"boomer" thread

[Maireas]

You've hidden this evening's offensive, ageist thread, stereotyping "boomers". Will this be deleted? Can we have a robust response to ageism on MN?

Surely you understand generalisation?

You’ll never get that one over the line it would be a ridiculous curtailment of speech.

You wouldn’t be able to call anyone childish or immature, say a certain fashion is ‘too young’, ‘act your age not your shoe size’, ‘grow up’, or all the rest of it.

Of course but you took it personally, so you clearly don’t.

Because I'm sick of seeing it.

No point in debating with you anyway.

The whataboutery is right there in your first paragraph too.

Of course we can talk about pensions. Climate change. Assisted dying. Why ever not?

Where discussions descend into ageism are when any older person is dismissed as an "old hag" or a "dirty paedo you should report him" (see swimming pool thread if it's still there. OP of that one also very vocal about the elderly on other threads- I was deleted for pointing that out) or when any neighbour who just wants to live in peace and quiet without harassment from the family next door and so gets abuse and posters on here whipping up the OP to give them more abuse.

This is why MN need to look closely at ideas they are allowing to be published on their website. Racism, ablism get short shrift, but the abuse of older people is still very much allowed to stand. It didn't use to be like that actually, for a few years moderators were very much onto it and overtly abusive posts were quickly deleted. Something recently has changed. Their site, their rules. But if opening a chat forum and seeing thread after thread full of abusive language and people being egged on to be even more abusive is indicative of both the demographic of the users, and the rules of its owners, then after 19 years maybe it's time to move on. I wouldn't be missed. Not nearly as ageist enough.

We’re all sick of lots of things.

If you think there’s no point debating in case somebody says an uncomfortable fact then not much I can do about that.

No. I meant there's no point in debating with you specifically.

I agree, but the ageism accusations are always made when people discuss the triple lock or pensioner concessions.

I said I only wanted fuel allowance to go to those on pension credit and was accused of wanting to put all over 70s in a workhouse.

Seriously.

You clearly understand very little about language.

Do you think it's ok to call people N*? Mentally retarded? Retard? Chav?

If not, (and one would hope it's a no) then you shouldn't think it's ok to call someone an old hag, an old bag etc.

The words you have used as your gotcha examples are neutral descriptives and have no negative connotation.

(Though in fairness, I'd add the "too young" for certain clothes' styles as ageist- in the same way that clothing is described as frumpy, or mumsy- not delete worthy, just needs robust calling out as yet again, another stick to beat women with)

Toooldtocare. This was me. Interesting thread. I didn't read the original post. I was born in 1950, only child, council house. Got pregnant at 18, got married,lived in 3 Rooms,shared a bathroom. Bought a caravan, not a fancy park home,a metal box, one paraffin heater. Washing done by hand, village,weather ex H or I drove. 1972, nursing training. Got a bicycle. Bought our first house,2 up 2 down. He was a violent passive aggressive gay psychopath. I Frequently had 3 jobs. Got divorced from him. Made homeless with 2 young kids still at home. Spent over a year in emergency accommodation,then council house. Re married, worked full time nights. New DH had been a council tenant for 20 years,so max discount. We had no central heating or double glazing, thought it was madness to add this to someone elses house,so bought it. A month later his company folded,I had 4 jobs. He was made redundant 5 times in 8 years. We downsized to a little 3 bed cottage. Always bought doer uppers. No holidays abroad, nothing fancy. Kids always shared bedrooms. The mortgage rate in 1983 after I had my son went from 12 to 16%, in 18 months. My late father re married 6 weeks before he died. He left me some premium bonds,we used them to buy solar panels,to future proof us. My hubby had an accident 3 years ago,had to stop work
No benefits because I had a tiny NHS (12 years) pension on top of my state pension. We scraped through. He's 7 years younger than me, just got his state pension this year.

When my dad was 12 he had a friend at school called Henry. They were both into science, and would conduct experiments together, with any materials they could scrabble up from their garden sheds or from local shopkeepers.

Henry stopped coming to school so my dad asked a teacher, where's Henry? The teacher said oh he won't be back, then refused to say any more.

My dad went round to Henry's house after school and the door was opened by Henry's nanny. She told my twelve year old dad that Henry was dead, having taken his own life. Then she closed the door. No adult ever said Henry's name to him again.

My dad went on to conduct many proper experiments in his early career in science, before becoming a civil servant on various projects that hugely improved the lives of people in our city. In his spare time he organised for CND, wrote letters to our MP, started mens groups and supported my mother going to Greenham Common. And raised us on a pitiful income with love and endless cultural and intellectual input.

Scratch a boomer, find a legend.

You seem to be taking this very personally. I've just had a look at your posts on the winter fuel allowance thread. I can't see any ageist opinions.

So, here's the thing. Just because you posted on thread X, the fact that some people are calling out the offensive language and opinions expressed on thread X doesn't mean they mean you.

How do you feel about the ageism expressed by others on Mumsnet?

It says ’Ageism in all forms should be unacceptable’

Does this also mean ageism against children and younger people? Or not?

Can you please dig out what you consider to be the most ageist post on that thread, to illustrate your example. I didn’t see anyone call anybody an ‘old hag’. However there was an awful lot of ‘young people robbing the elderly’, ‘young people thinking they deserve everything for free’, ‘young people want the elderly in workhouses’ that kind of thing. Just because they didn’t agree with a concession going to the wealthiest demographic in the country rather than the poorest.

Does this also mean ageism against children and younger people? Or not?

If that is as endemic as the ageism against women MN deems to be 'old' then yes it should.

Is it as bad or is this whatabouterry to distract from the main issue?

Well sadly, everyone knows just to mentally prefix “old” in front of ageism. Everyone knows what ageism means. That is the sad truth. It’s always detrimental and more often than not total bollocks being viciously spouted.

I agree the stereotypes against the older generations can be... something on here. However, there was a thread yesterday? About children and people were happily posting some vile shit about kids and young people there and there was nowhere near the level people bothered about that as they are here. Cuts both ways surely?

I’d swap with any hard working gen z (or whatever) living skint in a room.
Id have a possibility of 50 more years on earth not just 10-15

What was awful about the laptop thread was that the OP never once mentioned that the woman had done anything. She "looked". That was it. And, if the OP were to be believed, she "looked" once, because the toddler touched the laptop once.

There then ensued 20 odd pages of "if the stupid cunt had done that to my baby she'd have got off the train with 2 fucking black eyes" and "I'd have taken her fucking laptop and jumped on it". Etc.

Had the woman on the train had dementia, you can bet the language and opinions would have been far far worse.

As for me, I think ageist slurs are unacceptable and never use them. I’ve never called anyone a Karen or an Old Hag. Or anything like that, ever.

However I do find accusations of ageism are used to regularly shut down discussion of pensions and concessions. Presumably because people want to protect their own interests.

And while it’s inconvenient it is a simple fact that the majority of support for the Conservatives is from the elderly. The tories have made life for working and disabled people very very very hard. It is not ageist to be frustrated that most people who are retired are voting to further feather their own nests while pushing younger people further and further into poverty.

If younger people were mostly voting for a party that planned to decimate pensions and cancel pensioner concessions, how do you think pensioners would be viewing younger people en masse? Do you think they should be able to discuss it, or would it be ageism?

Yes, it does.
Under another username I'm frequently to be found defending teenagers. I teach 300 and love my life. Their minds, attitudes and sheer love for life gives me hope for the next generation.

I think you've missed my question: I haven't seen any ageist posts from you. How do you feel about ageism?

Cross post.

Domestic abuse is still often ignored.

Domestic abuse was overwhelmingly ALWAYS ignored for the boomer generation

Not simply ignored, but legal.
Marital rape for example, legal until 1991.

"If younger people were mostly voting for a party that planned to decimate pensions and cancel pensioner concessions, how do you think pensioners would be viewing younger people en masse? Do you think they should be able to discuss it, or would it be ageism?"

The second highest group to vote Conservative is the white working class aged under 35. Do they count?

It is not ageist to be frustrated that most people who are retired are voting to further feather their own nests while pushing younger people further and further into poverty

Damn those pensioners wanting not to starve and freeze to death and wanting a decent pension they can live on! how dare they be so venal when everyone else votes from the highest of principles and not for the party that'll do the most for them!