| HOME | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
a Community Services Systems, Inc., Wynnewood, PA
Correspondence: Elias S. Cohen, JD, MPA, Executive Director, Community Services Systems, Inc., 136 Farwood Rd, Wynnewood, PA 19096. E-mail: elimarco{at}snip.net.
Decision Editor: Laurence G. Branch, PhD
One of the earliest expressions of the phenomenon now termed ageism appeared in Max
Lerner 1957
monumental volume, America as a Civilization:
It is natural for the culture to treat the old like the fag end of what was once good material... The most flattering thing you can say to an older American is that he "doesn't look his age" and "doesn't act his age"—as if it were the most damning thing in the world to look old...
Since the American has been taught that success belongs to push and youth, it is hard to revere those who no longer possess either. One can be fond of them, tolerate them, take reluctant care of them, speak whimsically of the crotchetyness and frailties; but these are far from the genuine homage of heart and mind. To build a code of conduct toward the old requires not only personal kindliness but generations of the pratice of values from which the old are not excluded—of which they are the summation...
The style of aging in America is not a graceful one. It is filled with constant efforts to fight off anxieties, until one encounters what Martin Gumpert has called the "shock of aging"—the sharp recognition (usually associated with disease) that one is "done for" and the final loss of confidence that comes with it. There come then, as Albrecht and Havighurst have put it, the "insults" that assail the aging person—the loss of physical attractiveness, the loss of life partners and friends through death, the loss of status, the loss of useful and respected roles in the family and culture, and the final insult of being imprisoned in a body which is the shell of its earlier self. (pp. 613–614)
Lerner's observations are relevant because they disclose an understanding of ageism somewhat more complex than that disclosed by the survey instrument discussed by
Palmore 2001 in this issue of The Gerontologist. Careful reading of the survey suggests not only a deep-seated cultural set of values, but also the "buy-in" by older people themselves about the intrinsic devaluation of old age by society at large.
Lerner's observations, now almost half a century old, no longer comport completely with today's realities of legal and social relationships of the elderly population and the larger U.S. society. Butler's subsequent coining of the term ageism at a public meeting in 1969 (
Bernstein 1969), its further explication that year (
Butler 1969), its distinction from gerontophobia (
Palmore 1972), the explicit definition in
Butler and Lewis 1973, and
Butler 1975 further explication launched the concept in gerontology.
So much has changed even in the last quarter century that examination of the phenomenon should move well beyond mere subjective assessments of "ageism" by its objects. Gerontologists and social activists can and should probe more deeply into the nature and source of ageism.
Ageism is complex. Butler and Lewis's definition, quoted and commented on in Why Survive? Growing Old in America (
Butler 1975), probably requires some refinement:
Ageism can be seen as a process of systematic stereotyping of and discrimination against people because they are old, just as racism and sexism accomplish this with skin color and gender. Old people are categorized as senile, rigid in thought and manner, old-fashioned in morality and skills... Ageism allows the younger generations to see older people as different from themselves; thus they subtly cease to identify with their elders as human beings.
Today, given legislative enactments regarding age discrimination in employment and in some other areas, it is clear that some ageism has now moved from the arena of morality and moral obligation to the arena of legal obligation. That kind of ageism (reflected in Palmore's Items 6, 14, and 15) appears to be encountered least, judging from the percentage reporting never encountering such (99%, 95%, and 90% respectively; Table 1,
Palmore 2001).
At the other end of the spectrum, the highest-rated ageist encounters were "Told a joke that pokes fun" (42% reporting 0 events), "Doctor or nurse assumed ailments caused by age" and "Told me ‘you’re too old for that'"(57% reporting 0 events for both items).
Palmore's survey seems to assume that all jokes about old age are ageist in nature. However, any review of humor and racism or anti-semitism, for example, would have to distinguish between the standup comedy of Godfrey Cambridge, Richard Pryor, and Chris Rock—comedy going back over three decades or more—and the racist humor approaching near scatalogical proportions of "Coon Songs," a category of American popular music in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Similarly, one would have to distinguish between the "Jewish humor" presented by comics like Jackie Mason, Myron Cohen, Buddy Hackett, and Mel Brooks and the humor set out in neo-Nazi literature.
African Americans tell jokes about Black people, peppering such with the N-word and other epithets that are not racist in the common sense, but rather are often intended to point out the absurdity in racism. Thus, racism in humor may be a function of the messenger rather than of the precise words of the message. Palmore's assumption about jokes in the survey is too broad and undifferentiated.
More subtle and difficult to identify are the events of the marketplace. What does the age distribution of CEOs and COOs of dot com and internet technology companies say about ageism (which we might suggest includes age preference)? Or, what would an age distribution of key players in the Gerontological Society of America, the American Society on Aging, the Association for Gerontology in Higher Education, or the American Geriatrics Society reveal? Are senior discounts and early bird specials reflections of ageism and, if so, how are these ubiquitous signs reflected in the survey? To what extent are ads portraying super-elders water skiing, playing polo, tennis, and so forth ageist by virtue of holding up to praise those who are able to continue being young, active, vigorous? Was the National Council on Aging/Advertising Council of America campaign a few years ago inherently offensive by virtue of its "Get Off Your Rocker!" theme, by suggesting that people in rockers either by preference or by virtue of disability were not as worthy as those who "got off their rockers" and participated? Did the campaign reinforce or break down stereotypes?
There is a difference between the too frequent dismissals of physical and medical complaints of the elderly by physicians and health professionals (Palmore's Items 12 and 13 specifically, and possibly Items 5, 10, 16, and 18) and the straightforward queries or comments of health professionals about vision, hearing, memory, balance, and urination, all of which involve age-associated declines or problems. How does the survey distinguish between the subjective processing by the elder and benign or malign intent of the professional?
Just as we learned that actual crime against elderly persons was not off the charts and that it was the fear of crime that was prevalent far beyond the incidence of crime, so it might be that perceptions of ageism by older adults may outstrip the event. Or, it may not. The point is that ageism does not necessarily exist because some elderly people may believe that it does.
This survey presented by
Palmore 2001 is, at best, a survey of perceptions of ageism. As such it is an excellent starting point for the systematic inquiry into ageism. The inquiry cannot avoid the intensive qualitative research that delves behind the perceptions of elderly people. Nor can it avoid examining the processes by which commercial, educational, eleemosynary, and service organizations select their respective leaders and participants and whether age distributions reflect ageism, age-appropriate activity, or some other factors altogether.
Dr.
Palmore 2001 concludes too much from his survey as it now stands. However, the survey, whatever its limits, requires gerontologists to consider ageism more systematically. Palmore's analysis forces attention not only on the benighted, inconsiderate, ignorant, and unkind ageist, but also on the self-hating elderly people who have bought into the negative stereotypes and who promote staying middle-aged (or younger) forever. Rosalie
Rosenfelt 1965 gave eloquent articulation to the phenomenon she aptly termed "the elderly mystique." To what extent is what she described still the case? And to what extent does socioeconomic status make a difference? I have a hunch that elderly college professors have a very different "ageism experience" from the retired bank teller or self-employed electrician or family farmer. And I would suspect that housing, community circumstances and environment, and presence or absence of family also affect perceptions of ageist encounters.
Ageism, like racism, sexism, and homophobia, is complex in its generation and in its perception. It deserves more and better attention than it has received. Dr. Palmore deserves our profound thanks for his provocative piece.
Received for publication May 22, 2001. Accepted for publication June 5, 2001.
 |
References |
|---|
 TOP References |
|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|---|
