THE STANFORD CENTER on Longevity tackled a big topic at its annual Century Summit last week at Stanford University: “Ageism and the Intergenerational Future.” In collaboration with The Longevity Project, an organization founded to foster research and public conversation about our increased life spans, over 200 participants gathered in person and hundreds more online for two days of panels and discussion about the effects of ageism in society today.
Although gerontologist Robert Butler coined the term “ageism” back in 1968, the problem is alive and well and becoming even more pressing. The U.S. Census Bureau projects that the 65-and-over population will nearly double in size over the next few decades, from 49 million in 2016 to 95 million in 2060. By 2034, older adults are projected to outnumber children for the first time in U.S. history.
Ageism is the last ‘ism’
Ageism — sometimes described as the last acceptable “ism,” a perception that conferences like this one aim to change — and age segregation are “barriers” to what would otherwise be “one of the most exciting opportunities in history” due to increased life expectancy, SCL director Laura Carstensen said in opening the summit.
And ageism affects everyone. “We start aging the minute we are born,” said activist and author Ashton Applewhite.
Applewhite and other panelists described the inequities caused by pervasive negative attitudes about getting older.
“We are bombarded by messages of incapacity and how terrible (aging) will be,” said Applewhite during a panel on “Age and Culture in the United States.”
Like racism, sexism and other deeply held forms of prejudice, ageism prevents people from “a full and fair shot” at longevity, according to Leanne Clark-Shirley, president of the American Society on Aging.
Ageism has been amplified by a social infrastructure that keeps the generations apart. Marc Freedman, founder and co-CEO of CoGenerate, a nonprofit organization that fosters initiatives to connect different generations, gave a historical perspective, pointing out that in the 19th century, generations worked together and were integrated without regard to age.
The 20th century’s introduction of retirement communities and nursing homes created “structures that segregate” the generations, Freedman said, arguing that intergenerational housing arrangements can benefit older and younger people not only financially but by creating the proximity that allows true connection over shared interests like music or a common purpose like fighting climate change.
“Housing got us into this mess but may be the best way to get us out,” Freedman said.
Downsides and upsides of getting older
Of course, getting older has its downsides. Gerontologist and author Louise Aronson suggested that it is “utopian” to say that all messages have to be positive. The tendency of some medical professionals to speak to older people in a “sing-song, high pitch” voice — like baby talk — is “ironic” since hearing at that pitch is one of the first abilities to go, Aronson said.
Richard Dorment, who directs health coverage for Hearst Magazines, said we have to “acknowledge the limits of self-improvement,” referring to expensive and untested efforts by some, especially in Silicon Valley, to achieve some form of immortality.
That said, there are both economic and health benefits if older people have the chance to thrive. As one example, panelist Michael Clinton, a business consultant on the opportunities presented by the “new longevity,” pointed out university enrollment faces a cliff as the number of college-aged youth declines. To counter that financial hit, universities can offer programs for older adults, with all the benefits that intellectual stimulation and cross-generational connections can bring.
In the film and TV industry, creating content that doesn’t put older people down is tough going. “There is progress but still a lack of commitment” to telling stories about older people, according to producer Amy Baer, despite recent shows like “Shrinking” and “A Man on the Inside” that feature older stars Harrison Ford and Ted Danson.
In that business, “older means 45 and older, not 65 and older,” Baer says.
But Baer is confident the industry will respond to data showing “an audience for this content hiding in plain sight.” Apparently money still talks in Hollywood.
Older women get the worst of it
Several panels addressed the even greater negative effects of ageism on women. “Women are never the right age,” Applewhite said. They “are too sexy, then too fertile, then neither sexy nor fertile, then it’s over.”
Panelists from the entertainment, beauty and financial sectors spelled out some of the specific obstacles faced by women of a certain age. Musicologist and UCLA professor Tiffany Naiman challenged the implicit assumption in the music industry that as women age, they “become unproductive in every way” and the practice of dropping older female artists.
“Is there not wisdom in the music of older people?” she asked. “Who decides what music gets out there?”
Estee Lauder executive Tara Connaughton described the beauty industry’s efforts to move from the anti-aging products that have dominated most lines to a “pro-aging” approach, highlighting her company’s campaign to show achievements by older women made possible precisely because they have the advantages of age.
JoAnne Moore, an executive with financial services company Corebridge Financial, presented powerful statistics showing the triple whammy of increased longevity on women’s finances: they earn less, pay more for health care and insurance, and live longer than men. The result, per Cindy Hounsell, president of the nonprofit Women’s Institute for a Secure Retirement, is that “almost 50% of women over 80 live below the poverty line.”
Stanford Graduate School of Business professor Annamaria Lusardi said that one way to increase women’s financial security is to begin teaching children about finances at an early age.
“Financial literacy should begin with the tooth fairy” to help instill the confidence that women need to plan for their own financial futures, Lusardi said.
Ageism affects all ages
One of the most interesting themes to emerge over the two-day conference was the lived experience of many panelists and attendees that ageism is not directed only towards the old. An audience survey showed that 21% of people who had experienced age bias were in the 20-35 age range, compared to just 31% of those ages 51-65, and a surprisingly low 3% of those age 80 and over.
Kate Rarey, a 24-year-old producer who works at Palisades Media Ventures to develop content focusing on public policy issues, spoke of the negative comments she received about being part of an “entitled” and “lazy” generation after a Wall Street Journal interview in which she expressed her worries about buying a home and trying to secure her financial future. (There was broad agreement among older audience members that growing up without being subjected to “comments” sections was a definite plus.)
Climate activist Pooja Tilvawala said that as a young person, she was often “not given the amount of trust” needed to implement her organization’s goals. Millennial Erin Mcinrue — 41 years old with young children, aging parents, and a busy job as director of marketing at a workforce management platform called Rippling — described herself as “sandwiched, mortgaged and in constant need of caffeine” while facing assumptions about her commitment to a challenging career.
Nicole Kenney, founder of an organization that connects Black women of all ages called Hey Auntie!, said intergenerational relationships and the wisdom of older people who have lived through past problems can “help young people thrive in these difficult times,” a sentiment shared by many of the younger panelists.
In the end, the summit’s message cut across all ages. Author Anne Lamott, who wrote about being a new mother in 1993 and now writes a retirement column for The Washington Post, reflected that “we are all on borrowed time, so you make choices on spending it wisely” as you get older.
Carly Roman-Woo, who recently received her doctorate degree in gerontology and is working with the nonprofit Archstone Foundation to help older Californians, gave the issue a practical spin: “You are setting yourself up for the ageism you will face” if you are not fighting ageism as a young person.
Ken Stern, founder and chair of the Longevity Project, summed up the consensus: the 20th century models of older people “marching off to Arizona and Florida” for retirement and younger people “marching out of the house” to separate lives are far from the ideal way to live.
The post Taking aim at ageism: Stanford summit looks at changing the conversation about longevity appeared first on Local News Matters.