THIS CHAIR ROCKS
pushing back against ageism—which affects everyone
This article describes Manhattan MiniStorage’s ad campaign as “proudly progressive.” I wouldn’t say that about this billboard, would you?
Nope. It’s true of some of the company’s billboards, but there’s nothing progressive about ageism—no matter where you store it.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I think this information is good for everyone, why target older adults?
This brochure from the Canadian government, Safe Food Handling for Adults Ages 60 and Over, explains that older people are less likely to recover fully from food poisoning because our less robust immune systems and greater likelihood of underlying health conditions make it harder to fight off infections. I’m sure that’s the case. It’s also the case for people of all ages who are immunocompromised or have chronic diseases. So yes, the title and premise of this public-health handout are ageist.
Ageist or not? I can’t imagine any other “ism” being allowed in that question.
Right you are. This bus ad is ageist because it frames aging as a negative and the goal of slowing it as desirable.
There’s exciting evidence that stem cells may one day prove useful in treating a range of diseases related to aging. But aging itself is not a disease—aging is living—and everyone wakes up a day older.