To be shocked at the ageism on here tonight

[drudgetrudy]

AIBU to be shocked at the terms used to refer to older people tonight.
We've had "old duffers", "old biddies" "old dears with nothing better to do" and this isn't a TAAT-its been on more than one thread.

If any other group were referred to in generalised and negative terms like this people would be going nuts.
People are people and come in many varieties over all age ranges.
Seriously pissed off tonight.

I have been guilty of not reporting instances to MNHQ in the past - I've posted on the thread instead. From here on, I will do both.

So shall I, BIWI

Thanks Justine that's an encouraging start.
Although I think we're in for a long haul.

Insidious ageism gets on my tits, as well as the obvious stuff.

I've been following a topic, whereby a Grandmother posted on a thread , saying she wasn't sure about gelling hands, when visiting a newborn and is this normal to expect the grandparents to do this..

Most of the posters assumed she was a grandmother (a woman) and tore her a new one - obviously in their minds, she was an interfering old woman.
But, interestingly enough, as soon as the poster revealed her self to be a Grandfather, which was about 6 pages in......
all of a sudden the whole tone changed and became much friendlieronce the posters realized it was a man:

Oh, you do have a point and welcome to mumsnet maybe we've been a bit harsh on you^ pass the sick bucket--

I've noticed this a lot on here and especially in RL:

Women will be really harsh and nasty towards Older women, but can be really nice almost simpering when it comes to Older men.
Are some women programmed(conditioned by society would be a better word) to be nicer to men in general, even older ones? But older women don't get the same respect.
I will never understand it.

Yes, Its definitely a Man's world out there.

And a LOT of ageism comes from Women as well as men, sad to say.

I have reported ageist posts. One response I got from MNHQ was that the ageism has been addressed on the thread, which was true; I and several others had posted objections. But it would have been much better if MNHQ had come on with a reminder of the talk guidelines (I don't remember if the post was egregious enough to warrant deletion).

I am much happier this morning than when I went to bed last night. Thanks, Justine.

And thanks to everyone on this thread.

Sometimes, you only really get a sense of whether/how offensive or inappropriate things are via discussion - and this has been an enlightening one........... Seems like we have a bit of a consensus here, so we're very happy to canvass opinion more widely about that on site and will do so

I do not think that the discussion here shows a consensus. In fact I think the nature of the forum discourages dissenting views from the vast majority due to the quite aggressive and sometimes insultive posts. The "middle of the road" pragmatist is for the most part do not wish to engage in healthy discussion as many times the argument becomes personal unpleasant

"I do not think that the discussion here shows a consensus. In fact I think the nature of the forum discourages dissenting views from the vast majority due to the quite aggressive and sometimes insultive posts"

I don't understand- do you feel you haven't been able to express your views? Or that you've been insulted?

I don't understand either. Tron isn't willing to elaborate, it seems.

Certainly the vast majority of contributions to thisthread indicate the feeling that there is an issue to be addressed. Justine appears to acknowledge that.

I think that basic politeness and tact are the issue when using terms, I do not think that the majority of words that people are objecting to are ageist in Themselves it depends on context.

The vast majority of a small numbers of contributors who are likely to have a view as they are self selecting to join the debate is not the vast majority of MN users

I think part of the problem is the constant statements in the media about the elderly being a problem.

This huge drain on resources, all the issues with overworked carers, drain on the nhs, bed blocking..... We elderly are an ongoing and insoluble problem according to that.

But really that is just a tiny part of being 'elderly' usually at the very end of lives.

I'm sure I've read that most people live less than a year after moving into a care home. So that being the case the costs can't be that high.

I wonder what percentage of the population born in say 1925 has or is being part of this huge expense. Probably quite small over all with most passing away with little cost to anyone.

Perhaps we need to use another term for the aged infirm who do require caring for and not lump them in with everyone else over 60.

"I think that basic politeness and tact are the issue when using terms, I do not think that the majority of words that people are objecting to are ageist in Themselves it depends on context."

Of course. Could you give some examples of when "old biddy" "old trout" or "old sow" could be used politely and tactfully?

I do not think that the majority of words that people are objecting to are ageist in Themselves it depends on context

Could you give some examples of when "old biddy" "old trout" or "old sow" could be used politely and tactfully?

Good question Hak

Moniker my mother is in her 90s and has been in a care home for 4 and a half years. Yes, I'd describe her as elderly. Tron I can't imagine a context in which it would be acceptable to describe her as an "old biddy".

Older people have a wealth of knowledge and experience, sometimes their contributions are welcomed and valued other times they are interfering, this depends on the situation. I do not think the term "biddy" is offensive, I think the other terms " sow" and "trout" are rude not necessarily ageist but rude, Never have never heard them used. Regional expressions such as "old duck" I also do not thin offensive or rude

"Older people have a wealth of knowledge and experience,"

Well, some of them do- some of them don't! Just like people of any other age

I do not think the term "biddy" is offensive, I think the other terms " sow" and "trout" are rude not necessarily ageist but rude,"

What if you put "old" in front of them?

Never have never heard them used

Really? Don't you read Mumsnet very much then?

Looking at your other posts Tron I think I will have to agree to disagree on equality and diversity issues.

If you don't find the term "biddy" offensive and you are still arguing for context in the light of other language that most people find offensive I doubt if we have any basis for productive debate.

So you say to women you don't know 'how are you you old duck/biddy' ?

People say, hen, chuck, love, lad, son, dear to people's faces but not old duck or old biddy ime.

Tron -I think the discussion on this thread has been relatively polite and anyone is welcome to post-all threads are self-selecting and unless anyone puts an alternative view there appears to be a consensus.

Sometimes threads that appear to be going in a certain direction change course when a brave person dissents.
I don't agree with you but you are free to express an opinion.
There have been a large number of people posting on this thread and they are largely in agreement.

I wouldn't want you to feel intimidated from expressing your point of view.
The caveat to this is that there are some forms of discriminatory or offensive posts which contravene mumsnet rules. Sometimes ageist posts in this category are sometimes slipping through the net. A large number of people are unhappy about this.

I have been out all day and just got back to it. Thank you for the response, Justine- far fairer and more positive than the first one.
I think that the reason that you haven't had many complaints of ageism is that people haven't bothered. I was the first one to mention 'old biddies on the bus' and I saw it over a year ago and hadn't mentioned it before. I shall report from now on.

Another one who has been out all day and just returned to this very interesting thread.

ilovesooty has it right in her list of proposed actions - thank you.
And Justine, thank you for your more measured and thoughtful response. I too will be reporting more instances of ageism in general - not looking for them deliberately, but feeling more empowered in reporting them.

And for moniker1, my mother, born in 1923 is still a net contributor to society, both financially and her charity volunteering as well as continuing to be a fabulous mother, grandmother and great grandmother. Definitely nobody's "old biddy".

I too have just come back to this thread and seen Justine's most recent reply. I am glad that she has taken on board what has been said here and will act on it.

I will make more of an effort to report ageist comments on MN in future. Thanks for starting this thread OP and highlighting this very important issue.

my mother, born in 1923 is still a net contributor to society, both financially and her charity volunteering as well as continuing to be a fabulous mother, grandmother and great grandmother. Definitely nobody's "old biddy

Well I didn't say anyone was an old biddy did I?

My point was that the elderly who DO require a lot of resources in respect of 24/7 care etc should NOT be lumped in, in the media, with elderly people (ie in some people's eyes anyone over 60) who do not. So your mother is not in that category Dido - so all the media attention on the 'problems' and 'cost of care' of the elderly should not be described as such in such a generalized term.

My point was that the constant descriptions in the media of the old being an insoluble and expensive problem contributes to ageism.

Moniker, I took your post to mean that people born in 1925 ish were either in nursing homes or other care, or are dead. I am just expressing a different view, that some of them fit neither of your categories!

Ahem.
Could we swap 'the elderly' and 'the old' for 'older people', please?!

Yes to the above ^^