Age matters, but so do words.
While experts debate President Biden's cognitive fitness for office and the possible motivations behind the damaging language contained in special counsel Robert K. Hur's classified documents report, the rest of us have a different problem: the “elderly.”
Older people themselves are not the problem, but the way we talk about them is. We must change the language our society uses to describe older adults.
Among the ageist stereotypes in Hur's characterization of Biden as “a sympathetic, well-intentioned old man with a bad memory,” the word “old man” stands out as the most embarrassing for its power to evoke images of fragility and helplessness.
Many of us who study aging avoid the terms “older people” and “elderly,” which can Reinforce negative stereotypes that isolate older people. as a different and separate social group.
Sociologist Arlie Hochschild calls the seemingly respectable “old man” an “unfortunate phrase that suggests a big boy scout with a gold watch.” But just because “older people” is so ubiquitous doesn't mean it's appropriate. or harmless.
Age discrimination remains a widely accepted prejudice. I love late-night talk shows, but a sampling of the hosts' recent monologues reveals wild jokes aimed at older people (yes, I'm looking at you, Stephen Colbert). Age discrimination defies political persuasion, as can be seen in Nikki Haley's “grumpy old men” campaign, which attacks the ages of Biden and Donald Trump. Picking on older people doesn't seem to provoke the same kind of outrage as insults about other social identities like race, ethnicity, and gender.
The issue of ageism arose during the pandemic, and COVID-19's derogatory nickname, “Boomer Remover,” trended on social media. But childish laughter and complacent language harm everyone, exacerbate social exclusion and age discrimination, and instill fear of growing old. Internalized ageism, which is prevalent among older adults, is associated with negative health outcomes such as shorter life expectancy, high blood pressure, and reduced self-esteem.
Cultural change is difficult and moves at a glacial pace. But as our senior population increases, the rest of us need to catch up on choosing age-inclusive language. Content producers can take the initiative to mitigate ageist depictions, but everyone should examine the language we use.
Recent revisions to the Associated Press style guide, based on guidance from the American Geriatrics Society, offer a good start to writing about older people with greater specificity, accuracy, and respect. In addition to retiring “seniors” and “seniors,” the AP suggests using “seniors” or “seniors” in general phrases and using more precise age ranges when possible, such as “new housing for people aged 65 and over.”
I have struggled with decisions about language to describe the older adults I write about in my upcoming book. I don't use “elderly,” but I have come to use “elderly,” inspired by geriatrician Louise Aronson's revival of the word to connote respect for people over 65. I also don't treat “old” as a dirty word. to avoid. As someone who lost her mother to premature death from cancer at age 53, I hope I live long enough to grow old.
We can draw on recent debates about inclusive language by describing race, ethnicity, and gender as precedents for how making simple adjustments to our language based on age can benefit older people. Just as we can capitalize “black,” adopt they/them pronouns, and use “Latino/x,” we can adjust the way we refer to older people.
So the next time you laugh at a joke or stereotype about an older person, consider this: Depending on your age, you're either fanning the flames of self-loathing or laughing at your future self. Either way, the joke is on you.
Stacy Torres He is an assistant professor of sociology at dDepartment of Yessocial and bbehavioral Yessciences at UC San Francisco.
