This is how the Greek philosopher Aristotle defined old age. In this way, he broke with the previous conception of aging, described by Plato as “a maximum state of prudence, discretion, sagacity and good judgment of the person, which allows him to play roles of great responsibility and respect”. That classical vision explains why there was a time when older people enjoyed a privileged position in the social hierarchy, as is the case in various societies of the Ancient Age such as Egypt, the Hebrew people, Greece or Rome.
But starting to think of old age as a process of pure deterioration changed everything. So much so that we now live in a time in which age discrimination, or ageism, is very present in a society in which people are judged mainly by their productivity.
Although ageism is currently considered the third major form of discrimination, behind racism and sexism, several studies estimate its prevalence above the other two. This is what happens with the figures reported by the general population in the European Social Survey (ESS) in 2012.
According to the ESS, ageism was the most prevalent type of discrimination in all age groups, being reported by 28% of the participants, compared to 24% for sexism and 15% for racism. The survey also showed that disrespect was the most frequent manifestation of ageism (41%) and then abuse of the elderly (23%).
More recently, in the 2021 World Ageism Report, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that one in two people globally is an ageist.
Although the idea of ??discrimination based on age began to emerge in the 1950s, it was not until 1969 that the American psychiatrist Robert Butler defined it as “the prejudice of one age group over another age group.”
Ageism is a multidimensional concept. It is made up of a cognitive dimension (beliefs and stereotypes), an affective dimension (prejudice) and a behavioral dimension (discriminatory behavior and behavioral intentions). In other words, what we think, what we feel and how we act.
This type of discrimination can occur at different levels. While stereotypes and prejudices act at the individual (micro) level, where the understanding of ageism happens; discriminatory behaviors are present both at the individual level, as well as at the meso (social relations) and macro (institution and culture) levels.
One is not aware of how fatal ageism can be until one is aware of its negative consequences on the health of the elderly: increased mortality, reduced longevity, physical illnesses, functional and cognitive deterioration, anxiety, depression, reduced quality of life, social isolation, loneliness, social exclusion, increased social and health spending, premature institutionalization, etc.
One of the most widely held theories to explain how ageism affects health is Steele’s stereotype threat theory.
Ageism has a series of characteristics that distinguish it from racism and sexism. One of them is that ageism affects the only evolutionary condition common to all human beings: aging. Many authors suggest that the formation of ageist attitudes arises from the fear of aging and death, which in today’s society continues to be taboo, and it seems that it does not concern younger age groups because they are supposedly exempt from “it”. But age or not, the outcome of any human is the end of his life.
Another distinctive characteristic of ageism is the difficulty in differentiating between the figure of the oppressor and the oppressed: any individual or age group can accept and exercise discrimination based on age, including young people, family members or social and health professionals.
Sometimes even the same age group that is the victim of ageism, in this case the elderly, becomes the oppressor. Because yes, it turns out that older people can be ageists towards themselves, which ends up embodying the so-called self-ageism.
The cultural ambiguity surrounding the concept of ageism is noteworthy. A clear example is found in the ambivalent attitude that Western societies present towards the elderly. On the one hand, these societies, often for electoral purposes, protect the elderly through pensions, public spending and social services, while on the other, they subject them to stereotypes, humiliating, marginalizing and making them invisible.
The widespread desire for a long life is also ironic. The belief that living many years is synonymous with success clashes with society’s mainly negative perception of ageing. It is less striking how people intend to live many years but, simultaneously, they reject aging.
Aging is a physiological process present throughout the life cycle that includes from the moment of conception until death. Therefore, human beings should understand (and accept) that it is and will be a continuous process in our lives. If we optimize our opportunities for health, participation and safety, as suggested by the WHO’s concept of active aging, we will be able to celebrate years of healthier life.
The stereotypes of aging are unconsciously acquired at an early age and are reinforced over the years. In the end they are internalized by individuals and are translated into behaviors consistent with those beliefs. For this reason, the solution involves a conscious education free of discriminatory attitudes towards the elderly, aimed at both the youngest and the oldest.
To change our attitude, we should just remember that, as the French interpreter Maurice Chevalier said, “getting old is not so bad when you think of the alternative.”
This article was originally published by The Conversation.
