practical living
it is easy to deprive them of the rights
of that society.
So, with all of this, would it be a leap
to say that the way we have historically
talked about the elderly informs the
apparent mistreatment we have seen aired
at the royal commission?
“I think that’s not an unfair way of
putting it,” Crichton says.
“But the real force of what you said
comes in when one considers the
language that you’re referring to as
a way of dividing the world up into
meaningful bits.
“Because if the only options you have
as a person of a certain age is to be in one
of several categories, all of which cast you
as having limited capacities or diminishing
competencies and certain kinds of
attractiveness, if the only categories
available to you to be a member of
society are in different ways denigrating,
marginalising, disempowering, then that’s
who you are going to be.”
And apart from the way in which people
are physically treated, research has shown
that ageism and ageist language can
negatively affect the health outcomes of
those who experience it. Researchers have
found that negative ageing stereotypes
have a direct influence on cardiovascular
stress, and positive ageing stereotyping
interventions can protect individuals.
Language-based age discrimination
is often covert, and there is little written
about it. Crichton believes that it is a
case of language failing to keep up
with a society where the way we age
has changed.
“The role of people over a certain age
is also changing rapidly, so essentially, on
about five or six fronts – social, economic,
linguistic, health, longevity – we’re playing
catch-up simultaneously,” he says.
“I think language is coming to light
as being important in this because it’s
important across all the other areas. You
can’t articulate policy without language.
You can’t create products and create
markets without language. You can’t
brand or provide care without language.”
Crichton describes language as deep
infrastructure, as the “dark matter” of any
change in society.
Social psychologist Sik Hung Ng has
said that language is power, and that
discrimination cannot be alleviated
Studies looking into
ageist language have found
that we ‘dehumanise’ the
elderly with language,
‘thereby making it easier to
oppress this group’.
nor fully understood without language.
Crichton agrees.
“It’s not about expressing opinions
about elderly people or older people,
it’s about the options that you’re
giving people within which they can
meaningfully be anything in a society, and
that’s what language does,” he said. ■
OCTO
BER
agedcareinsite.com.au 21