Why is ageism accepted/tolerated on MN?

[IntermittentFarting]

I reported a post earlier today that the poster actually prefaced with "Sorry for an ageist post..."
wherein elderly people were moaned about for having the temerity to go shopping and stubbornly pissing everyone off with their very existence.
After a while I had an acknowledgement about my report, and saying that MN would take a look.

Well... it's still there.

Whether or not the post is ageist is not up for debate: the poster themselves even said it was, and intentionally posted an acknowledged ageist post.

Can you tell me why MN accepts ageism?

Ok so let’s say we go zero tolerance on ‘ageism’.

Can we discuss badly behaved children?
Horrible stroppy teenagers?
Snowflake millennials?
Middle aged men hogging the roads with their silly bikes?

Or is it only ageism against older people that you’re objecting to? And if so, why are they exempt from the general moaning above?

@IntermittentFarting I honestly believe ageism against younger adults ( 18-late 20s say) is actually as prevalent if you really went through the posts. Some people like to ram it into any thread at any opportunity. It is widespread on MN and in society as a whole.

I would say ageism against children actually. It’s ’they’re 2, they’re bonkers at that age’ or ‘5 year olds aren’t known for their tact’ etc.

As I said in my post above, ageism is unacceptable against anyone, but it happened to be a post about older people that prompted me to post here.

Discussing individual badly behaved children or stroppy teenagers isn’t ageism, though presuming all children are naughty and all teenagers are stroppy absolutely is.

Some millennials are snowflakes. So are some people of other generations. Assuming something negative about a whole generation absolutely is ageism.

Anyone on a bike hogging the road is annoying, but I see this in people of all ages and both sexes.

Not sure why you think some ageism is OK, to be honest.

Same with anything abelist. I report, and it gets ignored every single time.

I hadn’t noticed that, but perhaps you’re right. 🙂

Oh the ableism on here is a whole nother industrial sized can of Dune-esque sandworms. Very depressing.
And, yes, often left to stand when reported.

Should have added… acknowledging generational differences isn’t ageism.

Stereotyping age groups is very common and I don't think it's something you can or need to ban.

Challenge it when you see it - I do. I challenge every time small children are called brats or nuisances or teenagers are stereotyped negatively and people write off young adults as snowflakes.

I challenge people who say children must give way to adults, 'elders' just because of their age.

It's part of a discussion, not a reason for a knee jerk reaction for any particular age group to be treated differently from others.

I see more ageism in younger age groups - the discrimination of younger people who are paid less than minimum wage for example, despite doing exactly the same job .

As to discussing pension, why on earth should be not discuss a state benefit that is paid for by working age individuals?

It's not, but it's what gets accused of being ageist on here. Someone saying 'I don't want to wear granny shoes' gets some angry grandmothers asking 'what's wrong with granny shoes' completely missing the point that when they were young they also didn't want to look like their grannies.

So many posters get this wrong and I'm with MN here.

It is not agist to have a view or opinion about age, it is prejudiced.

"All young people are lazy" is a prejudiced view. It's is NOT agist or against the law or a breach of anything other than good manners (and a decent education and being a reasonable person).

"Old people annoy me because they are slow in the checkout" is prejudice but a view someone is entitled to.

DISCRIMINATION on the grounds of a protected characteristic is illegal.

"I won't speak to anyone over 60 because they've all got dementia" is stupid and is discrimination but is legal as it's free speech and a personal view.

"I'm a police officer and I won't go to a call involving old people" is discrimination and is illegal because it is changing the service provided ON THE BASIS of a prejudiced view.

Assuming a difficult person in a post is old, young, black, trans, whatever, is rude and offensive and surfaces the poster's prejudices but is NOT eg agist.

Well that is not ageism, is it. It's true that some things were easier in the past and some things were easier now, or at least it's a valid opinion.

I do find lazy use of 'OK boomer' as a reply to anything to be a bit offensive, but making a generalisation about a generation, based on historical facts, isn't.

The one I saw was a joke. Nobody was trying to make someone really think they have dementia!

I know some MNers think joking about any illness should be forbidden, but that's not real life.

@IntermittentFarting I think maybe I pick up on it as I have two great adult kids in that age group so maybe I'm more sensitive to it.

She shouldn't be allowed to argue that pensions are too high?

I mean, it's a strange argument when they are lower than many other countries, but it's an opinion she's allowed to have isn't it?

But MN is not a free speech platform nor does it tolerate (most) prejudice. It even groups ageism along with other discrimination in its guidelines, but is far less likely to delete it.
From the guidelines:

”We'll remove posts we consider to contain personal attacks, to break the law and/or to be obscene, racist, sexist, disablist, ageist, homophobic or transphobic, once they are brought to our attention. We will also delete any posts that we think are just seriously unpleasant (please note that any subsequent posts repeating the words in the deleted post may be removed also).”

Im bloody glad they don’t tolerate sexism, racism, homophobia and transphobia, but they seem far less likely to deal with instances of ageism.

I have 4 YA “children” aged from 18-32, and they’re all fab, as are the older 3’s partners! Believe me I love young adults 😊

The thing is that some people consider is ageist just to mention that people may be old. I was told off for using the expression old aged pension, for example. I've since learnt the name has changed, but it's still a pension you get at a certain age! Some people refuse to accept ageing as a thing at all.

The other thing that grinds my gears (in addition to some of the great points already made) is the unconscious bias around the year in which someone is born and the automatic assumption that because of their DOB that they are doddery, have lost their marbles, move around more slowly, are technologically inept and all the other ghastly stereotypes.

nowadays there are people in their 60s, 70s and 80s still running businesses, still in senior roles, actively engaged in sport, switched-on and contributing to society.

And these great people are not the minority, I meet such people every day, I work with them and I admire them. And many of them are women!!!

They just don't want to be labelled, simple as, because we aren't in Japan where age is venerated and respected. Age equates to scrapheap, disgusting but we are where we are, so we need to take care with vocabulary.

Calling someone an "Old Age Pensioner" defines the human by the year that they were born. There must surely be many other less disparaging ways to refer to a person, a bit of thoughtfulness is all that's needed.

"nowadays there are people in their 60s, 70s and 80s still running businesses, still in senior roles, actively engaged in sport, switched-on and contributing to society."

There are, but there are plenty who are struggling in their 70s and 80s as well.

"Calling someone an "Old Age Pensioner" defines the human by the year that they were born. "

Oh please. Calling someone a 'recipient of the state pension' gives you exactly the same information.

Maybe that's also just a point of view... 🙄

The bar is apparently shockingly low.

I’m willing to bet £50 that you would never have been ‘prompted’ by an ageist thread about toddlers, teenagers or younger people in general.

Someone hasn’t visited the ‘gender’ boards… 😳