So, i was looking at memes about aging to share with my class to demonstrate the mockery, humiliation, etc. I came across these offensive memes integrated in Care.Com site ? Seriously Care.com whose goal is to work with older adults? #nottakingitanymore
I’m so with you, NotTakingItAnyMore. This messages would be offensive no matter where they originated. They’re especially so coming from an organization that offers quality care for older people. I hope you’ll let Care.com know what you think.
Apparently New York Times columnist Pamela Paul aspires to grow old. You sure wouldn’t know it from “Grandma Food,” her Thanksgiving-weekend take on what old people eat.
“None of this is a slight against old people,” Pamela Paul? Really? “Golden-years-style feeding??” “FEEDING,” really?!? Check your privilege, and your bias. No one likes to be condescended to—and reinforcing ageist and ableist stereotypes does real harm.
I could not believe that Care.com integrated memes like this in a website for an organization that is supposed to care for older adults in a respectful and dignified manner.
I’m with you.I sure wouldn’t use a service that encouraged care providers to see the people they work with as “crazy old ladies"—or encouraged people to see themselves that way. It'a ageist, ableist, and denigrating—no matter who’s using the mirror. #ageism #ableism #misogyny
I received the following email from LinkedIn, and I noticed right away that the Pictures they used to reference ‘Global Talent Trends’, the ‘Changing World of Work’, and how to 'Find And Hire The Right Talent With The Right Skills’, all depicts Employees of a certain age. My question and concern is, Are Older People not visible in the Workplace? Do we collectively not have a place for Older Employees in these Environments? Are we as Older Individuals who are either still employed, or looking to be vital contributors in today’s Workforce, and towards our Nations overall Economy, not welcomed in these Work Spaces? I just want to know if this depiction of normal everyday work environments would be considered Ageist, since there is not one Older Person represented in any of them.
Global Talent Trends 2024
Get data-driven insights into the changing world of work.
•Find and hire the right talent with the right skills
Read the full report to find out what matters most in today’s labor market.
This marketing is definitely ageist. It’s also far from LinkedIn’s first offense on this count. Omitting older people from photos and images, like omitting fat people or people with visible disabilities, is a form of discrimination. Intended or not, it sends the messages that they are not welcome.
I’ll call LinkedIn to task, and hope you will too.
from Kimberley: So this argument seems to be popping up as a trend!! I’m stunned by this article. And the premise that even actually taxing corporations wouldn’t make up for all the money “wasted” on old people and that they are taking away money from the MILITARY? Ugh.
This NYTimes Op Ed piece (10/1/24) uses the same old out-of-date, zero-sum framing to pit old against young. Here’s my take on why this divisive demagoguery deserves an overhaul. It’s about class, not age.
Perhaps older men are fair game, but reading this article in the Guardian [about 51-year old Olympic skateboarder Andy Macdonald], one has the sense that what’s really at stake is the writer’s own shame at ageing, what that means for his desires and dreams, and whether it is better to compromise and give up on them than be deemed a laughing stock or “midlife crisis”. But perhaps you have a better angle….
I agree that the article reflects the writer’s ambivalence about his own aging. But he’s honest about it, and vulnerable.
In athletic competitions, age does matter. (See August 7 and August 8 posts, below.) The fact that skateboarders’ ages ranged from 14 to 51 is part of what made this such a terrific Olympic event. As Ronay writes, “Mainly, it was an uplifting spectacle, and not just for 51-year-old men or 51-year-old women or older people generally, but for anybody who wants to be inspired to do things. But mainly it was inspiring for 51-year-old men in cargo shorts.” There’s nothing wrong with that.
When reporting on winning a medal, is pointing out and emphasizing the olympic athlete's age, ageist? Often seems to imply that the athlete is too young or too old to excel at that sport. To me, I don't think pointing out age is necessary to be in awe and respect of an athlete's achievements. Your thoughts?
In general it’s best to avoid highlighting age when describing an accomplishment. (See question below.) Athletic competitions are an exception. Although physical decline can often be slowed, speed and strength diminish with age. When an older athlete performs exceptionally—like gold medalists 27-year-old gymnast Simone Biles, whose sport is dominated by teenagers, or 41-year-old Greco-Roman wrestler Mijain Lopez—it’s noteworthy! At the other end of the spectrum, knowing that 13-year-old skateboarder Heili Sirviö is the youngest athlete to ever represent Finland helps put her achievement in context. Special shoutout to Chilean table-tennis player Zhiying Zeng, who made her Olympic debut at 58 (after retiring at 20).
Is highlighting a person's age when they made a significant achievement - ageist? Example: a 93 yr old that just got her masters degree, a 87 year-old that goes sky-diving?
It’s complicated. Highlighting age arguably reinforces the damaging narrative that age alone makes the accomplishment exceptional. On the other hand, including age arguably inspires people not to see it as a barrier to fulfilling an aspiration. On the other hand, in order to avoid racism newspaper stories no longer mention a person’s race unless it’s genuinely relevant to the story.
I recommend applying the same standard to age: is it genuinely relevant? It may feel like we need to know, but that’s a habit worth breaking. If age is what makes an accomplishment truly noteworthy—if an octogenarian climbs Everest, for example, or a kid plays Rachmaninoff—it makes sense to include it. Otherwise, best to avoid ageism by leaving age out of it.
The Democrats' latest slogan, "Donald Trump is old and weird," is clearly and obviously ageist, and I'm trying to work up a proper outrage for it, but honestly, I'm delighted it's working. I'll deal with my issues after President Harris is sworn in. What do you think?
“All’s fair in love and war,” the saying goes, and politics is often war. That said, bad behavior often comes back to bite us. Trump is now the target of the kind of ageism he used to send Biden’s way. (On the bright side, a 57-year-old woman is suddenly seen as young! Just kidding.)
I understand your position, but I hope you’ll reconsider. Candidates should be judged by their words and actions, not their appearance. Stooping to “old and weird” betrays the values of equality and respect his opponents supposedly pride themselves on.
Lots of polls ask the question: Do you think Biden (or Trump) is too old to be president? This seems to me to be a clear measure of ageism. But how else would you ask the question?
Your instincts are right. Calling someone “too old” is both ageist and unhelpful. It reveals more about the person saying it than the person they’re talking about. We know that it’s hard to make survey questions neutral. Asking whether someone is “too old”—for anything, not just elected office—is anything but, because it incorrectly and misleadingly equates age with capacity.
Far better to omit age entirely. For example:
Do you think the person possesses the skills to do the job? Or,
Do you think the person is qualified for the position?
I’d also love to see poll responses to questions that raise awareness of ageism and make people think about the meaning of age, such as:
Do you think age bias makes so-and-so unelectable?
Do you think voters are too ageist to elect so-and-so?
What do you think age represents in this election?
