4 ms·

Don't call me "old": Avoiding ageism when writing about aging

8 points by m_kos 3y ago

Bostonian 3y ago
Some people really are old, that can be important information, and recognizing it is not an expression of ill will.
PopAlongKid 3y ago
As advice columnist Miss Manners states, "You are a victim of the silly, harmful and futile modern convention that it is embarrassing to grow old"
- ericmcer 3y ago
  Sounds like a dumb sentiment put eloquently.
  - fargle 3y ago
    it's actually an excellent sentiment. it's futile to just keep inventing new euphemisms every time someone is offended. people get old, it's a fact, it's the way it is. ageism isn't about what it's called or some kind of implied "shame". it's about assuming things based on it, like competence, employ-ability, etc. that's ugly, and fwiw the industry that hn serves, could really stand to learn a thing or two about it. i'm not as eloquent as miss manners, but she's right.
local_crmdgeon 3y ago
Do whatever you want about them, but I give you permission to call me old. I am old.
snakeyjake 3y ago
If someone says my 92-year-old grandmother's face that she is "successfully aging" she's liable to kick them in the nuts. She's old. As hell. The minds of people who spend time writing things like this article are so foreign to me that they are incomprehensible.
- wizzwizz4 3y ago
  To be fair, this was in the “language to avoid” section of the blog post. Be clear, precise, and pedantic about your terminology – don't use words to describe groups just because everybody else does – and you will automatically satisfy most inclusivity guidance. To write respectively, have enough respect to know what you're talking about, or consult those who do. To avoid harmful stereotypes, don't use them: think about what category of people you're really talking about, and use that (instead of a proxy category). Some people aren't very good at this, though, and these checklists can help them.
  - uyyyureru 3y ago
    > don't use words to describe groups just because everybody else does What? Arriving on shared definition of terms carries enormous cultural benefits. The world is vastly more complex than language, so language will always fall short. > have enough respect to know what you're talking about Who decides this? How is one supposed to know this? > or consult those who do Taken with the prior statement, this seems very similar to an abusive relationship. This kind of consultation would require enormous amounts of trust. How does one know if a person is trustworthy? > harmful stereotypes Who decides if a stereotype is harmful? I'm not sure how to act on this in a way that's not susceptible to being abused. > what category of people you're really talking about This is pretty good advice, but again shared cultural definitions are extremely powerful and valuable, so it will likely be in adequate.
    - wizzwizz4 3y ago
      “Shared cultural definitions” carry enormous cultural baggage. If I say something affects women, but it's about menstrual bleeding… well, why not just say “people who menstruate”? Much clearer for women on the pill or without a uterus, or trans men, or whatever. And if it's about breast cancer, that's a completely different set of people, many (though not most) of whom are not women. This imprecision has a death toll. To give an example from the article, “boomers” is a term referring to a specific American demographic group, usually from a sociocultural perspective. (It's actually a bit more complicated than this: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_boom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_boom for details.) If you're trying to classify humans by age, e.g. in a medical context, the term is not appropriate. I can't tell you how to know whether you know what you're talking about: that's difficult. A good rule of thumb is that you're aware of contradictory viewpoints, and understand why those people disagree with you (and why they're wrong, if they are), but this only works if you don't force it (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart's_law) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart's_law). Finding experts is a difficult problem, but in this case it's easy: picking a member of the demographic group at random, then randomly picking one of their friends (also in the demographic group), will probably give you someone who can tell you how members of that group will react to various terms, what the preferred terminology is, and why it's not about the words you use. (Because it isn't. Never has been, never will be. Even https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derry/Londonderry_name_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derry/Londonderry_name_dispute isn't about the name.) Stereotypes are harmful if they cause harm, which is most of them. There's no arbiter except reality. If it's easier for you, avoid stereotypes that are inaccurate: which is, again, most of them. If you don't know that either, just use one of these irritating checklists of prescribed and proscribed terms: that's why they exist.
idonotknowwhy 3y ago
Great, I guess I won't be able to ask chat gpt any questions about aging after the next training data update
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
User23 3y ago
Just what we needed, another euphemism treadmill. Getting old kind of sucks. While with fortune you’ll have gained some wisdom and assets, your body and mind are noticeably deteriorating by the time you hit 40 and it just gets worse from there. You get uglier, weaker, slower physically and mentally, more forgetful, and less healthy with every passing year. The only thing getting old has going for it is it feels like it beats the alternative. And no amount of euphemism is ever going to change that.
bgun 3y ago
This article is a training resource for scientific writers, not a guide on what you're allowed to call your grandma, which is entirely your business. However, like everything else, language is a practice, and it can't hurt to practice your awareness of what might constitute impolite vs formally appropriate speech, even if you consciously choose to ignore it in casual conversation.

8 points by m_kos 3y ago

Some people really are old, that can be important information, and recognizing it is not an expression of ill will.

As advice columnist Miss Manners states, "You are a victim of the silly, harmful and futile modern convention that it is embarrassing to grow old"

ericmcer 3y ago
Sounds like a dumb sentiment put eloquently.
- fargle 3y ago
  it's actually an excellent sentiment. it's futile to just keep inventing new euphemisms every time someone is offended. people get old, it's a fact, it's the way it is. ageism isn't about what it's called or some kind of implied "shame". it's about assuming things based on it, like competence, employ-ability, etc. that's ugly, and fwiw the industry that hn serves, could really stand to learn a thing or two about it. i'm not as eloquent as miss manners, but she's right.

local_crmdgeon 3y ago

Do whatever you want about them, but I give you permission to call me old. I am old.

snakeyjake 3y ago

If someone says my 92-year-old grandmother's face that she is "successfully aging" she's liable to kick them in the nuts. She's old. As hell. The minds of people who spend time writing things like this article are so foreign to me that they are incomprehensible.

wizzwizz4 3y ago
To be fair, this was in the “language to avoid” section of the blog post. Be clear, precise, and pedantic about your terminology – don't use words to describe groups just because everybody else does – and you will automatically satisfy most inclusivity guidance. To write respectively, have enough respect to know what you're talking about, or consult those who do. To avoid harmful stereotypes, don't use them: think about what category of people you're really talking about, and use that (instead of a proxy category). Some people aren't very good at this, though, and these checklists can help them.
- uyyyureru 3y ago
  > don't use words to describe groups just because everybody else does What? Arriving on shared definition of terms carries enormous cultural benefits. The world is vastly more complex than language, so language will always fall short. > have enough respect to know what you're talking about Who decides this? How is one supposed to know this? > or consult those who do Taken with the prior statement, this seems very similar to an abusive relationship. This kind of consultation would require enormous amounts of trust. How does one know if a person is trustworthy? > harmful stereotypes Who decides if a stereotype is harmful? I'm not sure how to act on this in a way that's not susceptible to being abused. > what category of people you're really talking about This is pretty good advice, but again shared cultural definitions are extremely powerful and valuable, so it will likely be in adequate.
  - wizzwizz4 3y ago
    “Shared cultural definitions” carry enormous cultural baggage. If I say something affects women, but it's about menstrual bleeding… well, why not just say “people who menstruate”? Much clearer for women on the pill or without a uterus, or trans men, or whatever. And if it's about breast cancer, that's a completely different set of people, many (though not most) of whom are not women. This imprecision has a death toll. To give an example from the article, “boomers” is a term referring to a specific American demographic group, usually from a sociocultural perspective. (It's actually a bit more complicated than this: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_boom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_boom for details.) If you're trying to classify humans by age, e.g. in a medical context, the term is not appropriate. I can't tell you how to know whether you know what you're talking about: that's difficult. A good rule of thumb is that you're aware of contradictory viewpoints, and understand why those people disagree with you (and why they're wrong, if they are), but this only works if you don't force it (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart's_law) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart's_law). Finding experts is a difficult problem, but in this case it's easy: picking a member of the demographic group at random, then randomly picking one of their friends (also in the demographic group), will probably give you someone who can tell you how members of that group will react to various terms, what the preferred terminology is, and why it's not about the words you use. (Because it isn't. Never has been, never will be. Even https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derry/Londonderry_name_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derry/Londonderry_name_dispute isn't about the name.) Stereotypes are harmful if they cause harm, which is most of them. There's no arbiter except reality. If it's easier for you, avoid stereotypes that are inaccurate: which is, again, most of them. If you don't know that either, just use one of these irritating checklists of prescribed and proscribed terms: that's why they exist.

idonotknowwhy 3y ago

Great, I guess I won't be able to ask chat gpt any questions about aging after the next training data update

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

User23 3y ago

Just what we needed, another euphemism treadmill. Getting old kind of sucks. While with fortune you’ll have gained some wisdom and assets, your body and mind are noticeably deteriorating by the time you hit 40 and it just gets worse from there. You get uglier, weaker, slower physically and mentally, more forgetful, and less healthy with every passing year. The only thing getting old has going for it is it feels like it beats the alternative. And no amount of euphemism is ever going to change that.

bgun 3y ago

This article is a training resource for scientific writers, not a guide on what you're allowed to call your grandma, which is entirely your business. However, like everything else, language is a practice, and it can't hurt to practice your awareness of what might constitute impolite vs formally appropriate speech, even if you consciously choose to ignore it in casual conversation.