Albuquerque Journal

Why do we talk about older people so negatively?

- BY STACY TORRES LOS ANGELES TIMES

Age matters, but so do words. While pundits debate President Joe Biden’s cognitive fitness for office (in light of) special counsel Robert K. Hur’s classified documents report, the rest of us have a different problem: the “elderly.”

Older people themselves aren’t the issue, but the way we talk about them is. We must change the language our society uses to describe older adults.

In Hur’s characteri­zation of Biden as “a sympatheti­c, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory,” the word “elderly” leaps out as most cringe-worthy in its power to conjure images of frailty and helplessne­ss.

Many of us who study aging avoid “senior citizen” and “elderly,” which can reinforce negative stereotype­s that isolate old people as a different and separate social group.

Sociologis­t Arlie Hochschild calls the seemingly respectabl­e “senior citizen” an “unfortunat­e phrase suggesting a large Boy Scout with a gold watch.” But just because “elderly” is so ubiquitous doesn’t make it appropriat­e or innocuous.

Ageism remains a widely accepted prejudice. I love late-night talk shows, yet a sampling of hosts’ recent monologues reveals rampant jokes targeted toward old people — yes, I’m looking at you, Stephen Colbert.

Ageism defies political persuasion, as one can see in Nikki Haley’s “grumpy old men” campaign, which takes cheap shots at Biden’s and Donald Trump’s ages. Picking on older people doesn’t seem to stir the same type of outrage as insults about other social identities such as race, ethnicity and gender.

Childish laughs and complacent language hurt everyone, exacerbati­ng social exclusion and age discrimina­tion and instilling a fear of growing older. Internaliz­ed ageism, prevalent among older adults, is associated with negative health outcomes including lower life expectancy, high blood pressure and reduced self-esteem.

Culture change is hard and progresses at a glacial pace. But as our older adult population swells, the rest of us must catch up with choosing age-inclusive language. Content producers can take the lead in mitigating ageist portrayals, but everyone should scrutinize the language we use.

Recent revisions to the Associated Press style guide, drawing 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 “elderly” and “senior citizen,” the AP suggests using “older adults” or “older person/people” in general phrases and employing more precise age ranges when it’s possible, such as “new housing for people 65 and over.”

I’ve wrestled with decisions around language to describe the older adults I write about in my forthcomin­g book. I don’t use “elderly” but I’ve come to use “elder,” inspired by geriatrici­an Louise Aronson’s reclaiming of the word to connote respect for people over age 65. I also don’t treat “old” like a dirty word to avoid. As someone who lost my mother to an early death from cancer at age 53, I hope to live long enough to grow “old.”

We can look to recent debates over inclusive language when describing race, ethnicity and gender as precedents for how making simple tweaks to our language around age can benefit older people. Just as we can capitalize “Black,” adopt they/them pronouns, and use “Latine/x,” we can adjust how we refer to old people.

So the next time you chuckle at a quip or a stereotype about an older person, consider this: Depending on your age, you’re either stoking the flames of self-loathing or laughing at your future self. Either way, the joke is on you.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States