Youth inequality
Media
It can be argued that inequality in the youth generation can be identified through
the media. Research conducted by Cohen suggested the idea that society is quick to
make assumptions between crime and teenagers. As soon as a new social problem
arises, society as a whole immediately demands a change in the school curriculum.
An example of this is knife crime, individuals instinctively assume that schools
are responsible for the rising cases of knife crime. However, it could be the
government that uphold some responsibility for these criminal acts of crime due to
cutting back on the funding for youth clubs. Therefore, these individuals have a
lack of opportunities to let off some stream and so instead turn to crime. This is
especially common in the youth of today due to Katz and Lyngs idea of edge work and
so are more susceptible to deviancy. Resulting in society accumulating negative,
violent assumptions towards the youth of today- which is often false. This was
highlighted by Sociologist Young, suggesting that violent children are uncommon but
newspapers publish it because it sells and gains the most publicity. This can be
identified during Charlotte Kelly’s 2018 research, she argued that teenagers gain
mostly negative publicity and are referred to with a lack of respect and
inaccurate, rude terms such as immature and dangerous- based on stereotypes. As a
result of negative, inaccurate stereotyping this can lead to discriminatory
practices such as in shops (Devlin). Therefore, the only way in which teenagers can
gain positive publicity is through dying- claimed by The Women in Formalism.
Workforce and financial income
A second way in which the youth face inequality in society, is through the
workforce and financial income. This can be highlighted due to the common nature of
0 hour contracts and being employed by the gig economy. ONS statistics confirm that
younger people are X3 more likely to be unemployed and cannot be furloughed due to
their age and inexperience. Highlighting the non consistent income younger
individuals are provided with as well the unstable, unreliable working environment.
This is because neither the employee nor employer are obliged to accept or offer
work and so provides flexibility for businesses and also allows younger people to
gain experience which is a positive. Glassdoor 2019 stated that 52% of employees
experience ageism and 2/3 who lost their job in 2019 were under the age of 25.
Overall, resulting in younger people’s careers being jeopardised due to social
economic factors. Belfield et al highlights this and states that in 2004-2007,
younger Individuals incomes have fallen significantly more than older individuals-
reinforcing the manipulation and inequality that is enforced onto the younger
generation.
Politics
A final way in which younger individuals face inequality in society is through
politics. This is because statistics showcase that the average age of a voter is 51
and 18-24 year olds engage the least in voting meaning younger individuals are
underrepresented in general elections and referendums. This may mean that the
needs, wants and desires of the younger generation may be disregarded due to the
lack of respect and priority that is taken of them. This can be highlighted by
Gotfield as they suggested that young people are not well respected by politicians.
In 2017, the turnout in the election for 18-24 year olds was 43% in comparison to
75% of 65+ age bracket. This reinforces Rainbow Murray’s idea of the
overrepresentation of 50+ middle class white men. Therefore, teenagers and young
adults are seen as a waste of space and aren’t taken seriously.
However it can be argued that youth inequality isn’t all so bad in today’s society
due to multiple factors. For example, student discounts on transport,
apprenticeships targeting young people and Boris Johnson’s policy of ‘Generatin
Buy’ that enables young people to get on the housing ladder.
Media
It can be argued that inequality in the youth generation can be identified through
the media. Research conducted by Cohen suggested the idea that society is quick to
make assumptions between crime and teenagers. As soon as a new social problem
arises, society as a whole immediately demands a change in the school curriculum.
An example of this is knife crime, individuals instinctively assume that schools
are responsible for the rising cases of knife crime. However, it could be the
government that uphold some responsibility for these criminal acts of crime due to
cutting back on the funding for youth clubs. Therefore, these individuals have a
lack of opportunities to let off some stream and so instead turn to crime. This is
especially common in the youth of today due to Katz and Lyngs idea of edge work and
so are more susceptible to deviancy. Resulting in society accumulating negative,
violent assumptions towards the youth of today- which is often false. This was
highlighted by Sociologist Young, suggesting that violent children are uncommon but
newspapers publish it because it sells and gains the most publicity. This can be
identified during Charlotte Kelly’s 2018 research, she argued that teenagers gain
mostly negative publicity and are referred to with a lack of respect and
inaccurate, rude terms such as immature and dangerous- based on stereotypes. As a
result of negative, inaccurate stereotyping this can lead to discriminatory
practices such as in shops (Devlin). Therefore, the only way in which teenagers can
gain positive publicity is through dying- claimed by The Women in Formalism.
Workforce and financial income
A second way in which the youth face inequality in society, is through the
workforce and financial income. This can be highlighted due to the common nature of
0 hour contracts and being employed by the gig economy. ONS statistics confirm that
younger people are X3 more likely to be unemployed and cannot be furloughed due to
their age and inexperience. Highlighting the non consistent income younger
individuals are provided with as well the unstable, unreliable working environment.
This is because neither the employee nor employer are obliged to accept or offer
work and so provides flexibility for businesses and also allows younger people to
gain experience which is a positive. Glassdoor 2019 stated that 52% of employees
experience ageism and 2/3 who lost their job in 2019 were under the age of 25.
Overall, resulting in younger people’s careers being jeopardised due to social
economic factors. Belfield et al highlights this and states that in 2004-2007,
younger Individuals incomes have fallen significantly more than older individuals-
reinforcing the manipulation and inequality that is enforced onto the younger
generation.
Politics
A final way in which younger individuals face inequality in society is through
politics. This is because statistics showcase that the average age of a voter is 51
and 18-24 year olds engage the least in voting meaning younger individuals are
underrepresented in general elections and referendums. This may mean that the
needs, wants and desires of the younger generation may be disregarded due to the
lack of respect and priority that is taken of them. This can be highlighted by
Gotfield as they suggested that young people are not well respected by politicians.
In 2017, the turnout in the election for 18-24 year olds was 43% in comparison to
75% of 65+ age bracket. This reinforces Rainbow Murray’s idea of the
overrepresentation of 50+ middle class white men. Therefore, teenagers and young
adults are seen as a waste of space and aren’t taken seriously.
However it can be argued that youth inequality isn’t all so bad in today’s society
due to multiple factors. For example, student discounts on transport,
apprenticeships targeting young people and Boris Johnson’s policy of ‘Generatin
Buy’ that enables young people to get on the housing ladder.
