The film “Plan 75” presents a dystopia about a hypothetical Japanese government proposal that would allow those over 75 to end their lives with “logistical and financial” support, thereby reversing the aging of the population. The elderly are seen as a useless burden .

Ageism is discrimination based on age. The term was coined by American gerontologist Robert Butler in 1969. No one is immune to this prejudice: we all age, so this negative perception of age and the possibility of suffering from ageism affects us all .

Butler defined “ageism” as a combination of three interconnected elements. These include:

• Negative attitudes toward older people, old age, and the aging process.
• Discriminatory practices against such people.
• Institutional and political practices that perpetuate stereotypes about older people.

However, ageism can also occur in relation to young people, when they are labeled as selfish or lacking in commitment; and also in relation to children, within the framework of an “adult-centrism” that prevents them from being the protagonists of their own lives (in a kind of enlightened despotism: everything for children, but without them). In fact, the etymological root of childhood is infantia , which means inability to speak .

Ages and generations

The concepts of generation and age are fundamental tools for sociology . But chronological contemporaneity—the fact of belonging to the same cohort—does not necessarily coincide with social identity. It cannot be assumed that there is a psychological nature associated with each stage of life and that the conditions of existence are identical for all those belonging to the same cohort.

Along these lines, some authors even speak of the “myth of generations.” They remind us that merely belonging to a generation doesn’t homogenize the people within it, nor can they be substantially compared or contrasted with others. It’s another variable to take into account , just like social class, gender, culture… and age.

Key ideas for overcoming ageism

The UN advocates for the promotion of intergenerational solidarity through social programs, as aging is understood as a process affecting everyone that must be improved as much as possible. If we don’t understand and address it as a natural (and social) process that concerns and includes all of us, we fall into the danger of age discrimination.

The three common forms of ageism —in relation to both older adults and young people—are infantilization (placing them in a position of subservience and powerlessness), depersonalization (failing to take into account each person’s uniqueness, needs, and preferences), and dehumanization (losing empathy when dealing with people).

Tension of coexistence and pact between generations

Although it may be exaggerated to speak of a “ struggle between generations ” replacing the class struggle, there are objective data indicating that tensions between generations are increasing.

The COVID-19 pandemic has fostered some intergenerational care, but at other times has led to greater distance between generations: stereotypes about older people and younger people have increased, as has ageism , with views of young people as selfish and violent, disrespectful or disengaged.

‘Profigurative’ education

An education that promotes intergenerational dialogue, encouraging collaborative learning between adults and young people, is one of the solutions to ageism and this tension between age groups.

The service-learning methodology is particularly suitable, as people of different ages collaborate on community projects, developing specific skills and prosocial values.

The PEACE (Positive Education about Ageing and Contact Experiences) model can also be applied . It indicates that the two interconnected factors that help overcome ageist stereotypes are education about realistic, demystified, and positive aspects of old age and aging; and intergenerational contact that facilitates the exchange of experiences.

Intergenerational and profigurative educational centers

Our proposal consists of the development of “multigenerational” families (rather than the traditional extended families or the current nuclear families of the familist model).

“Profigurative” educational centers, that is, those focused on offering an intergenerational and intersectional vision of education, would have participants of all ages and incorporate a culture of care. For example, there is already a network of Profigurative Centers for Intergenerational Education (CEPREI) run by the Institute of Educational Sciences at the University of Lleida. It is comprised of preschool, primary, and secondary schools; public and private, and in rural and urban settings.

With the participation of families, city councils, government departments of Health and Education, senior residences, and third-sector associations, exchange and mutual teaching-learning activities are organized between students, adults, and seniors. These include visits to residences, invitations to schools, joint excursions (to museums, libraries, or playrooms), correspondence through letters and social media, digital teaching-learning, historical remembrance and lived experiences, and shared days in schools, residences, and associations.

Furthermore, the school curriculum integrates competencies and content related to inclusion, equity, and sustainability, in a cross-curricular and age-appropriate manner, related to the study of generations, ageism, unwanted loneliness, respect, and mutual tolerance.

Beyond the economic value of people

This awareness also includes a new approach to equity and solidarity that goes beyond the commercial vision of the “economic” (productive and consumer) value of people.

“Retirement” should not be seen as the “withdrawal” from the market for the elderly. We must recover the etymological root of “ iubilare ” (to shout for joy), in the sense of continuing the ongoing life process that presents us with new alternatives in an adulthood in which wisdom predominates, within active aging: the joy of living, of being older, of being recognized and respected personally and socially.

Ageism has no age or meaning, and it would have no reason to exist, because the life cycle concerns and challenges us all equally, sooner or later, always.

Author Bio: Fidel Molina-Luque is Professor of Sociology at the University of Lleida