Are you an ageist?
I volunteered at Museo Alameda last week. The museum is the first affiliate of the Smithsonian outside of Washington, D.C. and is dedicated to the Latino culture. Last week they held an event for local YMCA summer camps. Working with the children reminded me why I had originally wanted to go into pediatrics (prior to falling in love with gerontology). One particular conversation made me smile.
Me: How old are you?
Anthony: I'm 6. And then I'll be 7.
Me: Yes. That's usually what happens after 6. I'm 26.
Anthony: That's a big number! When you have a big number you have to be old. Then you get to be 100, and then you die.
Later I recounted this story to some friends.
Carrie: Did you call him ageist?
Me: No, but I did teach him that not everybody died at 100. There were people that even lived to be 114. He was impressed.
------------------------------------LATER------------------------------------------
Andrew: Ageist? Is that a real word?
Carrie: Don't laugh. It's a real thing. Don't get him started.
Andrew: So I'd find it in the dictionary?
Me: Depends on the dictionary. The good ones have it.
It's sad to know that there people in their 20s that have no idea that ageism is a real issue, much less a real word. So that brings me to my point: It's never to early to teach your children about ageism. Ageism was a term coined in 1969 by a gerontologist named Robert Butler. He pointed out that many individuals are discriminated against solely based on their age.
If you would like to check out your own subconscious ageist tendencies, check out this quiz. Click on "go to demonstration tests" and then you need to agree to the informed consent page. When you find a list of different assessments, click on the "Age IAT". According to the results I "exhibit a strong automatic preference to old over young". So I guess I'm ageist against young people. Who knew? I suppose it's a good thing that I chose geriatrics over pediatrics.
Just remember this. A sexist will never be the opposite sex. A racist will never be a different race. But an ageist will get old.
13 comments:
I didn't take the quiz, but I have known my favorite ages have always been from about 35 to 45. Don't exactly know why, but they have been. LKM
I actually consider myself slightly ageist in both directions--young and old people tend to irritate me in different situations and in different ways. So I guess there's no surprise that I came out with "little or no automatic preference" for either.
But, now that I think about it, I also have very pleasant memories of working with children, young people and old people, so maybe I'm not quite as misanthropic as I thought.
"Your data suggest a moderate automatic preference for Old compared to Young." I'm surprised because I'm equally uncomfortable around everyone :-D
The quiz showed a preference for old compared to young. Which might explain why my career as a high school teacher was short-lived.
"Your data suggest a moderate automatic preference for Young compared to Old." Doesn't surprise me at all.
"Your data suggest a strong automatic preference for Young compared to Old."
I took this quiz last summer and it reported that I had no preference for the young or old. I suppose I'm becoming more ageist in my "old" age.
This article is actually pretty interesting... check it out
psychology.tamu.edu/Faculty/blanton/bj.2006.arbitrary.pdf
"Your data suggest a strong automatic preference for Young compared to Old." I wonder if the quiz is presented in different orders and if that affects the outcome. I feel like I got so "hard wired" by the first half by associating young with good that it was tough for me to switch. But, I could just be in denial. Perhaps it's all of those old crumugeny vets I work with :)
I definitely think the order matters. I'm not sure how accurate of a measure this is for ageism, but I thought it was still interesting. For all of those who didn't think your score accurately reflected your real attitudes, just remember that this thing is measuring differences of milliseconds so take the results with a grain of salt. I enjoyed the article that jbeany sent (here's a link). In the conclusion it said
"The IAT is being used in the public domain to diagnose hidden biases and prejudices. However, the arbitrary nature of the IAT metric and the fact that diagnoses have not been linked to any observable acts of automatic preference suggest that researchers have no way of gauging the true magnitude of the implicit preference expressed by a given IAT score."
"Your data suggest a strong automatic preference for Young compared to Old." I'm not sure what it means, since there were at least some of the pictures where you could be very clearly "wrong" in identifying old or young. Were they all that way? If so, how does that test my preference for one or the other?
But on a more general note, how does one distinguish between ageism in job hiring and expectations for health/longevity? A businessman may refuse to hire a 60 year old, not because he's ageist, but because the sixty year old will likely be slower or require higher insurance premiums?
Hey, isn't it time for a new post around here? Is there moving and shaking to report on?
Too much moving and shaking is going on. No time to post. Maybe later this week when my schedule is finalized and my secondary apps are in.
speaking of moving and shaking, did ya'll feel the earthquake on Sunday? About 10:30am, 4.7 centered east of LA. Did I spell ya'll right?
I didn't feel it. And I was awake at the time I think. Oh well. And you can spell it y'all or ya'll. I used to spell it ya'll, but I'm starting to favor the y'all. It all depends on whether or not you think it is short for "you all" or "ya all"
Post a Comment