17
votes
How old age was reborn. “The Golden Girls” reframed senior life as being about socializing and sex. But did the cultural narrative of advanced age as continued youth twist the dial too far?
Link information
This data is scraped automatically and may be incorrect.
- Title
- How Old Age Was Reborn
- Authors
- The New Yorker
- Published
- Nov 25 2024
- Word count
- 4183 words
I'll admit, this article bounces around like me trying to finish a paper by midnight but I thought it was a good read, and interesting, regardless.
This is a funny thing that I guess I've never really thought about but on the flip side, to the "girls" defense, when the kids move eight plus hours away and you've got more than one, how do the grandparents decide what kid to move near? The one without kids who can come visit more often, the one with kids who expects you to come take care of the kids so they don't have to, or split the difference, move to Florida and have them come visit you? We're all selfish, societally, the Golden Girls didn't really impact that any more than Always Sunny or Seinfeld.
I think the article sets out to disprove it's own hypothesis and does so successfully. The Golden Girls didn't create the problem, it just wasn't the male-centric version of the existing trope.
Lol, why are we talking specifically about my life? My partner and I are literally going through this with her parents. We both grew up in the bay area and the year her brother had kids (also still in the bay area) they up and moved to Florida and are now claiming capital gain taxes in California are too high to move back. It's wild.
I think the author found a hypothesis "boomers are opting out of familial support" and then thrashed around wildly trying to find media to blame. Anecdotally, I agree with the hypothesis, but like you say it's ridiculous to blame Golden Girls. My partners parents have opted out supporting grandkids, and when they do participate they act like they don't know what to do. Other friends are having similar experiences. Grandparents who refuse to help. Who call them lazy for looking external help or using daycare. Who seem fully out of touch about parenting in 2024.
To take my own stab in the dark, I think the difference is wealth. The baby boomers experienced a wild level of wealth accumulation, mostly from the real estate market absolutely booming during their earning years. They aren't reliant on their children now and have the wealth to really "indulge" in themselves. And so that's what we're seeing. On one hand, it's great that there are less old folks who are financially vulnerable. On the other we're losing familial support. Grandma flats now have renters rather than aging parents. Spare rooms are offices.
At least within our community, friends and siblings are stepping in to fill the void. I think there is a desire to find or build the feeling of community and collective support, and it's a bit sad that our parents are broadly opting out.
Forget free child care until leaving us with a large sum. Our generation can count ourselves blessed if we can escape paying for their sunset years and if they don't leave behind any debt.
And also haunts many other seniors. It's as if accepting anything less than total independence and complete hedonism means they acknowledge Death standing in their living room. It's a sort of reversed teenaged rebellion: being helpful to your family is for babies and the no longer wellderly. Hedonism is how one stays young and healthy. As long as they hold on to the Baby status, they'll keep booming along.
This denial can be extremely frustrating for families as well
If its any consolation, I suffer the same fate, and they are broke, so its not just wealth.
Lol, good to know it's an equal opportunity issue.
Mirror: https://archive.is/DtSXL