“Don’t trust anyone over 30.” 

If that statement resonates with you in a gut way, chances are you are one of 76 million Americans like me who were born between 1946 and 1964, known as the Baby Boomers. 

Never before in our nation’s history was a group of people defined so clearly as a generation and that’s understandable. We came of age during a post–World War II time of huge economic growth and surging mass communication, in which the medium of television vied with and eventually overtook print and radio as the major cultural conduit for American identity.  

We were the very first cohort of children to be marketed to directly, via kiddie shows, Saturday morning cartoons, breakfast cereals, and advertisements urging us to convince our parents to buy us Mickey Mouse wristwatches, Lone Ranger and Howdy Doody lunchboxes, Barbie dolls, and Superman and Cinderella Halloween costumes.  

In public school classrooms and auditoriums, many of us were thrilled to witness Alan Shepard become the first American astronaut to be launched into space and later, three more astronauts walk on the Moon. We were shocked by the assassination of John F. Kennedy, and five years after that, the assassinations of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy. 

These are just some of the events that impacted Boomers’ formative years. Other events of equal impact can be ascribed to any previous or subsequent generation (think the Depression and World War II for the Silent and Greatest generations, personal computers and the energy crisis for Gen Xers, and social media and Sept. 11 for Millennials). 

But our culture raises a bigger issue when we’re talking about any age-based group of people: Is it valid to make generalizations about them beyond the fact that they grew up at the same time? Do they all think and act the same? Do they all want the same things? Are they all equally healthy and successful? 

What Makes a Generation? 

According to Janine Vanderburg, CEO of the strategic consulting firm Encore Roadmap, “Technically, a generation is a group of people born within the same time period, within 15 to 20 years. I think it’s important to note that the idea of generations shaping behavior … is relatively recent in history.” 

A case in point regarding Boomers’ overall behavior: We grew up in a time of great domestic social turmoil with the Vietnam War; Woodstock and the counterculture; nuclear proliferation; women’s liberation; and the Civil Rights and environmental movements. Many of us marched and protested. But many more of us didn’t. We were so diverse and huge in number that pundits and advertisers have tried to define the Boomers, but ultimately can’t. Still, they keep trying.  

What’s behind this impulse to stereotype us? 

“It’s a cultural shortcut,” says Vanderburg. “It’s easier to look at people in buckets, than to look at individuals and all that they might bring to the workplace or any other setting (their experience, insights, values, interests). And it’s great clickbait! Think of all the headlines that pit Boomers vs. Millennials in some way, suggesting that we are competing for jobs and housing.” 

So, the false assumptions about attributions start to add up, justifying the “OK, Boomer” dismissals. All Boomers are selfish, greedy geezers who can’t handle technology and resist change. Let’s tackle each of these. 

 The Stereotypes Don’t Hold 

First of all, research shows that as people of the same age group get older, they actually become more different from one another. That’s because our lives vary greatly in experience and challenges, as well as how we react to them. That’s why it’s absurd and demeaning to lump Boomers into a group called “the elderly.” 

When it comes to the “selfish, greedy geezers” label, it just doesn’t apply. True, Boomers possess almost 52% of all wealth in the U.S., but it’s not equally distributed among us. One in 10 of us live below the poverty line. Only a little more than half of us have retirement accounts, and about 50% of us are working or plan to work past the age of 70—82% of whom list finances as a main reason. And selfish? Within the next 20 years, affluent Boomers will be passing down about $72 trillion in assets to their Gen X, Millennial, and Gen Z heirs.  

Can Boomers handle technology? According to the Population Reference Bureau, more than 80% of us use high-speed Internet, own a computer, laptop or tablet, and have a smartphone. And 80% of us are on social media at least once a day. 

As for resisting change, we’ve had decades of experience accepting and adapting to all kinds of iterations of cars, appliances, economic upturns and downturns, physical changes in our bodies, and the loss of peers to illness and death. Resistance has always been an impossibility and the overwhelming majority of Boomers have a history of eagerly embracing—and creating—change. 

What’s True About Generations? 

This same form of takedown of Boomer stereotypes can be applied to any other age cohort. Are all Gen-Zers money-obsessed and lacking a work ethic? Do all Millennials feel entitled and are they really glued to their smartphones? Behind all generational stereotyping is lazy thinking that discourages us to examine and accept the statistics that would disprove any of these claims.   

Adds Vanderburg, “[The] Pew Research [Center] made a huge statement about this whole issue when it announced last year that it would move away from generational labels in its research and instead look at factors like life stage, historical context and period effects.” In other words, our personal perspectives and behaviors are affected not so much by the chronological age we share with others but by whether we were children, teens, or adults when we experienced powerful social events. 

Extensive studies done by Pew have led the organization to rethink how people should talk about generations. Its president, Michael Dimock, has offered these considerations: 

“Generational categories are not scientifically defined.” Sources can differ in their time parameters for each generation, such as assigning 1950 to 1965 birthdates for Boomers. Furthermore, people themselves vary in how they self-identify. For example, many late Boomers may actually see themselves as members of Gen X.  

“Generational labels can lead to stereotypes and oversimplification.” You’ve already seen proof that these impulses are problematic. 

“Discussions about generation often focus on differences instead of similarities.” If we really think about it and look closely enough at the people of all ages whom we actually know, we find that we all care about being happy, finding meaningful work, supporting ourselves and our families, and staying engaged in the world.  

“Conventional views of generations can carry an upper-class bias.” In every generation there are millions of exceptions to the stereotypes, mostly among marginalized subpopulations, such as minorities and low-income and poor people. 

“People change over time.” If you’re a Boomer now who didn’t trust people over 30, have you changed your mind now that you’ve become one? 

So, what’s the best way for us to understand whether we’re biased against any generation different from ours? Vanderburg offers an answer. 

“My STOP and ASK rule: When a stereotypical thought about someone of another age pops into your head, STOP and ASK, ‘Why do I believe that? Is there another possible explanation?’  

“Works every time.” 

Jeanette Leardi is a Portland-based social gerontologist, community educator, and author of Aging Sideways: Changing Our Perspectives on Getting Older. She promotes older adult empowerment through her popular presentations and workshops in journaling, memoir writing, ethical will creation, brain fitness, creativity, ageism, intergenerational communication, and caregiver support to people of all ages. Learn more about her work on her website. 

The Boomers are Here

Ageism and Older Women: Beating the Stereotypes

Our Inner Ageist

The post Who Are the Boomers … Really? appeared first on 3rd Act Magazine.

BY JEANETTE LEARDI

Many of us remember the time during a 1984 debate with 56-year-old Democrat Walter Mondale when incumbent President Ronald Reagan addressed the elephant in the room––his age.

“I will not make age an issue of this campaign,” said the 73-year-old Reagan, with a wry smile. “I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent’s youth and inexperience.”

The line got a laugh, but the question was on the table even then: How old is too old to run for office?

Today, it seems, fewer voters are laughing. That’s because more people have begun to assume that the current U.S. government is less of a democracy and more of a gerontocracy—that is, rule by old people. But is this really the case?

If it appears that there are more old people running the government, it’s primarily because in general people are living longer. Currently, the U.S. average life expectancy at birth is 74 years for men and 80 years for women. The average age of members of the U.S. House is about 58 and 64 for the Senate. The current Cabinet? 58. That’s a far cry from back in 1775, when the average life expectancy at birth was 37 and the average age of the members of the Continental Congress was 44. So, today’s political representatives are decades younger than their projected lifespan.

In all fairness, along with this extended lifespan comes the increased possibility of experiencing certain health conditions such as physical frailty and cognitive impairment that can arise in our later years. And that’s what concerns many voters.

So perhaps that’s what they mean when they believe that someone is “too old” to run for or to hold office. However, according to American gerontologist Kate de Madeiros, PhD, professor in the department of sociology and anthropology at Concordia University, Montreal, “‘Too old’ is complicated and has less to do with age, in my opinion, and more to do with finding reasons to label someone as ‘incompetent’ or to suggest their views don’t align with ‘current thinking.’”

“My main concern,” she continues, “is that behaviors are interpreted through a biased lens of cognitive decline. Every gaffe or stumble lends support to the idea that a person is somehow not competent. Forget where you put your keys when you’re 80, people think you have dementia. Forget where you put your keys when you’re 40, people think you’re busy.”

Geriatrician Allen Power, MD, clinical associate professor of medicine at the University of Rochester in New York and Schlegel Chair in Aging and Dementia Innovation at the Schlegel–UW Research Institute for Aging, Ontario, clarifies a common misunderstanding about the aging process. “Society also tends to misinterpret some of the normal changes of aging as signs of decline in cognitive ability,” he says. “Some examples might include moving or speaking more slowly and deliberately, or occasional verbal slips or drawing a blank on a name or place.”

For de Madeiros, cognitive competence involves more than just remembering names or thinking quickly on your feet and in some respects actually improves with age. “There is substantial evidence,” she asserts, “that points to accumulated experience through age as contributing to better decision-making than cognitive tasks such as speed of processing or word recall.”

Power explains a deeper reason for connecting increased age to decreased cognition: Western cultural bias against old age. “Chronological age is only part of what defines a person and there is no set rule for when or if a person is too cognitively old,” he says. “There is prevalent ageism in our society—an attitude that assumes that older people are less capable than younger people.”

“Part of this stems from a society that focuses on youthful concepts of beauty and celebrates people who run the fastest, earn the most, or balance the most tasks,” he continues. “These are skewed values that do not see the wealth of wisdom and guidance that comes from those who don’t fit that image.”

Nevertheless, the question remains about what to do when there is concern about candidates’ competence to serve in government.

“I think it’s risky to require testing based on chronological age,” Power says. “One could argue that members of Congress who are much younger have displayed behaviors that might lead one to question their fitness to be an effective legislator. And serious physical, psychiatric, and cognitive illnesses can occur at younger ages as well as older. I think the most equitable approach is that all people in such a high position be required to have physical, psychiatric, and cognitive evaluations on a regular basis.”

Ultimately, the issue of age in politics reflects the broader issue of ageism that is found in our culture in health care, housing, employment, and beyond.

“Biased and uniformed attitudes about older candidates translate into biased attitudes toward older people in general,” says de Madeiros. “It’s not just the elections that should concern us. It’s the spillage of misinformed views that affects all older people.

“We have to resist what marketers tell us about age—that aging is bad, that older people are not cognitively trustworthy, that age alone predicts biased behavior, that generations are in competition with each other, and so on.”

Power agrees: “It is said that ageism is prejudice against our own future selves,” he says, “so much of it is driven by fear of our own mortality. The more we can begin to have open discussions between generations, the sooner we can dispel the myths of aging and create a more inclusive and just society.”

When voters focus on how old, rather than how competent, political candidates are, everyone loses. That also goes for how we see and behave toward our fellow citizens. Given that all of us are aging and hope to do so well into the future, prioritizing our individual needs and gifts over our accumulated years sounds like just the ticket we need to create a robust pro-aging nation.

And that’s something all voters can—and should—support.

Jeanette Leardi is a Portland-based social gerontologist, writer, editor, and community educator who has a passion for older adult empowerment. She gives popular presentations and workshops in journaling, memoir writing, ethical will creation, brain fitness, creativity, ageism, intergenerational communication, and caregiver support to people of all ages. Learn more about her work at jeanetteleardi.com.

Young Voters, Old Candidates

Experienced Voters, Older Candidates

Don’t Bet Your Future on the Political Winds

The post Should Age Be on the Ticket? appeared first on 3rd Act Magazine.

“What’s age got to do with it, got to do with it, got to do with it?”

Thinking about the overarching theme of this issue, I found myself singing Tina Turner’s biggest-selling single, “What’s Love Got to Do With It?”—only substituting the words age for love.

Well then, what does age have to do with it? Perhaps the better question is when doesn’t age matter? It defines when we go to school, get a job, drive a car, enter the military, be viewed as an adult, marry, or retire. And now, age has taken center stage as a qualifier in the upcoming election. Should age be on the ballot? Is age the sole denominator of one’s fitness to function in high-level endeavors?

Bonnie Wong, the director of the neuropsychology program at Massachusetts General Hospitalist’s frontotemporal disorders unit, studies “super agers.” She believes that assessing someone’s mental or physical capabilities from brief observations of speech, memory, or motor function is not reliable. “When it comes to cognitive ability, things are much more complex,” says Wong.

Our fixation on age as a qualifier of ability is becoming more important considering that the current median age in the U.S. Senate is 65 and nearly 58 in the House. As the issue of age ramps up given the age of the two leading presidential candidates, noted writer and activist Aston Applewhite considers calling either of them old is not ageism. “They are old,” she states. However, she notes, calling someone too old for a job is ageist. “Plenty of younger people aren’t up to a given task. Plenty of olders are.” Instead, she suggests the conversation should center on capacity.

When we set work limits based solely on age, we risk premature loss of talent and opportunities  for individuals and society, believes geriatrician and award-winning writer Louise Aronson, MFA, MD, thus exacerbating the dilemma of demanding older workers retire while lamenting the economic burden of unemployed elders.
Aronson suggests developing evidence-based guidelines that can be used to create employment standards across industries using data and expertise from leaders in economics, geriatric medicine, gerontology, and elsewhere to optimize work in older ages despite the considerable diversity in health and function across the decades of elderhood. She cautions that voting should be based on more than age.

Stuart Jay Olshansky, a professor of health at the University of Illinois Chicago who analyzes the longevity of presidents, argues that since not everyone ages at the same rate, it is important to distinguish between chronological age and biological age that considers genetics and lifestyle choices.

So, should age be on the ballot? The reality is for some, it will be a key factor. However, it does not have to be the predominant factor. Whether we agree or not, we choose what factors will influence our vote. Consider evaluating a candidate, presidential, or other down-ballot candidate by their truthfulness, consideration of others, position on crime, environment, or other issues. While age affects many things, it is not the sole indicator of competency. Elections matter and as an educated voter, our vote counts.

Linda Henry writes regularly on topics related to aging, health care, and communication and is the co-author of several books, including Transformational Eldercare from the Inside Out: Strengths-Based Strategies for Caring. She conducts workshops nationally on aging and creating caring work environments. Her volunteer emphasis is age-friendly communities.

This is What Democracy Looks Like

Aging with Intention—Paying it Forward

Experienced Voters, Older Candidates

The post Aging with Intention – What’s Age Got to Do With it? appeared first on 3rd Act Magazine.

BY JEANETTE LEARDI

From the moment you were born, you set out on a path of living, hopefully into a long, vibrant old age. If you’re lucky, you’ve been able to sustain a pattern of healthy development throughout your later years. However, how smoothly you travel today can be determined by certain challenges you may not have encountered in youth and midlife—precisely because you’re an older adult.

In some important ways, our later years can be a time in which it may be harder to participate in activities and stay engaged with others. The reasons for this change can be physical, social, or even psychological, any of which can stop us from meeting new people or doing worthwhile things.

Roadblocks and Obstacles

Take, for example, the way our bodies change as we age.

“The physical wear-and-tear our bodies experience over time can take a toll on our ability to remain as active as we once were,” says Barbara Raynor, founder and voice of AgingisLiving, an online informational and inspirational resource created to help people feel better about aging in order to age better and live longer.

“Overcoming those challenges in order to remain active and engaged requires a certain amount of strength, resilience, and determination,” Raynor continues. “Without the impetus or physical ability to ‘get up and go,’ it is easy to understand how older adults can believe that life is passing them by—and wrongly beat themselves up about it.”

How we deal with our physical abilities is one thing, but how our ageist society views us can be equally challenging.

Marc Freedman, founder and co-CEO of CoGenerate (formerly Encore.org), and author of How to Live Forever: The Enduring Power of Connecting the Generations, wrestles with this issue in his work, namely, regarding how age bias affects relationships (or lack of them) between generations.

He describes society’s ongoing, longstanding barrage of stereotypes describing older adults “as they move into their 60s or even earlier, with twin messages that they are past their prime and should move to the sidelines. At the same time, the idea of leisure and disengagement—the golden years notion—has been sold relentlessly. The end result is both a push and a pull leading older people out of the mainstream.”

Raynor would agree that cultural ageism is baked into certain roadblocks and obstacles in the very infrastructure of our society. “So many other factors can prevent an older person from fully engaging with their community: lack of transportation, caregiving responsibilities, lack of available programming, lack of access to digital resources, lack of knowledge about the various ways to engage, social isolation, feeling unwelcome—the list goes on and on.”

Moreover, the ageism that causes these kinds of roadblocks and obstacles can affect us psychologically. When we allow ourselves to believe in the ever-present advertisements and jokes about old people being clueless, cranky, incompetent, irrelevant, and stuck in our ways, we accept that script and internalize that ageism. These reactions can cause us to halt our journeys by disengaging and isolating from others.

There’s no reason for us to limit ourselves to motoring on side roads in the third act of our lives, let alone giving up the car keys altogether. No matter our individual situation, there are ways we can remain in the driver’s seat, enjoying new adventures.

Step 1: Get in the Car

Raynor asserts that the first step is to recognize your need and desire to make a change. “As is the case with developing any new habit,” she says, older adults “first need to make the decision to do it—and then follow through with that decision.”

“Make a trial commitment to start,” suggests Freedman, “long enough to get a flavor of the activity but without making any long-term pledges. It usually takes two or three different experiments to find a good fit.”

It can be helpful to remember what research has shown—that regularly engaging socially is as healthy for your body and spirit as eating the right foods and exercising daily. Whatever activities you embrace should be as important to you as staying physically fit.

Step 2: Choose a Route

Once you understand that you’re in control of the trip you’re making, you can set off in any direction you wish.

“Start slow but start,” says Raynor.

Be curious and open to exploration and change. Begin with who you are and who you want to be.

“There are a couple of ways to accomplish this,” Raynor explains. “The first is to identify what those needs and desires may be via a little bit of healthy self-reflection and then look for opportunities that address them.

“For instance, if you’re a person who thrives on being outdoors, seek out ways to engage in outdoor activities. If you’re a lifelong learner, look for classes offered by local adult-learning programs, community centers, or even institutions of higher learning,” Raynor continues. “If you’re looking for a way to fill yourself up spiritually, find a house of worship that reflects your values, try a yoga or meditation class, or find a like-minded group of people who are searching just as you are.

“The second way—especially if you’re unsure as to what you’re really looking for—is to try something new. Volunteering is a great way to not only make a difference in your own life, as well as the lives of others, but it’s also an excellent way to meet like-minded people, learn new skills, achieve a sense of purpose, and even fulfill a lifelong dream.”

Some volunteer activities to consider are serving on a community council or committee, assisting at an animal shelter or food bank, delivering meals, reading children’s books at a library’s story time, or being an elementary school lunch buddy.

These last two suggestions offer ways to connect with much younger folks. Freedman has tips for engaging with other people of different ages. “Overall I believe in the importance of the three Ps: proximity, purpose, and practice. First, put yourself in settings where there are opportunities to interact with other age groups; second, look for opportunities that further bring you together with other generations around shared interest; and finally, and best of all, seek out ways to collaborate on those shared interests.”

Keep in mind that choosing a route doesn’t stop you from changing directions or adding on more ways to travel.

Step 3: Reach Your Destination

As you settle into a new activity, appreciate how far you’ve come, alone or with others. Freedman suggests checking in from time to time: “Keep a monthly diary of lessons learned, both positive and less uplifting examples. And try to arrange periodic get-togethers with others engaged in these activities to compare notes and mark progress.”

Furthermore, know that what you’ve done can impact more than your own life. According to Freedman, “We all need to be role models for thriving in a multigenerational world—in how we live, work, learn, care, and play.”

“The knowledge, experience, and wisdom older adults bring to society is something that should be cherished, rather than dismissed or taken for granted,” says Raynor. “It is time that society recognizes our older adult population as the gift and important resource that it is—and treat it accordingly.”

Know that as you engage with society, you enable society to better engage with—and benefit from—you.

Surely that’s a road we should all be traveling along together.

Jeanette Leardi is a Portland-based social gerontologist, writer, editor, and community educator who has a passion for older adult empowerment. She gives popular presentations and workshops in journaling, memoir writing, ethical will creation, brain fitness, creativity, ageism, intergenerational communication, and caregiver support to people of all ages. Learn more about her work at jeanetteleardi.com.

Read More on the Aging Journey

Keys to Successfully Navigating Your Future

How to Live a Good Life

The post On Your Path of Living Stay in the Driver’s Seat appeared first on 3rd Act Magazine.

Later this year, I will most likely vote for a presidential candidate who has spent more time in the public sphere than I have spent alive.

If the race for America’s top elected official continues as expected, the president will be in their 80s by the end of the next term. The two leading presidential candidates—Joe Biden (81) and Donald Trump (77)—are more than 50 years my senior.

Whether we agree it should be an issue or not, age is on the ticket in 2024. In a poll released last summer, USA TODAY reported that “For Biden, 37% of Democratic and Independent voters say the 80-year-old president’s age makes them less likely to vote for him…” A different poll, also from 2023, found that 77% of people see Biden as “too old to be effective for four more years.” Ageism is rampant in our society, but do these numbers reflect ageism or perhaps something more?

Young Voters’ Malaise

Young voters have a unique relationship to this upcoming election—few, if any, candidates on the ballot represent someone from their generation, yet the policies they do or don’t enact will impact these voters the most.

Bret, 25, works as an engineer in Tacoma, Wash., and has friends and family who think politicians should retire when they get older and worries about Congress not being able to regulate things like social media effectively. “Term limits might help some of that,” he tells me, “But it doesn’t address the root problem of elections being bought and paid for.”

Drew Palmer, 24, an optical engineer living in Berkeley, Calif., says he started thinking about age in politics within the last three years but has a different view: “I think wisdom and experience is a key part of being a politician,” he says. Palmer shares that his father brought up the idea of “age as experience” to him. Voters “would lose a lot” if you set something like term limits, he adds.

But Palmer does think about the age requirements in place to hold office, as well. “If there’s a lower age limit, why can’t there be an upper age limit?” he says.

“I value age in voting but there’s not that much choice for me as a voter as—in many cases—the options are pretty much all the same,” says Allie Highsmith, 24, a student currently voting in the U.S. from abroad. Highsmith only recalls a few previous voting decisions that were influenced by age.

The lack of choices young voters face in age began as an unspoken starting point for this article. But instead of talking about age itself, which I was anticipating, I found Bret and Palmer quickly pivoting to policy solutions like federal age and term limits. We skipped over age as a metric and went straight to exploring solutions to ease the malaise they feel around voting.

It’s Not the Number

I spoke with my cohorts to get a sense of how or if the ages of our current candidates would impact their voting choices and what they would change if they could. Their opinions do not, by any means, represent younger voters as a group. However, I found myself on common ground with many of their points—on term limits, age restrictions, and others. One of my takeaways is that someone’s chronological age may not be as important as acknowledging how cultural biases around leadership traits can impact our perception of a candidate’s potential effectiveness as a leader.

“Trump gives this impression of being very vigorous and forceful and all of these things that sort of connote an amount of energy that Biden does not project,” says Thomas Jankowski, the associate director for research at the Wayne State University Institute of Gerontology who also holds a Ph.D. in Political Science.

“Biden’s always had a very soft voice. He speaks softly. He’s had a speech impediment, which he still works to overcome, that gives the impression of his speech being kind of halting and not particularly smooth,” Jankowski adds. Palmer brought up the popular meme of “Sleepy Joe,” a nickname used by Trump in a tweet for President Biden. It has since become the subject of political research and widespread internet memes.

Bernie Sanders, 82, escapes some stereotypes of aging and has been widely supported by younger voters. “Why don’t people think of his age as being a problem?” says Jankowski.  “Well, because Bernie Sanders is a tornado, you know? He speaks very forcefully. He’s got a lot of energy and so people don’t associate that with age.”

National media focus on President Biden’s and other national leaders’ ages may have tapped into our underlying cultural age biases. Both Palmer and Bret separately mentioned the issue of cognitive decline in older candidates, an issue covered by national outlets in 2023 after gaffes by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and the late Senator Dianne Feinstein.

“When anything having to do with older adults is covered, it seems like there’s always this sort of bifurcated view of them either as sort of a wise sage or the doddering fool … when most older adults are just people,” Jankowski says.

Bridging the generational divide will require everyone—at every age—to step up and be ready to work together supporting policies that ensure a bright and dynamic future for all. “I really hate the idea of generations being at odds,” Jankowski says. “Because every young person, if they’re lucky, is going to get old.”

Zachary Fletcher is a freelance journalist covering aging and other news, most recently for The Kitsap Sun/USA TODAY. His work has appeared in PBS’s Next Avenue and The Sacramento Bee, among other publications. He lives in Seattle with his partner. Learn more about him at https://fletcherzachary.weebly.com/.

Read more political articles on 3rd Act on topics relevant to older adults:

10 Tips for Travelling as a Political Act

Activism—Kitchen Table Transformation

Summon Your Ally Superpower

The post Young Voters, Old Candidates appeared first on 3rd Act Magazine.

A widely read report, The New Age of Aging, published by Age Wave (Ken Dychtwald, CEO) offered a very optimistic view about getting old.

In June 2023, its authors interviewed a nationally representative sample of older adults in the United States. Among its findings:

• Seventy one percent of people 65 and older say the best time of their life is right now or before them.
• They don’t feel over the hill but are just beginning to chart their best adventures and pursue new dreams—to start a new chapter in life.
• They are far more active, open-minded and curious—and less rigid, passive and isolated.

This report presents a much needed antidote to those earlier “misery perspectives” on aging that associated getting old with the four D’s: Dependency, disease, disability and depression. These ageist portrayals unduly emphasized the negative aspects of aging.

Some Alarm Bells

But embedded in this otherwise upbeat recounting of old age is a disturbing finding. It reported that when born, our lifespan (how many years we have left to live) is about 78 years, but our health span (length of time we are in good health) is only 66 years.

Simply put, debilitating diseases and physical and cognitive impairments may impact the last 12 years of older people’s lives. Living longer does not necessarily equate to living healthfully. We have a health span-lifespan gap.

On reflection, this observation should not be a surprise.

What we often refer to as old age can easily extend over three decades—that is, ages 60s to 90s. Although chronological age is far from a perfect indicator of physical and mental well-being, gerontologists have long distinguished third-age or young-old seniors in their 50s, 60s, and early 70s from fourth-age or old-old seniors in their late 70s and above. This latter group is more likely to suffer from mobility or functional limitations, memory issues, and health conditions such as cardiovascular diseases, cancer, diabetes, and chronic respiratory diseases.

Confronted with these assaults on the quality of their lives, it becomes more challenging for those in later life to remain positive about getting old.

Such a pessimistic observation leads to an obvious question: Are those extra years of life worth celebrating if we must cope with health declines and losses over this period?

What many of us want is not eternal life but eternally feeling younger than older. As one commentator put it, “Right now, we live well, then we don’t live well, and then we die.”

Is there perhaps an argument for living well but then dying quickly before decline sets in?

Recognizing Age Group Inequities

The need to address such questions will only increase. Demographic projections tell us that, all over the world, the fastest-growing populations will be aged 80 and over. Our old-old or fourth-age populations will become more visible and demand “the highest possible levels of care and comfort.”

Making simple generalizations about the age 60- or 65-plus population will also become more problematic when we admit that old age is not a homogeneous life stage. Here’s why:

Numerically, our fourth-age seniors are a minority share of the older population. Consequently, if we do not separate them out for analysis, we can easily gloss over and camouflage their distinctive unmet needs and problems.

Reason for Optimism

But these inequities should not overly dampen our positive perspectives on aging. New medical discoveries and gerontechnological advances make it more possible to diagnose, prevent, delay, and even eliminate the worst aspects of disease and disability.

What is referred to as “morbidity suppression” will become more attainable. These innovations offer hope that older people can reduce (suppress) the number of years they must spend burdened with chronic and debilitating diseases (morbidity) before they die.

Of course, we now do not lack for individual advice about how to strive for morbidity suppression. The media bombards us with information about staying healthy and disability-free for longer.

Frequently on our self-help radar screens are nutritious diets, better sleep strategies, exercising, preventative health checkups, maintaining strong social connections, keeping vaccinated, caring for our emotional health, and exercising our brain.

Still, we must be realistic.

Not all older people are motivated or able to fend off the scourges of old age. Most importantly, we do not all have the genes of those 90-year-olds running marathons, climbing mountains, or obtaining new college degrees.

What are our chances of experiencing excellent health up to our deaths? A recent U.S. study offered some guidelines. It reported that about 20% of 65-year-olds will not need care or assistance for the rest of their lives, while 22% will have only minimal needs. However, about 58% will require supportive services or long-term care to cope with their severe or moderate declines and losses.

With Knowledge Comes Wisdom

There is an obvious takeaway from these findings. Let us indeed celebrate the “good life” of the young-old and significant numbers of the old-old. But let us also recognize, sympathize with, and find solutions for the demanding physical and mental health challenges that often arise at higher chronological ages.

Acknowledging these alternative visions of aging also enables us to be more effective change agents. So when we are in good health and living active lives, we should use this time to plan for the contingency that we may become less well and dependent on others.

There is no shortage of books and internet sites that enlighten us on what our financial, legal, health, housing, and long-term care preparations should look like.

We should strive to age optimally no matter how close we are to our mortality. We may not be able to mimic the best of our young-old times, but we can give it a mighty good try.

Stephen M. Golant, PhD, is a leading national speaker, author, and researcher on the housing, mobility, transportation, and long-term care needs of older adult populations. He is a Fellow of the Gerontological Society of America, a Fulbright Senior Scholar award recipient, and a Professor at the University of Florida. Golant’s latest book is Aging in The Right Place, published by Health Professions Press. Contact him at golant@ufl.edu.

The post Getting Old—The Best of Times and The Worst of Times appeared first on 3rd Act Magazine.

I loathe being considered a member of the “Baby Boomer” generation. It is a stupid, vapid, obnoxious label. The epithet should have been laid to rest decades ago. In addition, it has become a term of derision for the millennials and their cohorts. What we actually are is the first rock n’ rollers, or FRRs.

Baby Boomers describes our parents, not us. We were the boomed, they were the boomers. Thus, Baby Boomer is a tag better suited to them acknowledging the surge of births as servicemen and women returned home after World War II. The “Greatest Warrior” generation became the greatest baby makers, and they deserve the credit for both of these gargantuan accomplishments. It is time to award them the double title.

Others have said I am being picky about this. If you actually think that you are obviously not one of us. Baby Boomer ranks right up there with being called “The Cabbage Patch Kid” generation.

Rock ‘n roll and my generation grew up together, that is part of why we loved it so intensely. We were there at the beginning with Bill Haley and the Comets, Chuck Berry, Fats Domino, Buddy Holly, and Jerry Lee Lewis. Elvis, of course, was the original “King” but once he stopped shaking his hips and strayed into Las Vegas, he became a mere shadow of past royalty. We survived “The Day the Music Died” when we lost The Big Bopper, Buddy Holly, and Richie Valens in one plane crash. And we keep on “Rockin’ in The Free World” into our old age. In the beginning, it was just us and rock. This music became the equivalent of Native American drumming and chanting forming us into a tribe. For any newly emerging teenager in the 1950s, membership in the tribe required love of rock. We created each other. My childhood interest in baseball cards and plastic model cars dissolved Christmas morning in the fifth grade when I received a new hi-fi record player and two 45 RPM records by Buddy Holly and Jerry Lee. I was quite impressed that my parents even knew what to buy until a cousin revealed they had consulted him.

Rock n’ roll defined us. Every change in recording stars or music styles reverberated with likes and dislikes, allies and opponents, new tribes and old. But rock was ours, only ours. Adults were in charge of school, homework, food, chores, clothing, and all the other boring stuff. Rock was the only thing they did not control. When they loudly complained they could not understand the words, we considered that a good thing.

One Saturday afternoon I came home after hanging out with friends and found my father playing his new Perry Como album on my hi-fi. OMG, the sappiest of the sappy, the most old-fashioned of all, a sacrilege was being perpetrated. The words were perfectly understandable and utterly gross. I contained my horror, but was so afraid it would corrupt the sound that I washed the player with bleach as soon as he wasn’t looking.

Most of us have remained loyal to our music, especially Classic Rock, and expect to remain so no matter what succeeding generations create. We ignored disco as it came and went. Rap mostly revolted us before any of us listened. I explained to one of my sons who was partial to rap that Dylan’s, “Talkin’ World War III Blues,” was really the first rap song. He just rolled his eyes like I did when my father tried to get me to listen to Perry Como. The older generation could have their music and the younger generation can have theirs. Rock, real rock, is ours. My favorite invention of the later part of the 1990s were earbuds and headphones so my kids could listen in private and stop annoying me with it.

It seemed, briefly, that there was hope for a younger generation. Almost 10 years ago I was driving with my granddaughter who asked me if I’d ever heard of Bob Dylan or Neil Young, who she had listened to with a friend’s father and thought they were great. I almost drove off the road as I expressed my love for both musicians and her. For a long time, we had a relationship that revolved around music. Unfortunately, her favorites became something called dubstep or EDM (Electronic Dance Music). Both of which I hated. But that sort of makes the point. Rock is ours. If you like the music your grandfather listens to, it is a betrayal of your tribe. The
Gen-whatevers are mostly fine people and can enjoy their music as they please. But ROCK IS OURS. We were the first rock n’ rollers. We still are. I bet our BFF Keith Richards would agree.

C. Graham Campbell, PhD, is a 75-year-old late-blooming author. He has explored the human psyche and soul as a psychologist for more than 40 years in central Massachusetts. Now retired, he spends most of his time meditating, writing, and as a nature photographer. He freely admits that his work can get a tad snarky. 

The post The First Rock n’ Rollers appeared first on 3rd Act Magazine.

As much as these physical changes occur for both women and men, women are often the main societal target for judgment and assessment of “how well they are aging.”

Not surprisingly, the multibillion-dollar global skincare industry then targets women as consumers of their products and services. All kinds of solutions are out there, and product awareness and availability are growing.

Today, women can select from a vast array of anti-wrinkle, firming, and skin tone creams and lotions—moisturizers, exfoliators, and depigmenting products. More aggressive solutions include skin procedures such as Botox injections, dermal filler treatments, microdermabrasion, chemical peels, laser therapy treatments, and cosmetic surgeries (e.g., facelifts).

So how do women feel about their aging faces?

• Do you feel inferior—and even invisible and marginalized—because others may consider you unattractive?

• Should you guiltlessly use anti-aging products to turn back the clock and feel thankful you have so many skincare options?

• Or do you only employ these skin care solutions because of social pressures to look younger?

• Should you even worry about losing your youthful physical appearance? Instead, should you view your aging skin positively—as a measure of maturity and wisdom, and ignore what others think?

There is definitely no shortage of opinions.

Unlike other body changes, our face is always on display. Possibly even more telling—how we feel and behave with our wrinkles and lines can also reveal our views and acceptance of aging.

One thing we have learned from human history is that beauty standards are highly subjective and hotly debated. But I believe the good news is that women can age optimally, irrespective of whether they reject or embrace these skincare solutions. This is unquestionably a case of there being no right or wrong answer.

To attempt an understanding of the differences in how women may view the aging changes to their facial appearance, I have developed three different profiles. I don’t believe that you will necessarily embody only a single profile. Depending on your life situation and changing experiences, you may actually find yourself moving between them.

The Naturalists

Naturalists view their aging faces as a natural outcome of getting old. They reject the notion that younger-looking skin should be the standard to judge beauty or desirability. They bemoan living in an ageist society that celebrates youth and simplistically equates getting old with declines and losses.

Their looks do not prevent them from living a healthy, confident, and active lifestyle.

They proudly display their wrinkles as a badge of honor. Their wrinkles communicate experience, accomplishments, and wisdom. In one woman’s words, “the young should see the lines and aging on someone’s face as a marker of the life they’ve been lucky to live.”

Consequently, they have little motivation to do anything to counter their changed looks. They are the most unlikely consumers of skincare products and procedures. Fueling their decision is recognizing that older men are seldom expected to display a youthful appearance.

The Modifiers

The women in this second group hold a different view. Perceiving their older faces as less attractive, they strive to mask or alter the physical signs of aging.

Most will rely on more moderate measures—creams, lotions, and less-invasive skin procedures. Looking as they did in their 20s is typically not their goal. They don’t seek to reverse the aging process, but, at the same time, they want to look their best.

A smaller share will more vigorously attack their perceived facial imperfections. To regain their once youthful appearance, they will embrace anti-aging solutions, such as cosmetic surgery procedures (e.g., facelifts).

All the women in this group generally feel that “bad” skin makes them appear sad, angry, tired, or depressed. But inside, they feel the opposite—happy, good, energetic, and sure of themselves. “They want things to match.” As expressed by one prominent 80-year-old New Yorker:

“It’s how you feel about yourself, and that’s really what it is. I know I look well and that makes me happy. And I know that I can face the world like I did when I was 30 or 40 or 50.… I don’t try to look young, and I don’t want to look young,” she said. “I want to look terrific.”

For people like her, the reasons for using skincare solutions are straightforward:

• To improve self-confidence and self-esteem

• To feel more attractive

• To look and feel healthier

• To look like you care

• To make it easier to face the day

These women also embrace these solutions because they strive to maintain self-continuity.

Throughout their adult lives, they have relied on cosmetics to improve their appearance and feel beautiful. How they think about themselves does not suddenly change after reaching a particular chronological age.

They are products of their past behaviors, beliefs, and memories. The older woman lamenting how she now doesn’t feel that different from her earlier self and doesn’t want to feel different in her future exemplifies these sentiments. Now their facial care regimens keep this continuity intact.

There are spillover effects for this approach. People enjoy better physical health and even greater longevity when they feel good about themselves. In contrast, when they hold negative beliefs about their aging selves—as when they don’t like their looks—they confront an increased risk of bad outcomes, such as hopelessness, depression, dementia, frailty, stroke, and heart disease.

Of course, these women are not immune from the powerful marketing influences of the skincare industry. But they are not unthinking and easily persuaded consumers.

Over their lifetimes, they have “seen and heard it all.” They are the most educated, proactive, self-reliant, health-conscious, work-savvy, and entrepreneurial generation of older women in history.

Unlike their mothers, they are more “fashion and appearance conscious.” Consequently, their purchasing decisions reflect their personal choices about changing their appearance.

Higher educational attainment is especially crucial because it positively correlates with older women’s beliefs that they have more control over their bodies. Possessing this sense of agency, they feel capable of tackling adversity and influencing the quality of their lives.

Consequently, they don’t view the cosmetic industry as a capitalistic enemy profiting from their fears of becoming old. Why should they? Their solutions help them to compensate for and deal with age-related changes.

The Conformists

Like the Naturalists, women in the Conformists group believe that their aging faces are a natural outcome of a successful past life. They are fine with their looks. But they are also acutely aware of their society’s ageist attitudes and behaviors—that portray older people as undesirable because they believe they are less physically attractive than the young.

They resent these views and could do without the self-serving messaging of the skincare industry. But to be dismissive like the Naturalists is not in their best interests.

They need and want to function in this youth-oriented world. They are still in the workforce or seeking employment. They seek to enjoy active, healthy, and visible lifestyles. They may be interested in new romantic relationships. Others strive to remain physically attractive to their partners.

In all these pursuits, appearance matters—especially to those who can influence their welfare.

Consequently, the skincare solutions adopted by the Conformists mimic those of the Modifiers. However, there is a difference. Their actions are less of their own volition.

Even as they feel in control over most aspects of their lives, social pressures compel them to “fix” their aging faces. This is true for even the most powerful women. Witness well-known older female celebrities who have cosmetic surgeries to maintain popularity.

The reasoning behind their decision-making is not remarkable. The women in this Conformists group are not muckrakers. They cannot single-handedly effect change and must selectively pick their battles. Taking a stand against societal expectations that dictate how they should look in their older years is low on their bucket list.

All Three Groups of Women Are Aging Optimally

It might seem surprising to argue that all the women in these three groups are success stories. But, in fact, they are all aging optimally. To understand this conclusion, we must clarify the meaning of this term.

Aging individuals often cannot avoid unfortunate assaults on their bodies. These make it difficult to perform everyday physical, social, or intellectual activities, saddle us with difficult-to-manage chronic health problems, or make us feel less attractive. Those who age optimally, however, do not passively accept these changes—they do not let them define who they are.

Instead, they may de-emphasize how these changes influence the conduct of their lives.

Alternatively, they try to alleviate their effects. They select new pursuits or goals that are both desirable and attainable despite their limitations. They then change their behaviors and lifestyles to optimize their physical and mental capabilities, social relationships, and productivity. They strive for positive emotional experiences that are meaningful and fulfilling.

This is what aging optimally is all about.

Each of the three groups of women chooses different roads to this end. There is no one correct pathway to aging optimally.

The Naturalists appraise their aging faces as unimportant and unlikely to disrupt their goals, lifestyles, and healthy aging. They are happy with who they are and do not need cosmetic fixes.

The Modifiers interpret their facial changes as antagonistic to feeling and performing at their peak selves. They embrace skincare solutions to feel their best as they have done throughout their lives.

And the Conformists, like the Naturalists, also do not feel troubled by their aging skin. But they cannot ignore those social pressures demanding they look younger. To age optimally—achieve their goals and pursuits—they must take advantage of skincare solutions.

The fact that all these women are aging optimally should give us pause. It warns against singling out a particular group for criticism.

Unfortunately, this condemnation is happening now.

The Modifiers and the Conformists are targeted because they camouflage the aging of their faces by using skin care products and procedures. Yet, those making these unfair and discriminatory judgments are exhibiting ageist behaviors themselves. They are shaming a subgroup of older persons because of how they choose to manage their lives.

Closing Thoughts

How women choose to age and the societal judgments that are often associated with this will not be going away anytime soon. Over the next 20 years, aging boomers—dominated by women who live longer—will become more visible worldwide.

How we perceive our faces will be a telling barometer of how we feel about getting old. And how we respond to our changing appearance will influence our ability to age optimally.

Cosmetic companies and dermatologists take note. Women are actively making choices about how they choose to age, so how you represent and market your skincare solutions will be much more highly scrutinized and not so easily sold.

Stephen M. Golant, PhD, is a leading national speaker, author, and researcher on the housing, mobility, transportation, and long-term care needs of older adult populations. He is a Fellow of the Gerontological Society of America, a Fulbright Senior Scholar award recipient, and a Professor at the University of Florida. Golant’s latest book is Aging in The Right Place, published by Health Professions Press. You can contact him at golant@ufl.edu 

This article was originally published on Booming Encore and has been republished with permission.

The post Shedding Society’s Image of What “Good” Skin Care Looks Like for Older Women appeared first on 3rd Act Magazine.

Blanket statements—the world is full of them today. Some are as subtle as lightweight goose down. Others are heavy like those trendy weighted blankets.

An article titled, “The Brain of an Elderly Person” came my way as an email link from an old friend. With enough blanket statements to make a bunch of patchwork quilts, the writing was somewhat peculiar, yet interesting, and loaded with generalizations about aging brains.

The first claim? “The brain of an elderly person is much more plastic than is commonly believed.”

The article is attributed to a neuropsychiatrist at a clinic in India, but was circulated under the name of Dr. Kenneth Pelletier, a clinical professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco. Tossed in—who knows why—is the unnamed director of the George Washington University College of Medicine.

 Much of the article’s research is said to have been published in the New England Journal of Medicine, a respected, peer-reviewed scholarly publication. One line attributed to the research: “The average age of dads is 76 years.”

Unfortunately, that’s about when the alarms should be going off in our plastic brains, but who doesn’t want to hear that an aging brain of someone over 60 has greater flexibility and is “more likely to make the right decisions,” dad or not.

The article also says that with age we’re “less exposed to negative emotions.” Wait. Does the author think we all twiddle our thumbs and spend our days watching soap operas, reading romance novels, or playing tic-tac-toe? Aren’t we endlessly susceptible to negative emotions when the roof leaks, dandelions overtake the yard, that lottery ticket isn’t a winner, or someone snags the last good parking spot at Costco during a hail storm?

If this theory is correct—that we lack negative emotions as we age—how is it that in modern times people have become so entangled in divisive political news and discussions?

For instance, Republican Nikki Haley, former South Carolina governor and United Nations Ambassador, recently said any politician past 75 should be tested for competence. Plenty of her elders beyond 70 had a negative reaction, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

“Ageism!” Sanders growled. “Some folks 40 are less competent than those who are 80.”

Haley, of course, now in her 50s, recently announced she’s running for president.

The brains of elders are “no longer as fast” as they were when they were young, the article concedes. Ah, but its author also says, “the peak of human intellectual activity occurs at about 70 years old when the brain begins to work at full strength.” Take that, Nikki Haley!

Hold on. How do we determine when we’ve reached that ever-lovin’ peak? And where’s the wisdom in all this mumbo-jumbo about a brain’s “full strength” as though it’s energized by some secret formula or maybe high-caffeine coffee?

Here’s one reassuring nugget, though: “Absent-mindedness and forgetfulness appear due to an overabundance of information. Therefore, you do not need to focus your whole life on unnecessary trifles.” No more grocery lists, perhaps?

Before you take a big sigh of relief and think this is beginning to make some sense, hold on a sec. Michael Patterson, a regular contributor to 3rd Act on the topic of brain power and mental balance, weighs in with some insights.

“Getting old doesn’t make you wise,” Patterson says. “There are as many dumb old people as there are dumb young people.”

Patterson also recommends a note of caution after discovering that Snopes, the internet’s fact-checking app, rated the information “false” and not published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

“‘The Brain of an Elderly Person,’” Patterson says, raises “some interesting points, but many unsupported and of dubious validity.” He adds, “That said, I do firmly believe that brains and minds can become wiser and more creative with age.”

Still, what’s with the notion that growing old automatically makes people wise? “Younger people excel in certain fields, such as physics,” says Patterson, “while older brains excel in other fields that benefit from the accumulation of information.”

In any event, the article’s conclusion is this: “If a person leads a healthy lifestyle, moves, has a feasible physical activity, and has full mental activity, intellectual abilities do not decrease with age, but only grow, reaching a peak by the age of 80–90 years.”

Woo-hoo! That gives us all quite the goal, real or imagined.

Annie Culver developed a knack for unearthing oddball characters and improbable events as a staff writer for various newspapers. In the early 90s, she went to work for websites where she wrote sassy essays aimed at women. In recent years, she morphed into a writer for several universities in the Northwest. She retired in 2016, yet still enjoys freelancing.

The post The Lighter Side—Please Say It’s So! appeared first on 3rd Act Magazine.

In her 60s, Beauvoir wrote a 650-page book La Vieillesse (1970)—translated as Old Age or The Coming of Age—to reveal the truth about ageing. She argues that ageing isn’t only a biological decline—society crushes ageing bodies through ageist discrimination. And yet, Beauvoir noted, elderhood also has the potential to bring us closer to authenticity than at any other stage of life. For her, being authentic means becoming creators of our vibrant selves, shaped through our choices. But older people face myriad challenges—many of them inescapable—that warp their choices and deter them from stretching toward authenticity.

For Beauvoir, the existential question lurking underneath the crisis of old age is, “Can I have become a different being while I still remain myself?” In other words, who is this person that I am becoming who appears to be me, but who seems to be someone else, too?

One of the reasons people face this crisis as they age is the tendency to treat old age as a “normal abnormality.” Elderhood is normal because, unless one dies young, ageing is humanity’s universal destiny. But elderhood is also an abnormality because older people are often assumed to be no longer properly functioning and capable humans. Ageism classifies older people as stagnant and powerless as time drags them toward their graves. Ageism, Beauvoir argues, is a travesty because, especially in capitalist societies where people are valued by their profitability, older people’s capabilities are undervalued and underappreciated, which oppresses and dehumanizes them. Beauvoir writes, “Society inflicts so wretched a standard of living upon the vast majority of old people that it is almost tautological to say, ‘old and poor.’”

Some adapt to their ageing so well that they barely notice it. Beauvoir points to the philosopher Lou Andreas-Salomé as one who didn’t notice she was ageing until she was in her 60s and her hair started to fall out. Some have the money and resources to cushion themselves against the hardships of elderhood, especially when it comes to accessing technology that can extend and enhance ageing bodies, or living in a state of such comfort that allows them to continue gliding seamlessly through life.

But, for most, elderhood grinds away at the possibility of achieving goals and completing projects. It brings loneliness when friends and family die. It often wipes out financial stability, as well as physical and sensory mobility. The likelihood of physical illness and pain intensifies, too. And growing older triggers an identity crisis. Beauvoir writes, “Nothing should be more expected than old age: nothing is more unforeseen.” While death is a possibility at any age, old age can seem so far off into the future that, by the time we realize it’s happening to us, it comes as a shattering blow.

Another reason for the identity crisis of elderhood, according to Beauvoir, is that our ageing is a situation that exists outside of us. We are old for others because there is a disconnect between how we feel inwardly and the ungraspable, judgmental gazes of other people. Beauvoir reflects:

“A Frenchwoman, a writer, a person of 60: This is my situation as I live it. But in the surrounding world this situation exists as an objective form, one that escapes me.”

When people started telling her that she reminded them of their mother, Beauvoir felt this dissonance agonizingly.

A common cliché is that you are only as old as you feel, but that is oversimplifying. Certainly, we make our own choices about who we become, but we are also defined from the outside—by other people, societies, and situations that surround us. We can discover some aspects of our being by looking in the mirror and introspection, but there is a dimension that only others can see, and which remains, for each of us, unrealizable.

Being defined by others isn’t a problem in itself. We coexist with other people, and we come to know ourselves more intimately through our interactions with them. But the problem is when other people’s gazes define us to the extent that we lose the ability to define ourselves. Those gazes can become so harsh and omnipresent that they lock elders into a category of “old,” constraining their ability to create themselves in authentic ways. This attitude is conveyed in the assumption that old people can’t learn new tricks, which is false. Beauvoir writes of ageing, “In no other aspect of life does the indecency of the culture we have inherited show itself more nakedly.”

Not all cultures have been ageist. Many societies have revered elders, seeing them as wiser, more virtuous, or closer to holiness. Respect for elders (filial piety) is a virtue in Confucianism. Cicero likens old age to piloting a ship—younger people may be climbing masts and pulling ropes, but the captain’s sagacity is as vital for navigating life as for navigating a boat. In Victor Hugo’s poem “Boaz Asleep” (1859-83), with old age comes greatness. Maybe the eyes of young men burn with fire, but Boaz’s octogenarian eyes sparkle with clarity—and sexiness. At Boaz’s feet lies a woman named Ruth, topless, apparently sent by God.

Most societies have revered male elders and vilified female elders. Consider Amy Schumer’s “Last F**kable Day” (2015) skit where she stumbles across the fellow comedian Julia Louis-Dreyfus celebrating that she has reached an age where the media will no longer portray her as sexually attractive. Given the dispiriting gaze toward older women (especially if underprivileged), it’s no wonder that many people internalize ageism. Beauvoir did.

When Beauvoir was 30 years old, she thought that older women should not have sex lives: “I loathed what I called ‘harridans’ and promised myself that when I reached that stage, I would dutifully retire to the shelf.” Aged 39, Beauvoir indeed objectified herself enough to try to retire her sexualized body. But when a younger man, Claude Lanzmann, propositioned her, she was shocked to discover she was still a passionate and desirable being.

Still, as Beauvoir grew older, she wanted to smash her mirrors like the Countess of Castiglione. The countess, a 19th-century Italian model and photographic artist, banned mirrors and darkened her house so she could not bear witness to her atrophying youth and beauty. In her 50s, Beauvoir would catch her reflection and lament her drooping eyebrows, the bags growing under her eyes, and, she said, “that air of sadness around the mouth that wrinkles always bring.”

There are many ways people attempt to deny their ageing. One strategy is to preserve youth in the stories we tell. One of the reasons that older people like talking about their past, Beauvoir speculates, is because they are trying to keep alive the legend of themselves, cementing themselves as the person they once were in relationships they once had. Beauvoir did this too.

She spent a lot of time writing memoirs in an attempt to resuscitate her fading memories. But according to her philosophy, wallowing in the past at the expense of the present and future is inauthentic because it’s an attempt to ossify our being into something that it was, instead of acknowledging ourselves as forever stretching and dynamically becoming into the future. Nevertheless, Beauvoir wasn’t entirely caught in this trap because although she did focus on her past, her memoirs acted as a portal to transcend and immortalize herself as a writer.

Another avoidance strategy is delaying the inevitable physical regression by physically cementing our flesh in its youthful state, such as through cosmetic surgery. Of the woman who laments ageing, Beauvoir writes, “[S]he witnesses, powerless, the degradation of this object of flesh with which she is one; she fights; but dyes, peeling, and plastic surgery can never do more than prolong her dying youth.”

To become authentic, in Beauvoir’s view, is to create ourselves through our own choices. In theory, there should be no problem with transcending the facts of our bodies toward new possibilities and futures. And shouldn’t we support one another in making whatever choices we choose for our own appearances?

Ideally, yes. It’s authentic to respect our ageing bodies by staying active and healthy. But mutilating our skin and body to avoid reality is inauthentic. Preserving oneself with cosmetic procedures is submitting to ageist and sexist gazes that tell us young is good, old is bad.

Classism infects anti-ageing practices too. Such procedures are available only to those who have hundreds of dollars to spend monthly, if not weekly. And when some freeze their faces, it harms others who don’t, or can’t afford to, because they look older in comparison. She with the most money (I say “she” because women account for the vast majority of cosmetic surgery spending) will be most able to protect themselves against ageist and sexist blows as they entrench discrimination for less-privileged women. The masks that some people put on to escape their age are a form of disguise that becomes exponentially obvious and costly to maintain, and distracts us from the real work of combating ageism.

“Nudity begins with the face,” writes Beauvoir in her novel The Mandarins (1954), suggesting that to reveal our faces—not only to bear our wrinkles, but to be proud of them—is a form of vulnerability. Natural faces, and indeed natural bodies, should not be objects of shame. But it is shameful that older bodies are discriminated against to such an extent that so many feel compelled to attempt to escape them. Beauvoir was well aware that the mortifying weight of ageist gazes overwhelms and punishes people, especially women, such as through employment discrimination, and acknowledges that “Whether we like it or not, in the end we submit to the outsider’s point of view.”

How do we then overcome the “identification crisis” of old age? We must stop inauthentic strategies of clinging to our past selves and, Beauvoir writes, “we must unreservedly accept a new image of ourselves.” Ageing authentically calls for us to shift our attitudes and recognize that becoming older is a fact of our condition, our normal fate, and a stage of life not radically different to adulthood. Beauvoir saw elderhood as “possessing its own balance and leaving a wide range of possibilities open to the individual.”

As death looms ever nearer, it takes effort to persevere and engage in life with zeal, to overcome apathy and listlessness, and to keep oneself afloat amid melancholia and lonesomeness. It takes strength shamelessly to love and accept our own and others’ ageing bodies. Elderhood’s challenges can improve when we embrace taking care of ourselves through exercise, for example, as well as technologies that extend and enhance health spans, cure illnesses, and relieve pain—and not only for the wealthiest in society.

Elderhood does have hidden strengths—experience, wisdom, and deeper self-understanding. Because people are closer to the end of their becoming, elderhood is the stage where we find ourselves closest to fulfilment or, as Beauvoir describes it, “that fullness of being at which life so vainly aims.” As we grow up, many of us are overly concerned with building our reputation and cultivating the impressions we leave with others. Elderhood frees us from this slog. It is an opportunity to turn to ourselves, to be more responsive to our own needs, and less obliged to other people. According to Beauvoir:

“The sweeping away of fetishes and illusions is the truest, most worthwhile of all the contributions brought by age … The truth of the human state is accomplished only at the end of our own becoming.”

This is why, she writes, “There is only one solution if old age is not to be an absurd parody of our former life, and that is to go on pursuing ends that give our existence a meaning—devotion to individuals, to groups or to causes, social, political, intellectual, or creative work.”

Later in her life, Beauvoir produced fewer written pieces, but she threw herself into political activism, supported other writers, and worked on reaching new audiences for her work, such as with a screen adaptation of her book, The Woman Destroyed (1967).

Old age, for Beauvoir, should be celebrated, but to have something to celebrate, we must keep working toward a better world, one free from ageism, so that all are free to create themselves in authentic ways, and where no one has to exist as a living corpse. After all, survival can be worse than death. Beauvoir urges us to face up to ageing with honesty and bravery:

“We must stop cheating. The whole meaning of our life is in question in the future that is waiting for us. If we do not know what we are going to be, we cannot know what we are … it is harder to adopt than falsehood, but once reached, it cannot but bring happiness.”

Skye C Cleary is the author of How to Be Authentic: Simone de Beauvoir and the Quest for Fulfillment (2022) and Existentialism and Romantic Love (2015), and co-editor of How to Live a Good Life (2020). She teaches at Columbia University, Barnard College, and the City University of New York.  This ‘idea’ was originally published on Psyche (psyche.co).

Read our Review on Sky Cleary’s book, How to Be Authentic: Simone de Beauvoir and the Quest for Fulfillment.

We also recommend the book Elderhood, by Louise Aronson. Read our review here.

More on Ageism:

Learn how our hidden attitudes and images of age shape our actual experience—and what that means for the fight against ageism in our article: “Our Inner Ageist,” by Dr. Connie Zweig

Our article “When Things Change” by Priscilla Charlie Hinckley looks at how navigating ageism and changing socioeconomic status’ impacts ones quality of life.

The post Simone de Beauvoir Recommends We Fight for Ourselves as We Age appeared first on 3rd Act Magazine.