Discuss sociological explanations of age inequality (40 marks)
One sociological explanation of age inequality is functionalism. Furthermore, functionalists believe
that age inequalities are differences with a biological basis that need to be embraced for good of
society as a whole; old and young people don’t have the necessary skills that others have which is
why young people are paid less. Parsons argues that youth is a bridge connecting childhood and
adulthood – often deviant and dysfunctional – that has been created after legal changes, no more
labour and extension of education to 16/18 (never having existed before). Similarly, Eisenstadt
(1956) – a student of Parsons – argues that youth is a time of stress where young people break away
from authority and comfort of parents and work out their own way in society. Eisenstadt believes
that this is what leads to youth culture – a time of experimentation and testing boundaries is good
for society in the long run. Later down the line, disengagement theory (Henry and Cummings, 1961)
explains the role of elderly. As they deteriorate, they need to disengage from social responsibilities
and workplace and come to terms with their inevitable death. This allows younger groups to come in
and take their roles which is good for society. In summary, functionalists believe that age is an
inevitable process which maintains social solidarity and allows for social progress and for society to
keep functioning. Wild behaviours of the young and retirement of older people is for the greater
good.
However, some would argue that the functionalist perspective exaggerates age inequalities. For
example, Robert Havighurst (1961), who was a social interactionist, criticised disengagement theory
for being too pessimistic about ageing. Old risk suffering personal crisis and demoralisation. He
instead talked proposed activity theory – encouraging older people to take up part time work,
volunteering, going on holiday etc to replace lost roles after retirement. This is furthered by Statham
(2011) – in support of activity theory - who suggests that continued interaction will stop elderly from
being segregated – they can stay integrated in old age by staying physically and mentally fit and by
looking after grandchildren. Therefore, the sociological theory of activity theory in regard to the
elderly explains away negative connotations of ageing.
Another sociological explanation of age inequality comes from Marxism where it is explained
through the needs of capitalism. Essentially, the young are an asset as they have energy and new
skills like technological skills and if they don’t have skills, they can also be cheap labour. Similarly,
with the elderly taking up free childcare, it creates more of a youth-based labour force with more
women going out to work. Engles and Marx name this how the young and elderly make up a reserve
army of labour – they can be used as extra labour in times of boom through the use of zero-hours
contracts where there are no benefits like sick pay, holiday and pensions. Arguably, the elderly have
always been used as a reserve army of labour, but more so now (Phillipson, 1982). This comes from
the political economy theory by Townsend (1981) and Phillipson (1982). It explains how the elderly
face inequality due to capitalism as the elderly workforce are replaced with the young to help profits
stay high. This means the elderly are forced into retirement and rely on pensions and are therefore
made to be dependent instead of independent. This further means that they are institutionally
marginalised as their status in society drops. Thus, Marxists explain how age inequality meets the
needs of capitalist society.
On the other hand, Postmodernism is a sociological theory that looks from a micro perspective and
says that age inequality levels depend on the individual if it exists at all. For example, Polhemus
(1997) uses the focus of the youth being a non-homogenous group (pick and mix culture) to suggest
that there can be no general explanation for age inequality but several micro areas that explore the
issue. Laczko and Phillipson (1991) argue elderly inequality is not caused by age but wealth instead.
This can be explained by Blaike (1999)’s theory of 'active ageing' as a much more positive view of
aging has been established through more opportunity for leisure-based activities like cruises and
,holidays (which require wealth). He suggested that there is proof of active ageing in that the grey
pound (purchasing power of elderly people as consumers) is worth £215 billion a year. New
technology and the rise of cosmetic surgery also allows people to re-create themselves and decrease
the vulnerability for discrimination in regard to age, but this also relates to wealth (Powell and Biggs,
2000). Wherefore, the postmodern view is that rather than age inequality serving capitalism and
profits but age inequality being the problem, the wealth was always the source of inequality.
A further sociological explanation of age inequality comes from interactionists
who argue that the predominant cause of the inequality comes from the
labelling. Negative labelling and stigmatisation of both the elderly and the young
by the media and other agents of social control and socialisation could be said to
create a self-fulfilling prophecy. In other words, is the elderly are labelled as
‘useless, lonely, dependent and unable to learn’ (Victor, 1994), then perhaps
those stereotypes become reality. Cohen (1972)’s work on moral panics similarly places
blame on the stigmatisation of the age group regarding youth deviance. Cohen observed seaside
fights and their media responses between two youth subcultures, the mods and rockers, and argued
that the media labelled the mods and rockers in a negative and stereotyped way, making them be
seen as 'folk devils'. Cohen highlighted the role of the media in defining the situation and creating a
greatly exaggerated picture of the conflict between them, influencing police force involvement.
Using the concept of a deviancy amplification spiral, he identified how this unnecessary
stigmatisation increased social awareness of the problem which actually led more people to
participate in the activity. Therefore, interactionists argue that the labelling of certain age groups
creates the age inequalities, often presumed to be unjustly imposed in the first place.
However, other social action theories place the blame with the factors that cause
the label rather than the label itself – interactionists fail to look at why these
labels are imposed. Weber argues that you need to look at someone’s class, party and
status to understand the inequality they face. In terms of age inequality, the elderly will suffer
inequality because their status is lowered when outside the workplace and the young are not yet in
workforce so also suffer low status. Turner (1989) portrays that in a society based on consumption
(generally Western societies), high status is given to those who have material goods of which the
elderly and young are least likely to have. By using what Turner calls a ‘reciprocity-maturation curve
of ageing’, it is simple to see that if groups are dependent, they then have low status. Similarly,
James Dowd (1986) presents that the elderly are considered “migrants in time” and “strangers in
their own land” to argue that ageing is therefore about being trapped in an identity rooted in the
past. They are trapped because they don’t have the same advantages (e.g. technology) that other
age groups (possibly including youth) have who are at home in the present. Therefore, whilst most
social action theories agree that there is stigma associated with certain age groups, this is a
consequence of practical boundaries that they face.
Another sociological explanation of age inequality is the feminist one which
highlights the double standards that women face as they age. In short, Arber
and Ginn (1991) conclude that age affects power and status of women (older women
have less). One portrayed understanding of the double standards that women face as they age is by
Itzin (1990) who blames the differing status criteria between men and women - women’s status is
related to their reproductive cycle and men’s is related to employment. Women’s status therefore
declines after childbearing age and men’s does not until after retirement. Another portrayed
understanding of the double standards that women face as they age related to cosmeticisation (the
pressure on older women to look young). Susan Sontag (1972) conveys that women are pressured
into maintaining the appearance of youth. “Every single standard of beauty for women dictates that
they must go on having clear skin. Every wrinkle, every line, every grey hair, is a defect.” She
highlights the double standard that men gain status and respect as they age, but it is the opposite
, for women. Society demands women’s accomplishments are passive (to look a certain way) and
these decline with age whereas men’s is to ‘do’ something. Sontag concludes that this systematic
subordination of women keeps them in a childlike state, never becoming true adults. Thus, social
inequalities become increasingly evident as women grow older.
However, some would argue that these ‘inequalities’ between men and women that become
increasingly apparent with older age are nothing more than a result of the differing priorities of men
and women. Catherine Hakim (2006) illustrates through preference theory that women choose to
be the main carer in the family and to make their careers come second. Moreover, she believes that
this is a rational choice made by some women as they hold traditional views and get more fulfilment
from their family role. Thus, women are not victims of unfair double standards as it could be argued
more unfair to allocate status to women based on employment considering that doesn’t accurately
reflect their priorities. Hakim argues that status is determined by the chosen priorities of the group
i.e. women chose to define themselves by their looks and childbearing role so can be held
accountable for this. She recognises that some women, usually most highly educated, are strongly
committed to full time work but says between half and two thirds of women still hold 'traditional'
views. Her theory supports the Functionalist view of Human Capital Theory as it suggests women
aren’t as committed to their jobs as men. Wherefore, the lack of status for an age group of women is
a natural consequence of the overarching priorities of women in general and in theory could be
changed if the majority of women chose to shift their priorities.
In conclusion, I believe that age inequalities do exist, particularly for the old and the young. I believe
the media plays a major role in the maintenance of these inequalities, unnecessarily and unjustly
labelling and influencing the groups, through moral panics and for the benefit of capitalism. If the
media portrayed more accurate and kind representations of such age groups, I believe this would
drastically change the everyday experiences of such groups.
One sociological explanation of age inequality is functionalism. Furthermore, functionalists believe
that age inequalities are differences with a biological basis that need to be embraced for good of
society as a whole; old and young people don’t have the necessary skills that others have which is
why young people are paid less. Parsons argues that youth is a bridge connecting childhood and
adulthood – often deviant and dysfunctional – that has been created after legal changes, no more
labour and extension of education to 16/18 (never having existed before). Similarly, Eisenstadt
(1956) – a student of Parsons – argues that youth is a time of stress where young people break away
from authority and comfort of parents and work out their own way in society. Eisenstadt believes
that this is what leads to youth culture – a time of experimentation and testing boundaries is good
for society in the long run. Later down the line, disengagement theory (Henry and Cummings, 1961)
explains the role of elderly. As they deteriorate, they need to disengage from social responsibilities
and workplace and come to terms with their inevitable death. This allows younger groups to come in
and take their roles which is good for society. In summary, functionalists believe that age is an
inevitable process which maintains social solidarity and allows for social progress and for society to
keep functioning. Wild behaviours of the young and retirement of older people is for the greater
good.
However, some would argue that the functionalist perspective exaggerates age inequalities. For
example, Robert Havighurst (1961), who was a social interactionist, criticised disengagement theory
for being too pessimistic about ageing. Old risk suffering personal crisis and demoralisation. He
instead talked proposed activity theory – encouraging older people to take up part time work,
volunteering, going on holiday etc to replace lost roles after retirement. This is furthered by Statham
(2011) – in support of activity theory - who suggests that continued interaction will stop elderly from
being segregated – they can stay integrated in old age by staying physically and mentally fit and by
looking after grandchildren. Therefore, the sociological theory of activity theory in regard to the
elderly explains away negative connotations of ageing.
Another sociological explanation of age inequality comes from Marxism where it is explained
through the needs of capitalism. Essentially, the young are an asset as they have energy and new
skills like technological skills and if they don’t have skills, they can also be cheap labour. Similarly,
with the elderly taking up free childcare, it creates more of a youth-based labour force with more
women going out to work. Engles and Marx name this how the young and elderly make up a reserve
army of labour – they can be used as extra labour in times of boom through the use of zero-hours
contracts where there are no benefits like sick pay, holiday and pensions. Arguably, the elderly have
always been used as a reserve army of labour, but more so now (Phillipson, 1982). This comes from
the political economy theory by Townsend (1981) and Phillipson (1982). It explains how the elderly
face inequality due to capitalism as the elderly workforce are replaced with the young to help profits
stay high. This means the elderly are forced into retirement and rely on pensions and are therefore
made to be dependent instead of independent. This further means that they are institutionally
marginalised as their status in society drops. Thus, Marxists explain how age inequality meets the
needs of capitalist society.
On the other hand, Postmodernism is a sociological theory that looks from a micro perspective and
says that age inequality levels depend on the individual if it exists at all. For example, Polhemus
(1997) uses the focus of the youth being a non-homogenous group (pick and mix culture) to suggest
that there can be no general explanation for age inequality but several micro areas that explore the
issue. Laczko and Phillipson (1991) argue elderly inequality is not caused by age but wealth instead.
This can be explained by Blaike (1999)’s theory of 'active ageing' as a much more positive view of
aging has been established through more opportunity for leisure-based activities like cruises and
,holidays (which require wealth). He suggested that there is proof of active ageing in that the grey
pound (purchasing power of elderly people as consumers) is worth £215 billion a year. New
technology and the rise of cosmetic surgery also allows people to re-create themselves and decrease
the vulnerability for discrimination in regard to age, but this also relates to wealth (Powell and Biggs,
2000). Wherefore, the postmodern view is that rather than age inequality serving capitalism and
profits but age inequality being the problem, the wealth was always the source of inequality.
A further sociological explanation of age inequality comes from interactionists
who argue that the predominant cause of the inequality comes from the
labelling. Negative labelling and stigmatisation of both the elderly and the young
by the media and other agents of social control and socialisation could be said to
create a self-fulfilling prophecy. In other words, is the elderly are labelled as
‘useless, lonely, dependent and unable to learn’ (Victor, 1994), then perhaps
those stereotypes become reality. Cohen (1972)’s work on moral panics similarly places
blame on the stigmatisation of the age group regarding youth deviance. Cohen observed seaside
fights and their media responses between two youth subcultures, the mods and rockers, and argued
that the media labelled the mods and rockers in a negative and stereotyped way, making them be
seen as 'folk devils'. Cohen highlighted the role of the media in defining the situation and creating a
greatly exaggerated picture of the conflict between them, influencing police force involvement.
Using the concept of a deviancy amplification spiral, he identified how this unnecessary
stigmatisation increased social awareness of the problem which actually led more people to
participate in the activity. Therefore, interactionists argue that the labelling of certain age groups
creates the age inequalities, often presumed to be unjustly imposed in the first place.
However, other social action theories place the blame with the factors that cause
the label rather than the label itself – interactionists fail to look at why these
labels are imposed. Weber argues that you need to look at someone’s class, party and
status to understand the inequality they face. In terms of age inequality, the elderly will suffer
inequality because their status is lowered when outside the workplace and the young are not yet in
workforce so also suffer low status. Turner (1989) portrays that in a society based on consumption
(generally Western societies), high status is given to those who have material goods of which the
elderly and young are least likely to have. By using what Turner calls a ‘reciprocity-maturation curve
of ageing’, it is simple to see that if groups are dependent, they then have low status. Similarly,
James Dowd (1986) presents that the elderly are considered “migrants in time” and “strangers in
their own land” to argue that ageing is therefore about being trapped in an identity rooted in the
past. They are trapped because they don’t have the same advantages (e.g. technology) that other
age groups (possibly including youth) have who are at home in the present. Therefore, whilst most
social action theories agree that there is stigma associated with certain age groups, this is a
consequence of practical boundaries that they face.
Another sociological explanation of age inequality is the feminist one which
highlights the double standards that women face as they age. In short, Arber
and Ginn (1991) conclude that age affects power and status of women (older women
have less). One portrayed understanding of the double standards that women face as they age is by
Itzin (1990) who blames the differing status criteria between men and women - women’s status is
related to their reproductive cycle and men’s is related to employment. Women’s status therefore
declines after childbearing age and men’s does not until after retirement. Another portrayed
understanding of the double standards that women face as they age related to cosmeticisation (the
pressure on older women to look young). Susan Sontag (1972) conveys that women are pressured
into maintaining the appearance of youth. “Every single standard of beauty for women dictates that
they must go on having clear skin. Every wrinkle, every line, every grey hair, is a defect.” She
highlights the double standard that men gain status and respect as they age, but it is the opposite
, for women. Society demands women’s accomplishments are passive (to look a certain way) and
these decline with age whereas men’s is to ‘do’ something. Sontag concludes that this systematic
subordination of women keeps them in a childlike state, never becoming true adults. Thus, social
inequalities become increasingly evident as women grow older.
However, some would argue that these ‘inequalities’ between men and women that become
increasingly apparent with older age are nothing more than a result of the differing priorities of men
and women. Catherine Hakim (2006) illustrates through preference theory that women choose to
be the main carer in the family and to make their careers come second. Moreover, she believes that
this is a rational choice made by some women as they hold traditional views and get more fulfilment
from their family role. Thus, women are not victims of unfair double standards as it could be argued
more unfair to allocate status to women based on employment considering that doesn’t accurately
reflect their priorities. Hakim argues that status is determined by the chosen priorities of the group
i.e. women chose to define themselves by their looks and childbearing role so can be held
accountable for this. She recognises that some women, usually most highly educated, are strongly
committed to full time work but says between half and two thirds of women still hold 'traditional'
views. Her theory supports the Functionalist view of Human Capital Theory as it suggests women
aren’t as committed to their jobs as men. Wherefore, the lack of status for an age group of women is
a natural consequence of the overarching priorities of women in general and in theory could be
changed if the majority of women chose to shift their priorities.
In conclusion, I believe that age inequalities do exist, particularly for the old and the young. I believe
the media plays a major role in the maintenance of these inequalities, unnecessarily and unjustly
labelling and influencing the groups, through moral panics and for the benefit of capitalism. If the
media portrayed more accurate and kind representations of such age groups, I believe this would
drastically change the everyday experiences of such groups.
