Part I - Inequality, Rights, and Respect (A Look At The Prejudice and Ignorance That Still Exists In 2012 America)

This is Part I of a two-part piece addressing inequality, rights, and respect; or more accurately, the absence of any, or all, of these in 2012 America. Because ageism may be one of the more common "isms" today, but also because it may go more undetected than some other forms of prejudice do, I've devoted the first part of this Hub to just ageism.

Part II takes a more general look at prejudice, bigotry, and ignorance. The aim is not to call yet more attention to those types of prejudice, bigotry, and ignorance with which most of us are fairly familiar; but instead to call attention to some of the ways in which people are not viewed as, or treated with, equal respect that we don't always hear very much about it.

Over the last few years, I've noticed one idea that seems to be cropping up more and more in one place or another, and that idea is that Baby Boomers (people approaching sixty years old and those who reached it in recent years) are taking away jobs from younger people by not retiring "when they should".

It's probably worth mentioning that I've noticed that those who often complain of having trouble finding work "because of old people" (who were in one instance instead referred to as "old f'ers") often complain in grammar that isn't quite as polished as some employers might prefer, or with a self-centeredness that suggest immaturity (which may not do much for getting a person hired).

Although every time I've run into someone who thinks this way I've always thought how "lousy" it is, I haven't really given it a whole lot of thought - mostly, I suppose, because I've been in my fifties for the last several years and just wasn't thinking a whole lot about being sixty.

A Little Background - My Own Age, Difficulties with Unemployment, and First-Hand Exposure to Over-Sixty People and Their Employment Endeavors (In other words, what I know first-hand about being around sixty and a little over, and what a lot of younger people just haven't yet figured out)

It may also be worth mentioning that one reason I write online in my spare time ("skimmed time", actually) is to supplement my part-time freelance income, which needs to be supplemented because I wasn't able to find permanent, full-time, employment as a result of my being around fifty at the time, as well as the poor economy. As a result (and contrary to the common belief that people around sixty live in a rocking chair), I spend a good part of my 20-hour days writing, with some part of some days also spent with family or friends, taking care of house responsibilities, walking (for exercise) or else following one of my many DVD fitness programs, include my favorite - "The Wave". I've got my share of bills, and I've got my share of plans, dreams, and causes. In other words, with the exception of not having to cook for more than myself most of the time, I'm still pretty much the same as I've always been. I write thousands of words a day (not infrequently, 5000 words in two or three hours) without a whole lot of grammar errors (considering the number of words, anyway), and I type those thousands of words a day without a whole lot of typing errors (considering the number of words, anyway). I'm not bragging - only pointing out that I have a fairly high energy level that can come in handy with a lot of work situations. Neither am I applying for a job here - only pointing out that I'm pretty damned capable of being pretty damned productive.

Remaining very much at the same energy level, and having very much the same career aims that I've always had, even though I've settled in my present work situation without "always looking for a job" I haven't necessarily ruled out the idea that if the right position were to become available to me I just might accept it.

Hanging out in circles that include people my age and a little older has shown me that I'm not alone in how I experience my own age. I have an early sixties sister who continues to seek the same kind of work she's always done, after she was forced into retirement two years ago. Also, my children's early sixties father continues to pursue his own career interests with full-time employment, as well as work on developing a couple of things on his own in his spare time.

Changes in How We View Age As We Age - My Own Observations

I don't blame younger people for thinking sixty is old. Most of us think whatever age we haven't yet reached is old. I recall thinking high-school kids were old when I was in junior-high. I recall thinking twenty-three was old when I was in my early- and mid- teens. At twenty-one or so, I thought thirty was old and forty was REAL OLD. At forty, I could look back on how misguided (stupid) I was about "old", so I had learned enough from discovering that that I was a little more cautious about who and what I considered "old". At forty, I felt the same as I had at twenty (but I knew more about life), and I was even told that I looked ten or fifteen years younger than I really was (which meant I didn't look in the mirror and see "old" any more than I felt old). It was at forty that I realized that forty is actually pretty young. That's when I braced myself for soon leaving "being young" and entering "being middle-aged", but I didn't know exactly when "middle-aged" would arrive because, after all, forty was considered "middle-aged" and yet looked and felt so young to me.

At forty, however, I did feel good and mature. In fact, I thought I'd reached some level of "good and mature" with which I'd move onto the next phase of life. I thought I had the whole human-development/maturation thing figured out: We spent twenty years growing up (Science tells us we really spend more like twenty-five years reaching complete maturity.) Then we spend the next twenty years establishing life as an adult and, maybe, building a family. By forty, I thought, we've spent twenty years of being an adult and building, or continuing to build, that life; and we reach forty we move onto the next phase of living life as a well established and completely mature person. Yes, at forty I figured I'd reached that complete maturity and certainly had learned enough about being a person, and living a life, that I had come a long way from being in my twenties.

At fifty, however, I discovered that I'd learned and changed some of my thinking over the course of my forties. It had turned out that apparently (at least for me) being forty isn't the ceiling on growing up. Who knew! Having discovered this at fifty, I started to see what may lie ahead a little differently. Since I'd thought I'd reached that ceiling at forty, and since I'd discovered I hadn't; I could only wonder if there was yet more to learn and figure out in my fifties and beyond. I'd noticed that some of the things I'd learned after forty were the smaller (but not insignficant) things of life, living, and maturing. I'm not talking about "small" in terms of things like learning how to bake a better cake or taking up photography. I'm talking about things like understanding how and why some things in life change us, or the ways in which we can think differently from one decade to the next. I'm talking about inner growth - not the superficial stuff. What I'd noticed about my forties was that it was kind of like putting finishing touches on being a mature and whole individual, and managing life in general.

At fifty, I felt as if I'd learned so much more. What I would eventually learn in my fifties was that my fifties would be a matter of not thinking so much about life in general and returning, instead, to focusing on essentially adjusting to the idea that I was past fifty and was finding my way to defining myself, my life (and fifty, itself). Also, with what I'd noticed about my fifties, I changed that "schedule of life" I'd once believed was accurate. Call it "wishful thinking", but I paid more attention to the fact that more and more people live to be a hundred these days, and that if it weren't for health problems often associated with stress or unhealthy behavior), a hundred was increasingly becoming closer to a realistic life expectancy.

This, of course, would mean that fifty actually was "mid-life". Hmm.. Maybe it was more accurate to think of that "schedule of life" this way: Twenty-five years of reaching complete physical maturity (the brain, the skeleton, etc.). Twenty-five years of living completely physically mature but still putting finishing touches on mental/emotional maturity. Twenty-five years of living "middle-aged" (but with distinctions between "early middle-age" and "late middle-age"), and - ideally - twenty-five more years of living as an elderly person. I think this makes sense. A lot of science and statistics back it up too.

This isn't to suggest that we aren't people until we reach some age of "genuine maturity". I remember being three old and know how "the same" I am now to how I was then. I'm not one of those people who think children or younger people can't be mature and "don't know anything" (within the context of their own age). I know how mature, capable, and sensible a person of fifteen or twenty can be (again within the context of their age, but also sometimes within the context of their overall mental/emotional development). I was there. The way I imagine the increased-number-of-birthdays thing is that we start out as whole (although small and less complex) people and add layers of "being a person" around whatever we started out being (a core around which layers are added over time). In other words, we don't become less as we age. We become more.

My mother, who was in her seventies when she passed away and who had had Rheumatoid Arthritis (not age-related, the way Osteoarthritis can be, but isn't always), described what was difficult about being in her seventies and having physical limitations (and pain) this way: She said, "What people don't understand is that you can feel the same as you've always felt, and be the same person you've always been - but you can't do the things you wish you could do; and that's what makes it hard (because you're the same as you've always been but people treat you as if you're not)."

Physical Limitations - There For Some People, Not Such A Problem For Others

An important point about aging and physical limitations, however, is also that not all people over "a certain age" have them. Some have them to a relatively minor extent and aren't affected by them in a substantial way.

The real point is that while even though the physical limitations that can come with age can mean a person is "less active", they don't mean the person is "less of a person" or "less him" than he's ever been.

In any case, back to the matter of seeing so many people believe that Baby Boomers should step aside in order to make room in the workforce for younger people...

As I said, even though I've seen this subject raised time and time again online (and off), I've never thought much more about it; other than to think that some younger people certainly have a far more ignorant attitude about older people than I did even when I was young). I may have had a lot to learn about whether I'd grow or change over the years, but there was never a time in my life when I was so ignorant that I saw older people's age as a reason not to value them or believe they had a right to live their lives as they'd always done.

Over the last year, however, I've been doing quite a bit of thinking about being sixty because I'll be turning sixty in only a few months. While hearing/reading remarks about how people should retire and make room for younger people has always irked me, as I've gotten fewer and fewer months away from turning sixty, verbal attacks (and wishes that people sixty and over would go away) have become more personal.

There's Always Someone Who Thinks You're Old (No Matter How Old You Are), But It's Not Until Sixty That People Usually Even Think About Expecting You To Step Aside Completely

Needless to say, never before have I reached an age that's so associated with being a major turning point; so I've really found myself trying to figure out, and define, what being so close to sixty really means. Although my birthday hasn't yet rolled around, I feel close enough to sixty to be able to safely make some observations:

I'm As Productive and Sharp and Energetic As I've Always Been, I Could Be Looking At Ten, Twenty, Thirty, Or Forty More Years Of Life. Why Should I Give Up A Job To Someone Else Just Because They Want It?

First, I've noticed that while that core I mentioned above is ever present and ever still the same as it's always been, the layers around it so seem to have created some distance between me and the younger world. Even if I know more, and understand more, now than I ever did; as my mother described, I don't feel any different. The distance I mentioned is more a matter of noticing that as the population of people substantially younger than I has increased, so too has the population of people who seem to create that distance that wouldn't be there if those people understood how "the same" I still am.

"Mental Aggression" Toward Those Who Have What We Think We Ought To Have

In a lot of people there can be an aggressive, arrogant, and generally misguided element to thinking when such people haven't learned any better (or aren't by Nature more thoughtful and and understanding people), and that kind of thinking shouldn't go unaddressed in society (which is why Part II of this two-part Hub on inequality and oppression exists). My own theory is that the reason this kind of aggression and arrogance exists in so many people is that they haven't outgrown the self-centeredness and insecurities that are associated with two-year-old children; but also that they haven't been taught by someone that what they want immediately is sometimes something for which they must wait.

Just as when we're in our childhood or teen years, the large population of people older than we tend to push us away from "mainstream", something similar apparently happens when the population of those younger than we are is substantial. Just as when we're children or teens we tend to find the strongest kinship among people of our own age, it's similar when we're on the other end of the "being pushed out of the mainstream" scale. It's not that when we're children, teens, or sixty and over that we aren't loved or valued in a lot of ways. It's just that we aren't as effortlessly respected and seen as "equals" as people who have reached the legal (but not necessarily) age of being grown-up but haven't yet reached an age that's associated with being "old".

More Reality Associated With People Sixty Or So (Like Me)

I'm a really fortunate close-to-sixty (knock on wood). So far, I don't have a shred of arthritis. In fact, I had some arthritis after some bone fractures when I was young, but by thirty-five it seemed to have cleared up. Bodies can heal and conditions improve with age, it appears. Who knew that either! When I was said to have arthritis at twenty-one I just assumed that would be forever. Well, I didn't assume it. I was told that by a physician. (One of those things we learn over the course of living is that experts don't always know everything.)

From that core under all those layers of living, I can tell you that having all those layers can mean understanding and experiencing happiness in a much deeper or else grander way. The other side to things is that those layers can also mean living with some sadness that must be managed if it's not to become too much to bear. Learning that we can manage it, however, is something that adds to our sense of being capable and strong (not bad things to have as part of those layers around that inner core). In fact, when we're capable and strong and sure that we are, it's a lot easier to stay in touch with that core and allow ourselves to truly be the same person we've always been. That's called, "being young at heart", and it's considered a very healthy and positive thing to be. I, personally, think that being young at heart is really a matter of being truly mature.

We all know how grandparents and their grandchildren can have a special relationship and bond. That's often attributed to the fact that grandparents don't have to get involved with "the less fun" aspects of being a child's parent. I kind of think it's often (if not more) a matter of kids and people of grandparent-age sharing the same problem of having a bunch of people who have reached a certain degree of maturity, and yet who haven't become mature enough to think in the most mature way, arrogantly believe they always and absolutely understand most things; and aim to exercise that misguided sense of all-knowing and inflated confidence at the expense of those younger AND older than they. Personally, I don't have any grandchildren yet; so that, in itself, dispels the assumption that everyone sixty must be "an old grandma" or "grandpa". My plan is to continue to try to share with my grown children what I've noticed about growing older, because I think, maybe, that will help them understand both their own children and me when those children do show up. That's another point about being sixty: We still have things to share with our kids.

There are a lot of things about being sixty (approaching it, anyway) that I won't get into here. The point is it isn't what a lot of people who aren't over, at, or near sixty would think it is.

As with any other group of people of one "variety" or another, we remain very much individual and different, no matter what the categorization is. Our individual core isn't our age any more than it is our race, sex, income level, or anything else.

Having said all that, back again to that main issue of people's thinking that Baby Boomers should step aside and "give younger people a chance".

Usually, when that idea crops up somewhere, there's always someone who explains how people sixty still have bills to pay, may be paying college tuition, have mortgages, etc. etc. I, for one, don't think I need to offer an explanation as to why I don't think Boomers should step aside in the workplace. Why should anyone have to explain and justify their presence in the workforce to people who think that age, alone, is reason to stop doing what one chooses to do? People don't work hard to get their educations and/or work experience in order to throw it all away because someone else thinks they ought to. (If someone young doesn't like the idea of (at least for now) feeling as if he's "wasted" four or six years of his life, spent on getting an education; how would he feel if he were expected to throw away forty years of hard work and striving for no reason other than that someone else wanted his job?

Don't blame me because you can't find the job of your dreams. It's the economy, and bad economies aren't the exclusive problem of today's recent college grads.

Believe me, I have every sympathy for young college graduates who discover that finding work in today's job market isn't easy and/or that finding the kind of work, or pay, they want can be impossible. My own kids have come out of college and into today's workplace and economy; and it stinks that they haven't been able to do what people of my generation so often did, which was to graduate and get a high-paying job fairly easily.

Things have changed, and it isn't just the economy that has brought on those changes. The economy is, of course, at the heart of the fact that there are far too many job applicants for each job opening. Young people think they don't get hired because they're too inexperienced and employers want experienced people. People over forty often believe they don't get hired because of their age. With an over-abundance of resumes for each open position, employers do screen out people who even the slightest thing going against them. That isn't even factoring in references or how interviews have gone. Employers these days often ask for degrees that aren't really even necessary for some positions, but requiring one degree or certificate or another (or "advanced knowledge" of one software of another) can help sort out some of the candidates.

One problem may be that my parents' generation of working class Americans wasn't a generation where getting a college education was "what everyone did". It was only what "those who had the time and money" did when my parents were young. They were the WWII-generation that led to Baby Boomer phenomenon, which was a generation of children raised by parents who had a vision of what childhood, peace-time, and "better life than parents had" held so much meaning for a generation of people who had lived through war and the hardships of The Great Depression. (Let's not even get into the unemployment problems of my parents' generation.)

I'm a second-wave Boomer, so by the time I got to junior-high most of my classmates in my working-class, public school, had plans of going to college. So many Boomers would never have to take jobs involvng the kind of physical labor that meant people sometimes retired because they're bodies had been worn out by the kind of labor that a more industrial America had become so accustomed to.

Not only did kids of the 1960's come of age at a time when work in technology (rather than manufacturing) was where graduating students were told they'd most likely find the best jobs and incomes, but it was a time when getting degrees was so common (almost taken for granted) that Masters' degrees became, in a lot of ways, a dime-a-dozen (which meant, of course, more competition in the work-force). With a glut of people in technology jobs and an over-abundance of people with degrees, when recessions of that time hit it often meant that people either had to become yet more knowledgeable and trained in their own line of work, or else trained in other kind of work. For any young graduates today who think their generation has a monopoly on finding their dream job and adequate income, I can tell you that it was my generation that invented the phenomenon of over-qualified, under-employed, and unemployed masses.

The difference between my generation and today's generation of newcomers to the job market is that my generation wasn't as often in competition for work with someone of the previous generation. There had been a cut-off between the manufacturing and manufacturing-centered generation and the technology and technology-centered/associated generation. As a result, a lot of people of my parents' generation retired early (or earlier), or else died young (as my father did, at sixty-two) after a lifetime of the kind of work (and the struggle that went with providing that happy childhood and education opportunities for one's children) that wears a person out for one reason or another.

Just as so many people of my parents' generation had hoped for their children, my generation isn't one that's had to do the kind of work our parents so often did. I recall when my mother replaced the old wringer washing machine with an automatic one. I recall the big deal it was that clothes dryers meant people didn't have to hang laundry on lines in the yard. My mother's generation washed and boiled diapers, sterilized bottles, and made their own baby formula. I've never hung a load of laundry, boiled any cloth diapers, or did any number of other things that made my mother's life that much more difficult and tiring. My generation has had its own set of challenges and difficulties, but having our bodies worn out at fifty and sixty (or younger) isn't very common for my generation.

With whatever challenges there have been for my own generation, I'm grateful to my parents' generation for its legacy of a less physically demanding lifestyle, but also for so often providing their children with the kind of childhood that brought an often more educated generation into a technological age. In other words, I can't help it if I happen to be an almost-sixty person who just isn't tired enough, or worn out enough, to retire. In fact, when I think of how hard my parents' generation worked each day, and over the course of their lifetime; and then when I think of all the things that are so much easier for me, I can't help but feel very moved and appreciative.

Generations that came before the Baby Boomer got older earlier. My generation has changed what being sixty is. That's not because we don't want to accept being older. It's because being older feels, and is, different for those of who from this generation that hasn't had to struggle in the same ways that previous ones did. The way I see, all those previous generations of people who died young because of diseases that hadn't yet been kept under control and who ran themselves into an early grave, didn't do whatever it was they did, within the context of history, so that I'd throw away a decade or two (or more) of my own prefectly valid future in order to make room for someone else in the work-force and/or mainstream. The way I see it, if lives are getting longer and people aren't aging as quickly as they once did, maybe that's Nature's way of telling us that the people who should have those jobs and be running things just might be those who have decades of experience, additional training, and wisdom. Maybe it does have to take a little longer (especially with the economy what it is) for recent grads to find their dream jobs, but maybe it's better than people in their early twenties have a few more years before taking on some responsibilities.

My own children have found ways to have more than one type of work and more than one source of income. I don't like that they've had to do that because they're just starting out, but I'm not sure they won't benefit by having so many other options than a lot of people of my generation knew enough to make sure they had.

In the interest of fairness, it's only realistic to point out that my Boomer generation, which managed to get itself heard at a very young age; and which often managed to fairly easily make its way into the work-force, mainstream, and society-changing circles; made a mess of a lot of things because of it. Yes, my generation did a lot to bring about a lot of positive changes in our society, but it also made its share of messes for itself and those who would follow. My generation or not, there are a lot of matters on which I think the grown-ups of that era should have said, "Look, we're not having a bunch of kids dictate what direction some things are going to take." Society has paid for the fact that my generation had a way of completely taking over, and some of why today's young graduates can't so easily find some work may well be the indirect paying of that price.

There are a lot of things about my own generation of which I've never been particularly proud, or with which I'm particularly happy. One thing I am kind of proud of is that my generation is known for being one that isn't willing to accept what isn't right or fair. One thing about which I'm pretty happy is the fact that my generation is the one that will show the world that sixty years old is far from the age at which healthy people should be pushed aside, disregarded, and resented for enjoying the fruits of decades of hard work, striving, and learning.

If there's ever a situation in which the matter is something like my having to do without a donated organ because I'm older and someone younger is on the list, I'll happily accept that someone younger should be given the chance to have his life saved over mine. When we're talking about the work-force, though - sorry, younger people. You'll have your day. (It won't come as soon as you'd like it too, but if you play your cards right you will have your day.) Today is still my day.

And sometimes it isn't even the economy at the root of a young person's not finding his dream job.

When I've witnessed some of the attitudes, behavior, and often overall obliviousness to what is appropriate and/or professional in the workplace; I'm not surprised that some people aren't being hired. In an Internet-influenced culture where people are so often known to make statements such as, "Nobody cares about proper grammar these days," and "People have a short attention span and aren't going to read more than 400 words;" it's no wonder that a lot of people who have this kind of disdain for what still really does matter in a much of the offline world.

Yes, the work-force is often (not always) more casual these days, but there's a difference between "casual" and "not knowing how to behave" in the work world. There are actually employers who look for "mature" employees because they don't want to have to tell someone how to act in the work place, worry about the impression he'll create, and generally be someone's "mother" and "teacher". It's important to say that not all younger workers/job candidates often don't know how to behave professionally, or else don't think they should have to worry their little heads with things like good grammar and good manners. The point is lot of "mainstream" employers (of any age) look at a lot of younger workers/candidates, and tend to think they have a lot to learn (regardless of whether or not they know how to actually perform one job or another).

In any case, I'm not stepping aside or giving up any job opportunities (full-time, part-time, freelance, or other) to someone else just because he thinks I should. Whoever you are, and regardless of how old you are, imagine having anyone expect that of you - and consider whether you'd happily hand over your livelihood just because you've had a few more birthdays than that person has. If you reply to that question involves your pointing out why it's so much more important that you have the opportunities, as compared to someone who is sixty or over, you've just made my point about how people believe that others sixty and over aren't as "equal", and how their needs and goals aren't as important as yours. I, on the other hand, have hopefully made my point about why my age doesn't (or shouldn't) mean that I'm not as important or equal as anyone else.

We're here. We're still clear-headed. We dare (to tell some younger people they aren't going to push us aside because of ignorance and aggression). Get used to it.