Talk:Ageism/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Inconsistent Description of Adultism

In the section "Distinction from other age-related bias" is the following text:

Adultism is a predisposition towards adults, which is seen as biased against children, youth, and all young people who are not addressed or viewed as adults.^[1] This includes political candidacies, jobs, and cultural settings where the supposed greater vitality and/or physical beauty of youth is more appreciated than the supposed greater moral and/or intellectual rigor of adulthood.

This is inconsistent. It describes adultism, presumably correctly, as being bias in favour of being adult but then moves on to talking about vitality and youthful appearance being preferred which would seem to be the opposite, i.e. favouring the young.

It seems reasonable that there may be a word for favouring those in their prime, i.e. adults and neither children or adolescents or people in their senior years but, if adultism is it, the description needs to be much clearer. Otherwise the paragraph needs to be revised, probably by removing the comment about vitality and youtthful appearance or explaining what that preference is called as it isn't adultism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steve James (talk • contribs) 00:58, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

References

^ Lauter And Howe (1971) Conspiracy of the Young. Meridian Press.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 September 2020 and 6 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ywrhea.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:00, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Spsjaggy1.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:36, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

The References

Um...where does this article cite its sources at all? Seriously, I don't see any references or even a bibliography. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.27.211.52 (talk) 00:25, 16 February 2007 (UTC).

I semi-fixed the syntax on the references so they'll arrive in the section. This article needs to be rewritten with better citations though, that much is true. - Freechild 06:20, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I just want to add that the year cited for when Butler coined the term is incorrect. Robert N. Butler states that he "originally coined the term 'ageism' in 1968. As chairman of the District of Columbia Advisory Committee on Aging, I had been actively involved in the acquisition of public housing for older people." Further, ageism more succinctly refers to a systematic stereotyping of and discrimination against people because they are old, just as racism and sexism accomplish this with skin color and gender." This is from Butler's article, "Dispelling ageism: The cross-cutting intervention," published in the Spring/Summer 1993 issues of Generations, 07387806, Vol. 17, page 75-79.

He later adds that "ageism allows the younger generation to see older people as different from themselves; thus they subtly cease to identify with their elders as human beings (Butler, 1969)." Reference: Butler, R. N., 1969. "Ageism: Another Form of Bigotry" Gerontologist 9:243-46. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.91.45.249 (talk) 21:23, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Old comments

What needs to be included in this article is that whether "ageism" is an invidious form of discrimination is not something on which a consensus has been reached, at least not to the extent that there has been on racism.

For example, P.J. O'Rourke on ageism being a silly concept:

"A person who failed to discriminate between a six year old and a twenty six year old would be insane in almost all circumstances and arrested in some." --All the Trouble in the World

However, there has been enough of a consensus that the article should include a link to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act in the US and whatever other legislation exists. Ellsworth 16:17, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

Specific incidents of high-profile ageism (alleged or otherwise) need to be noted. Jane Pauley comes to mind. Mike H 22:00, Sep 5, 2004 (UTC)

Just like schyler? Give me a good explanation and I'll leave it as it is. --Requiem the 18^th_(email) 03:23, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Youth/Elder differences

Has there been any research/criticism about the bias towards recognising success in younger people rather than older? It seems that someone who attains, say, a PhD in their late teens is more praisworthy than someone who attains it later in life when, all things being equal, all PhDs should held in similar regard. Would something to this effect be worth mentioning in the article? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.248.132.73 (talk • contribs) .

Well it's understandable that someone who accomplishes something at 19 is more praised than the one who does a similar thing with 10 more years of experience and time. It's like comparing someone who does task X in 10 minutes compared to the other who does it in 15 minutes. This is not a way of judging a person, but when judging this accomplishment the younger person is more impressive. It doesn't mean he's more intelligent or "superior". --Sheep Select 00:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Much Point of Viewism has crept into this article

I visited this article for the first time a few minutes ago and found it to be full of absurd statements. Going back through the history, I find that it was reasonably encyclopedic before about 29 November 2006, when it began acquiring statements like "This (meaning Ageism) includes any assumption of familiarity or sameness due to one's age" and "...Parents, by assuming their disconnectedness and Adultist tendencies" (this one was reverted and changed to a statement about ageism against middle-aged people) and "Automatically assuming that infants and small children are helpless, incapable, and ignorant" (that last one is the most absurd -- it is not ageism to assume that infants are helpless, thank you, because infants are helpless). This has gone from an article about the real and invidious phenomenon of discrimination against people on the basis of age to a silly essay that asserts that it is a terrible thing to think that any person's age has any relationship to any other attribute of that person. I am tempted to revert to the revision as of 12:05, 29 November 2006 by KPalicz, which appears to be the last sensible version, but I suppose a few of the changes since then might be justified. --orlady 03:24, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with your assessment, mostly because I made the statements that you dislike. However, I would suggest that there is value in leaving the concepts introduced in those statements, e.g. pedaphobia, ephebiphobia, and geronphobia. Maybe I'll try to rewrite these w/o the POV. -Freechild 04:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

If your interest is in creating a dictionary of phobias, may I suggest that the encyclopedia entries about the topic of ageism might not be the best place to pursue that interest? Fear is not the same thing as discrimination. --orlady 05:01, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

The relationship between ageism and the phobias cited is encyclopedic; however, the process of vetting Wikipedia entries is simply not worth it to me. Enjoy the revision. -Freechild 05:35, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

orlady, is it not YOUR POV that is creeping in? By asserting the possible absurdity of such statements because YOU feel it is, thus injecting your POV into it, aren't you making the same mistake you assert freechild to have made? As for the phobia things, I was unaware science with sources was unacceptable on Wikipedia.Theowannabe 06:46, 11 January 2007 (UTC)Chip

With no discussion on this for more than a month, and with a bit of clean-up, I am removing the POV tag. - Freechild 19:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Having studied sociology of aging, I've found that a large portion of reference materials on the topic of Ageism tend to contain a large ration of opinion to fact.

One example from this article that I find particularly alarming is the statement of fact that statistics from the Weakest Link showing that older people are voted off more often than expected proves that the contestents strongly disliked having older people on stage with them. In terms of both hard logic and common sense this conclusion is absurd. In terms of logic, it more or less goes without saying that correlation does not imply causation--that is, just because older contestants were voted off of a game show at what is interpreted to be an abnormally high rate (and this interpretation is entirely determined by Levitt (et al)'s subjective views on the apparently universal strategy that determines how a contestant will vote). More simply put, Levitt makes his conclusions by comparing the statistics that he was given with those of a non-existent control group, its data being a totally subjective result of the writer's assumptions about the game. To be more concise, the older contestants may very well have been voted off early on because of stereotypes concerning age and mental performance. But by the point in the game in which voting against one's true competitors begins, stereotypes are less likely to be used as observations about the abilities of the individual member of the stereotyped group become more relevant. So, as an alternative explanation, even if an older contenstant conforms to a preconceived stereotype of, say, mental slugishness, the average contestant may have noticed that the older competitor was more knowledgable (possibly attributed to his or her longer time being alive, being able to accumulate more knowledge) even if s/he struggled in earlier rounds. Knowing that the final round allows a contestant more time to consider a question, the older peer may be considered a greater threat than a younger person who may instead be more skilled at reflex-type answering or banking strategies.

The explanation that I write there may be totally wrong but my point is that it would be irresponsible to draw the conclusion that typical Weakest Link contestants are instead intimidated by older participants, just as it is equally (or more so) irresponsible to use Levit's unsubstianted assumptions to declare that a great deal of people dislike the company of older people. I'll admit that it serves its function of showing the difference between stereotype and prejudice. But it is simply unobjective AND offense to document Levitt's conclusions as fact unless it is extensively rewritten to indicate the subjectivity of the scenario and essentially stated that the Weakest Link example is being used only as a hypothetical to define the important terminology. The only other valid use for this source/example is as an example of popular beliefs and publications about the role of ageism in our culture.

Again, this is not the only example that I noticed. I point it out in such great detail because I attempted to edit the article to put that example in its proper context but found that I would have to make major changes that I was not only struggling with but also felt that I should not implement without discussion. Please give me some feedback. One final clarification: I don't mean to say that older people are not discriminated against through stereotyping and prejudice in any number of situations. I just believe that this example is a flawed and subjective way to convey that point. I will be reapplying the POV tag until these issues are addressed or if a number of other users disagree. - Korbnep (talk) 22:16, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

National Youth Administration was not about curing ageism

Kudos to Freechild for so quickly addressing my skepticism about the NYA organization being associated with remedying ageism.

After reading his input, I now am more thoroughly convinced that it does not belong in this article. The NYA was about providing economic opportunity for youth during a time when the economy was not producing enough jobs for any age group, not ending discrimination against youth. Eleanor Roosevelt's comments were also about economic opportunity. The document referenced[1] says (in part; the added emphasis is mine):

The huge numbers of unemployed youth of the 1930s underscored several fears adults had for society. Conservatives saw disgruntled young people as a fertile ground for revolutionary politics while liberals mourned the disillusionment and apathy spreading among American youth. Educators feared that without some type of financial aid, colleges would suffer irreversible damage. ER worried that long-term unemployment and borderline poverty would undermine young Americans' faith in democracy. She told The New York Times that "I live in real terror when I think we may be losing this generation. We have got to bring these young people into the active life of the community and make them feel that they are necessary."(1)

Accordingly, I deleted that chunk from the article. --orlady 16:12, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I won't respond directly to your assertion about the NYA, because I don't believe that type of squabbling is conducive to a healthy WP. However, I do not want to loose the effect of the ER quote, so I re-inserted it with a different phrasing. – Freechild (¡!¡!¡!¡) 16:48, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

This dispute is not about the NYA, but rather about accurate interpretation of information found in cited sources. The source you cite never once suggests (much less states) that E.R. was concerned about discrimination against youth. She definitely was concerned that youth would become disengaged and disenchanted due to lack of opportunity, but there is no hint that she perceived discrimination against youth. When you quote her out of context, it is possible to infer that she was thinking about discrimination, but the context provided by the source does not hint at any such thing. Furthermore, the NYA appears to have focused on giving youth opportunities, not on addressing discrimination on the basis of age. Thus, you can use that quote in an article about youth engagement, but it does not belong in Ageism. --orlady 18:40, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Your original comment makes assertions about the NYA. The comment above makes assertions about the NYA. However, I am addressing ER's quote - not the NYA. Let's not mistake that. The ER quote is appropriate in the context of the article where I inserted it, and I have not quoted her out of context - she was often quoted expressing her dismay about the conditions young people faced simply because of their age - and that is ageism. – Freechild (¡!¡!¡!¡) 18:48, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I definitely don't read her quote the same way that you do. It's easy to read something into two sentences taken out of context: "I live in real terror when I think we may be losing this generation. We have got to bring these young people into the active life of the community and make them feel that they are necessary." She says that youth have a need and that there are serious consequences of not addressing that need, but nothing in that quotation indicates a theory regarding the underlying cause of the situation. I don't know what else she said in the same interview or article, but there is nothing in the article you cited [2] that so much as hints at "discrimination" being the cause of the problems she describes. Rather, the focus of the contextual article is on unemployment and poverty as causes. Furthermore, the material I have read regarding the National Youth Administration focuses on it as an education/training and employment program, aimed at young people on relief. I realize that you perceive the NYA as an outgrowth of American Youth Congress, which makes it a youth voice initiative but not necessarily an anti-ageism initiative. My bottom line is that neither the quotation you have chosen, the reference you cite, nor other information I have consulted provide support for the point that you want to make. --orlady 19:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I do not care to argue about this with you Orlady. If you don't like the quote, be bold and remove it. – Freechild (¡!¡!¡!¡) 20:47, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

But just to answer your mis-perception, according to the National Park Service, the NYA was an outgrowth of ER's relationship with Joseph Lash and the American Youth Congress [3]. And your report that ER was concerned with just the economic conditions of youth - that's not an either/or situation. Lash reported that "Mrs. Roosevelt... was concerned with young people and what was happening to them in the Depression."[4] – Freechild (¡!¡!¡!¡) 20:59, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your recent edits to the Ageism article, Freechild. --orlady 22:05, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Spelling

Yesterday an unregistered user changed all of the spellings of the word "ageism" to "agism", minus the e stating that spelling it as "ageism" is a common mistake. There is little evidence online that substantiates that. Anyone have any thoughts?– Freechild (¡!¡!¡!¡) 16:24, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Young People

So why is the subject of discrimination of young people barely included in this page? It seems like it is more for the discrimination of older people. Please add some more information in this area.toaster 00:33, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm working on it. KPalicz 16:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Obviously not working on it very diligently... :( KPalicz 14:27, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Finally got a bit on ageism in employment for youth. But there is still a lot more to do. KPalicz 14:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

what are the laws in america?

students such as hannaford are trying to understand age laws in the us, uk and europe.

"So why is the subject of discrimination of young people barely included in this page? It seems like it is more for the discrimination of older people?" ~　Maybe for the same reason that it is popular to state that racism is institutionalized and one "can't be racist against white people". The reality is that "old guy" is a dehumanizing expression heard daily without repercussion in the US and other countries, whereas "young guy" has no stigma attached to it at all.

Well, if we're going by that, then the truth is that ageism towards the young is worse than ageism towards the old, and therefore, anti-young ageism should be more focused on. Old people are still the ones with most of the privilege and power, so being called an "old guy" is not a big concern. I don't see young people with most of the money. I don't see young people making the laws. I don't see young people running most of our institutions. I don't see old people doing most of the dangerous, back-breaking labor. I don't see old people fighting our wars. The young are the ones taken much less seriously than the old. The young are the ones told to respect and listen to elders just for being born before them, regardless of whether the elder actually deserves respect. These are worse problems than being called an "old guy". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.228.9.173 (talk) 17:55, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

MADD

I added Mothers Against Drunk Driving in the "see also" section, and it was immediately removed. I think a link to the MADD article should be in that section, as MADD is smong the largest and most influential ageist orgainzations in North America. MADD's agenda isn't one against drunk driving, but one of promoting hatred and prejudice against young people, therefore I think it should be included in that section as an ageist organization. 96.21.185.101 (talk) 03:23, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I removed it because I did not see how it related to ageism. After reviewing the reasoning above and the Mothers Against Drunk Driving article I see no evidence in the article that Mothers Against Drunk Driving is an ageism group. I still do not believe it belongs in the article. A new name 2008 (talk) 03:31, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I believe understand your reasoning about MADD potentially creating ageist sentiments. But any such resulting ageism seems an incidental, de facto side effect rather than a strongly purposeful, goal de jure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Korbnep (talk • contribs) 06:07, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Age laws

The drinking, smoking, voting, etc ages aren't mentioned in this article. It should be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.55.134.137 (talk) 23:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposed new section on the history of Ageism

Dear editorial colleagues, I would like to propose new or expanded historical sections to the following Wikipedia pages: Sexism, Racism, Ageism and Classism (Class discrimination), with specific focuses on when was the first recorded case of each and how have these concepts changed over time to contemporary times in different cultures. I am more than happy to work on a first draft (with original sources of course) for your consideration, a have some degree of knowledge in these areas. However, I am unwilling to put the time and effort into such an endeavor if any of my esteemed editorial colleagues here do not consider this to be necessary and/or welcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.14.164.195 (talk) 20:01, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

The Lord God, and Saviour, "Jesus Christ"

The first recorded instance of this was in the Bible, where the Disciples try to discriminate against children based on their Age, and Jesus rejects this 134.148.66.152 (talk) 12:54, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Do you have a specific passage from the Bible you can refer to for this? And can you provide an independent source that verifies that this is actually the first recorded instance of ageism? Ivanvector (talk) 14:15, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

So before the "time of christ," humans were accepting of others, regardless of race, religion, age, etc.? That bible sounds wonderful.

Inconsistency in advocacy section re: lead

The advocacy section is almost completely about youth advocacy, while the lead emphasizes that youth advocacy isn't really what most people mean when they talk about ageism.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Ageism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110706181639/http://www.laws.justice.gc.ca/en/showdoc/cs/C-46/bo-ga:l_XXIII-gb:s_718//en to http://www.laws.justice.gc.ca/en/showdoc/cs/C-46/bo-ga:l_XXIII-gb:s_718//en#anchorbo-ga:l_XXIII-gb:s_718

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:05, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Ageism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:56, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Ageism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070213202808/http://www.zmag.org/0009.htm to http://www.zmag.org/0009.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.stop-discrimination.info/6423.0.html?&no_cache=1&mc_glossary%5Bcategories%5D=1
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080627184745/http://www.aarpmagazine.org/lifestyle/a2003-05-21-mag-justice_age.html to http://www.aarpmagazine.org/lifestyle/a2003-05-21-mag-justice_age.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.laws.justice.gc.ca/en/showdoc/cs/C-46/bo-ga%3Al_XXIII-gb%3As_718//en
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110817013151/http://www.agediscrimination.info/cases/Pages/ItemPage.aspx?Item=412 to http://www.agediscrimination.info/cases/Pages/ItemPage.aspx?Item=412

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:07, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Convert to bullets?

I suggest the following be changed so that those dot things are now bullet points or, in the case of WikiText, asterickses:

Australia is however lagging behind the rest of the first world in tackling ageism outside of the employment sector. For example, although it is acknowledged to be ageist practice to identify and target younger adult drivers, every state in Australia has a probationary plate system in place designed for that specific purpose.  This is tolerated however as the Age Discrimination Act says that, in some circumstances, treating someone differently because of their age won’t be against the law. This is known as an exemption and includes <br>
•things done in compliance with Commonwealth laws, including laws about taxation, social security and migration <br>
•things done in compliance with state and territory laws <br>
•certain health and employment programmes <br>
•youth wages or direct compliance with industrial agreements and awards. <ref>[https://www.humanrights.gov.au/know-your-rights-age-discrimination When is age discrimination not against the law?] humanrights.gov.au Retrieved 7 March 2017 </ref>

References

Added content to employment section

Hello! I'm currently in a class where we've been asked to contribute to an article based on research we're doing for a final project. I've added a few sentences to the Employment section regarding the discrimination of midlife women in the workplace. Thanks for your thoughts on any improvements. Spsjaggy1 (talk) 21:49, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Added content to the Related campaigns section

Hi again. I added a short paragraph about a new movie featuring the perspective of an older woman and how it challenges the notion of a middle-aged woman's invisibility. If it doesn't belong in that section, please let me know if I should move it into the Hollywood section. Thanks! Spsjaggy1 (talk) 07:39, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

OK Boomer

So far this has only been added as a link, it should also be intregrated into the article itself, due to it being a very common form of ageist prejudice in the late 00s. --141.20.217.12 (talk) 15:29, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

illlustration

As the term "kitty ageism" is not discussed in the article, the caption on the illustration is not appropriate--and I'm not sure the illustration is a suitable one in the first place. DGG ( talk ) 05:34, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

[1] Lauter And Howe (1971) Conspiracy of the Young. Meridian Press.

[1]