It seems that throughout the stages of our lives, our perceived maturity level is a parabola.
At birth and infancy, we are at our lowest level of perceived maturity, slowly rising as we grow into adolescence and adulthood, and peaking when we reach what is deemed “middle-aged.” However, the curious part is where the dip occurs. Despite the steady rise seen for the first part of our lives, the fall seems to be abrupt and unexpected as we reach geriatric ages. As infants, we are, naturally, taken care of and spoken to in a tone and cadence that to any other age group would come across as patronizing. However, even though it seems like society would naturally view elderly people as the most mature group, it is often the opposite that happens: infantilization.
It seems that as an elderly person, you fall into one of two groups or typical tropes: infantilization or vilification. It has been repeatedly seen and reinforced in the media that almost all of these characters fall into one of the two. They are either deemed “cute” and in many ways treated similarly to how we treat babies, or they are seen as grouchy, rude, and made to be vilified by their age.
The film Up is the perfect example of this. We are introduced to the widowed old man, Carl Fredricksen, who starts as a grouchy old man unwilling to change. Throughout his journey and the progression of the movie, he proves how competent he is and how he shouldn’t be viewed as the fragile and incapable man everyone sees him as. Despite this being one of the main messages of the movie, however, he is still called adorable and seen as a cute old man by many viewers of the movie.
Outside of movies and television, however, this same issue can be found within social media and even our day-to-day lives. It’s often that I see videos on platforms like TikTok where an elderly person has an account making completely normal videos that give no indication of a reduced mental capacity, maturity level, or need to be “babied” and yet all of the comments and feedback will be messages calling them “cute” and “sweet” and often many similar adjectives to how we describe infants.
I will see a video of an elderly woman baking one of her family’s recipes. She does it with expertise, skill, and without any hint of immaturity or need for patronization, and yet I will open the comments to find her being referred to as “cute” and “precious,” almost as if she is a toddler being praised for achieving a task.
The juxtaposition to this is viewing elders as evil or rude due to their age, and there seems to be a widespread belief that all senior citizens past a certain age are unwilling and unable to accept any perspective outside of their own.
When you hear people describe interactions with elderly people, whether it be through customer interaction, familial interactions, or even just in passing small talk with a stranger, they always seem to be sorted into one of two. They are either described using oversimplified adjectives, calling them adorable and lovely, or calling them grouchy and crabby.
So, where along the line did we draw this distinction that they have to fall into one of the two categories? I believe that in the ascent of social media and an age of radicalization, we have become almost allergic to the “in-between.” There is a sense of impossibility in neutrality that forces us into extremes. We are no longer comfortable with nuance and complexities, and we would rather claim what is certain and assured in the extremes and radicals. This isn’t just present in elderly people. However, this is part of a broader global and cultural shift in ideals.
Part of this is what I believe is the crux of the period of radicalization that we’re currently in. Due to shortened attention spans, rapid descents toward radical politics, and a need to add a sort of intensity to every feeling, we have become too oversimplified. By removing the complexities from issues, media, and even people, we make it easier to consume and comprehend.
Kids shows are all in flashy, bright colors, politics are taking a turn toward radical ideologies like never before, and people are described in one or two adjectives that simplify and sort an entire human being into one trope that fits within our realm of comfort and understanding.
On platforms like YouTube, on news sites, and even in books, there has become a need to articulate ourselves in the most minimal and loud fashion possible to attract attention to a rapidly dying attention span and tolerance. We seem to have lost the meaning of the phrase “Don’t judge a book by its cover,” and everything is now judged by its initial appearance and impression.
This has been coming since the rise in consumerism in the 1950s, but the simplification of people into categories is what has been the most concerning. We take one look at someone and sort them into a certain trope based upon a mental checklist of perceived ideals of how we think of others.
Someone is either a Republican or a Democrat, nice or mean, pretty or ugly, smart or dumb, and infant-like or evil.
To break down stereotypes and the categorization of real human beings, we need to acknowledge the complexities and depth that everybody contains that can’t be simplified to one thing or another. If we are able to stop sorting people into boxes based on initial interactions—seeing them as people rather than categories—then we will be able to accept people for what they really are: not messes or perfections, but humans.
