, the film by Aki Kaurismaki, the advances of a man in his fifties (played by 55 yo actor) are rejected by a woman (40s?) for his age - she refers to him as “elderly” (English translation). He tries to pretend he is not yet 50, but she asks to see some ID. If it was a man speaking to a woman like this, it would be easier to see a problem, but is it ageist when it’s the other way round? Tricky! 

Bias is bias, no matter whose mouth it comes out of. We’re accustomed to women being judged more harshly than men for aging past youth, but that doesn’t make the opposite any more acceptable. Nor is it a good idea to lie about your age to someone you hope to impress.

Is this headline ageist?

Biden is old, and that’s not ageism 

The headline isn’t ageist. Biden has exceeded the average life expectancy for American men by eight years. This makes him old. It’s an aspect of his identity, like the facts that he’s a Democrat, a Catholic, and a dog-owner. 

In a world free of bias, facts like those would be neutral. We would base our opinions of politicians (and everyone else) on their characters and their actions. In an ageist world, however, age is not neutral. Neither is the article in the Wisconsin State Journal. It gives a pass to a cartoon showing the President using a walker, suggests he has “lost a step,” and criticizes Donald Trump for not “getting any younger, either.” That’s both ageist and ableist. 

“You know, my parents are up in age, and I love them dearly,” Nicky Haley said when asked directly if Trump, 77, is mentally fit to be president. “But when you see them hit a certain age, there is a decline. That’s a fact, ask any doctor, there is a decline. And this is a situation where our country is very vulnerable right now.” 

Cognitive decline is not inevitable—we all know some extremely sharp 90-year-olds. Bodies, on the other hand, inevitably work less well over time. Physical decline  doesn’t kick in at a given age, however, and it affects each of us differently because each person’s physiology and personality and situation is unique. Haley’s comment is ignorant and ageist, as is her call for officeholders to take a mental competency test at age 75.

Generational Stereotypes in media - Does this reinforce ageism?

Hi Ashton,

An Aussie Ad for Meats & Livestock Australia depicts divided generations come together over Lamb BBQ. It has a great message about bringing generations together with some Aussie humour, however according to this recent article by author Sue Parker in Mumbrella, the Ad trips up on tired ‘generational stereotypes’ to get the message out. However, many don’t see age stereotypes showing up in the Ad and mostly love the messaging.

What are your thoughts? Do these exaggerated ‘generational stereotypes’ contribute to our schema or ‘mental library’ of age stereotypes as our guide to what ageing looks like? Or, is a parody of age stereotypes for effect?

Thank you,

Natasha 

It’s hard to imagine how people “don’t see age stereotypes” in the ad. It’s titled “The Generation Gap” and lampoons stereotypes about Boomers, Gen X and Gen Y from beginning to end. 

Like Sue Parker, as an anti-ageism advocate I seize any opportunity to debunk generation stereotypes. (Here’s why.)  I agree that the the ad’s portrayal of older people is patronizing and inaccurate. However, the way younger people are portrayed is every bit as patronizing and inaccurate. So I could make a case that the ad highlights the dumb and arbitrary nature of all stereotypes. It also shows everyone coming together at the end, albeit around meat-eating. 

Parody can be a devastatingly effective tool for social change. On the other hand, just because something makes us laugh doesn’t make it acceptable; discrimination isn’t funny. Meats & Livestock Australia should do better. But I’m not going to the mat on this one.

The “grandma rule”

On LinkedIn, an expert in “strategic communications for tech companies” writes:

“The ‘grandma rule’ always works. Explain complex concepts in a way that your grandmother could understand. Depending on the goals, you might still want to keep some of the industry lingo - this helps to keep the expert position (used in advertising a lot).”

 I am a grandpa and my job is explaining complex technical concepts to a general audience. I know many grandmas who can explain complex concepts a lot better than me. My grandma, born in 1896, was Toronto’s first woman real estate agent and could explain complex commercial transactions to any banker. I think the “grandma rule” is totally offensive and ageist.

I couldn’t agree more. It’s sexist too. 

There’s actually a name—the Matilda Effect—for the well-documented phenomenon of erasing the accomplishments of women in science.

Excuse me????

I attended a unitarian church service recently and during coffee hour, a couple of members (women) approached me to chat.  Almost immediately, one of them asked of me, “So, do I assume by the color of your hair that you are not yet retired?”   They were both completely gray, and I had no gray (but would if I didn’t color it :)).   I was dumbfounded.  What do you make of this type of comment, and do you have any suggestions as to a suitable response?

There are so many things wrong with this comment it’s hard to know where to start.  Have they never met anyone who colors their hair? Would they say, “You must be wild” to a redhead? Would they speak extra slowly to a blonde? It also demeans all the people with white hair who manage to hold down a job! Are they asking, “Hmm, are you one of us?

Respond with “What do you mean by that?” in as neutral a tone as you can manage. Then wait. After all, they must be sweet, retired Christians with plenty of time to repent.