This week I was interviewed on BBC Radio about Manchester University and other academic institutions that are providing guidance to their staff on how to refer to older people and others without causing offence. This had been gathering a few newspaper headlines over recent days.
Staff are being advised to actively avoid ageist terms such as 'elderly', 'OAPs', 'pensioners' or 'youngsters', instead using terms that are objective such as 'mature individuals', 'older people' or simply 'learners'. The university’s inclusive language guide also recommends staff to only refer to age if it is relevant, for example with initiatives that are only available for a particular age group.
From my point of view this seems eminently reasonable and uncontroversial. However, there are those that disagree. Some newspaper reports quoted an anonymous spokesman for the Free Speech Union as saying:
'It's one thing for universities to protect snowflakes from hearing certain words - they might be "triggered" and feel 'unsafe'.
'But it's deeply patronising to offer the same protections to old people. In my experience, most OAPs are tough as nails and the last thing they're worried about is hurt feelings.'
While we know that organisations such as these are designed to stir and stoke outrage, I found their words to be dismissive of people’s experiences. They make sweeping general assumptions about older people with very little basis or evidence. The spokesman also misses the vital point that the alternatives to ageist terms suggested by the universities are the terms that older people themselves wish to be referred by.