journal article Show
Reviewed Works: The Social Forces in Later Life: An Introduction to Social Gerontology, 3rd ed. by Robert C. Atchley; Growing Old: A Societal Perspective by Martha Baum, Rainer C. Baum; Gerontology: A Behavioral Science Approach by Richard C. Crandall; Social Gerontology: An Introduction to the Dynamics of Aging by David L. Decker; Sociology of Aging by Diana K. Harris, William E. Cole; Aging and Old Age: An Introduction to Social Gerontology by Beth B. Hess, Elizabeth W. Markson; Adulthood and Aging: An Interdisciplinary, Developmental View by Douglas C. Kimmel; Aging and Society by John B. Williamson, Anne Munley, Linda Evans, Barbara H. Vinick, Sharlene Hesse Review by: Gordon F. Streib Contemporary Sociology Vol. 10, No. 2 (Mar., 1981) , pp. 186-190 (5 pages) Published By: American Sociological Association https://doi.org/10.2307/2066845 https://www.jstor.org/stable/2066845 This is a preview. Log in through your library. Journal Information Contemporary Sociology (CS) publishes reviews and critical discussions of recent works in sociology and in related disciplines which merit the attention of sociologists. Since not all sociological publications can be reviewed, a selection is made to reflect important trends and issues in the field. Please note that CS does not accept unsolicited reviews. Publisher Information American Sociological Association Mission Statement: Serving Sociologists in Their Work Advancing Sociology as a Science and Profession Promoting the Contributions and Use of Sociology to Society The American Sociological Association (ASA), founded in 1905, is a non-profit membership association dedicated to advancing sociology as a scientific discipline and profession serving the public good. With over 13,200 members, ASA encompasses sociologists who are faculty members at colleges and universities, researchers, practitioners, and students. About 20 percent of the members work in government, business, or non-profit organizations. As the national organization for sociologists, the American Sociological Association, through its Executive Office, is well positioned to provide a unique set of services to its members and to promote the vitality, visibility, and diversity of the discipline. Working at the national and international levels, the Association aims to articulate policy and impleme nt programs likely to have the broadest possible impact for sociology now and in the future. Note: This article is a review of another work, such as a book, film, musical composition, etc. The original work is not included in the purchase of this review. Rights & Usage This item is part of a JSTOR Collection. AbstractIn the literature on aging there have been almost simultaneous calls for researchers to make more explicit links between theory and research and for researchers to incorporate diversity in their work. Although gerontologists have begun to document diversity, theory is often absent from this research. In this article, the author examines sociological aging theories of inequality and argues that this absence of theory may not be due to an oversight on the part of researchers. Rather, aging theories need to be rethought to be better suited for diversity research. Vernon L. Greene, PhD Recently, researchers concerned with aging and social inequality have called for an incorporation of diversity in theory and research (Calasanti 1993, Calasanti 1996; Calasanti and Zajicek 1993; Hendricks 1996; Nelson and Dannefer 1992). Focusing on diversity brings comparative group differences to the fore of research, allows for descriptive examinations of previously neglected groups, and helps show why and how group differences emerge in the first place (Calasanti 1996). Studies of diversity are concerned with interlocking hierarchies of power (Calasanti 1996; Hendricks 1996), and these studies assess group differences by situating them within the context of this power hierarchy (Calasanti 1996). Researchers examine neglected groups from the standpoint of the group, thereby avoiding the categorization of the group as "deviant" or "other." Thus, studies of diversity compare groups and assess differences by privileging the knowledge of the group in question and by asking why and how these groups are oppressed (Calasanti 1996). Although there seems to be a general acceptance of the importance of incorporating diversity in research on aging (Hendricks 1996), many scholars have yet to embrace it in their work. In this article I argue that one reason for this omission may be that there is an incompatibility between diversity research and established aging theory. A point of clarification is necessary here. In her important article on diversity, Calasanti 1996 made the distinction between content and approach diversity. Content diversity refers to group differences (racial, ethnic, class, gender), and approach diversity refers to a research emphasis on power and standpoint. Although researchers who study aging have made great strides in documenting content diversity (see, e.g., O'Rand 1996a, O'Rand 1996b; Uhlenberg and Minor 1996), research that deals with approach diversity lags behind. This, I propose, is linked to the relative reliance on aging theory that is required in each body of work. In other words, although it is relatively straightforward for researchers to document content diversity without much theoretical emphasis, the same is not true for approach diversity. Thus, the problem lies, at least in part, with the state of aging theory (see Appendix, Note 1). In a recent article, Bengtson, Burgess, and Parrott 1997 addressed the atheoretical nature of aging research and the importance of linking research to theory. They argued that aging research tends to be atheoretical largely because researchers are slow to integrate facts "within a larger explanatory framework, connecting findings to established explanations of social phenomena" (p. S72). The implicit assumption in this argument is that the "established explanations of social phenomena" are adequate, that the explicit connections are there to be made, and that researchers should begin to do so. Although this may be true in some cases, in others the state of aging theory may impede researchers from making those explicit links. This, I contend, is the case with diversity research. The basic premise of approach diversity is that class, age, gender, and ethnicity/race (see Appendix, Note 2) are interlocking sets of power relations that structure social life. Thus, for a theory to be well suited for diversity research at least two criteria must be met. First, class, age, gender, and ethnicity/race must be conceptualized as power relations, and second, they must come together as an interlocking hierarchy of power rather than as separate systems. In this article, I examine several well-established aging theories on social inequality to assess whether they meet these two basic criteria of approach diversity. I focus on two bodies of theoretical development that have arguably been the most influential in sociological aging research—the age stratification perspective and the political economy approach. I then turn to feminist approaches on aging. Although feminist theory has not had the same influence as the political economy and age stratification perspectives on research on aging, it is important to consider this work because it comes closest to an explicit theoretical statement of approach diversity. The Age Stratification PerspectiveConceptualizing AgeThe age stratification perspective, as developed by Riley and her colleagues, is arguably the most cited and used approach in the aging literature. According to this perspective, age is conceptualized as both a process and a structure. Riley 1994 conceptualized individual aging as a biopsychosocial process, thus capturing psychological and biological development as well as the experience of entering and exiting social roles (Riley, Johnson, and Foner 1972). According to this approach, the aging process influences the structure of age-related acts or capacities. Allocation and socialization are the processes that intervene between the social structures relating to people (persons of given ages or age strata and age-related acts or capacities) and those relating to roles (roles open to persons of given ages and age-related expectations and sanctions). Allocation refers to the process whereby individuals are continually assigned and reassigned to particular roles, and socialization alludes to teaching individuals how to perform new life course roles (Riley et al. 1972). The age stratification perspective has evolved into what is now called The Aging and Society Paradigm. Subtle changes in the terminology used to describe the theory came with the model's elaboration including the addition of the word dynamism, which is thought to encompass both process and change (Riley 1988). Riley described the evolution of the paradigm when she stated that the "distinction between people and roles led us to focus directly on the central theme of the paradigm: the two dynamisms—changes in lives and in structures" (Riley 1994, p. 438). Each dynamism is a distinct and separate process; both are interdependent and both are asynchronous (differ in timing; Riley, Foner, and Waring 1988; Riley and Riley 1994). As a result, they produce a structural lag because human lives change faster than the social structure (Riley and Riley 1994). The Age and Society Paradigm seeks to explain the processes that underlie the movement of age cohorts through time and age-related social structures. Exploring the asynchrony between individual and structural change, the paradigm attempts to resolve issues of conflict related to this "structural lag." The theory also strives to understand the interdependence between age cohorts, social structures, and individual aging processes (Bengtson et al. 1997). In age stratification research, the age system of inequality is generally conceptualized in terms of the differences between older, middle-aged, and younger age strata. At a structural level, similar-aged individuals form strata that may be defined on the basis of either chronological age or biological, psychological, or social stages of development (Riley et al. 1972, p. 6). Age strata differ from one another in size and composition as well as the relative contributions that each makes to society. Age is also established in the social structure as a "criterion for entering or relinquishing certain roles" (Riley et al. 1972, p. 7) and thus is used as a marker through which age-appropriate behavior is gauged. Although there is some recognition that inequalities arise as age strata are constructed and reformulated through the changes in society and age-related processes (Riley et al. 1988, p. 268), age tends to be treated in static, rather than dynamic, terms. Thus, the processes and changes that are captured in the diachronic view of the age stratification approach are generally absent in assessments of social inequality. Instead, researchers tend to start with the assumption that age strata, with clearly defined roles and consequential rewards and expectations, exist and comprise a system of age-based inequality (Foner 1974, Foner 1986; Riley et al. 1972, Riley et al. 1988). Hence, these theories of inequality are generally framed within the synchronic model of the age stratification perspective. To illustrate, let us now turn to the specifics of how age stratification researchers might conceptualize age-based social inequality in two spheres—the economy and the family. In this body of research, paid employment and family membership are considered socially valued roles because they function to maintain order in society. According to the age stratification perspective, older and younger age strata are relatively disadvantaged because they tend not to take part in the productive roles that are highly valued in modern society. Labor force entries and exits are allocated by age both directly through labor laws and indirectly through educational criteria for entering jobs and also by the perceived age-related performance abilities for job exit. There are age differences in the kinds of jobs people hold and in the age distribution of the workforce. These age-related roles and expectations for labor force participation lead to different rewards according to age. Thus, compared with labor force participants, retired workers and young people tend to be less powerful and economically disadvantaged. Within labor markets, older workers assume more power and tend to make more money than younger workers, especially in well-established firms (Foner 1986; Foner and Schwab 1981; Riley et al. 1972, Riley et al. 1988). Age stratification discussions of the family have focused on the age-graded nature of the family, its changing structure, its functions, and the roles and norms associated with different types of memberships in families (Foner 1986). Inequality within families is generally assessed through economic differences and power imbalances between parents and their younger children. In families of procreation, parents have more power and economic control than their children because they assume socializing and caregiving roles. The focus in discussions of later life families is on whether older parents are neglected by their adult children (Riley et al. 1988). Although these discussions tend not to be framed within the context of power, an imbalance is implied in which the power shifts from parents to children. Cohort flow is one of the fundamental processes in the age stratification perspective (Riley et al. 1972). Riley and her colleagues (1972, p. 8) suggested that cohort flow is the
Thus, besides specifying age as strata or a biopsychosocial process, age stratification researchers conceptualize age in terms of cohorts. Following Ryder 1965 definition, Riley defined a cohort as an aggregate of individuals who experienced the same event within the same time interval; birth cohorts are only a special case of this more general definition. Notably, Ryder's conceptualization allows for individuals to be grouped according to any significant event. In practice, however, year of birth tends to be the event that is assigned meaningful significance. Thus, Riley viewed cohorts as aggregates of individuals who are born in the same time interval. The conceptualization of cohorts in arbitrarily defined 1-year and 5-year age groups is a fundamental problem in the application of age stratification perspectives. This approach serves to reify chronological age as the basis of inequality and ignores the more subjective dimensions of age (Marshall 1983; Passuth and Bengtson 1988). By assuming that 1-year or 5-year age cohorts take on meaningful significance, this approach masks qualitative differences in personal experience that are age related (Marshall 1983). Maddox and Wiley 1976 and Marshall 1983 have voiced concerns over the atheoretical nature of the term cohort as it is used in most social science research. According to Marshall 1983, it is more meaningful to assess age relations in terms of groups of people who experience a significant historical event in different ways. These groups would not necessarily be defined in 1-year or 5-year birth cohorts. Rather, depending on the historical event of interest, they may encompass people born over a span of 2, 7, or perhaps even 20 years (see also Elder 1974). Ryder 1965(p. 847) appeared to allow for this possibility in his general definition of cohort by suggesting that a cohort may be "identified by common time of occurrence of any significant and enduring event in life history." Examples Ryder gave of these events include the year in which a group of people completed school, got married, migrated to a city, or entered the labor force. Here again, however, he has reduced cohorts to single years without considering theoretical implications of doing so. For instance, it may make more theoretical sense to compare a group of individuals who completed their formal schooling during the years of the Depression to those who finished their schooling immediately before World War II (see Elder 1974, for an example of this general approach, and Appendix, Note 3). Conceptualizing Gender, Class, and Ethnicity/RaceThe preceding discussion illustrates that age (conceptualized as a biopsychosocial process, as strata, and as cohorts) predominates as the primary basis of difference in the age stratification perspective. Assigning such primacy to age leads to a homogeneous view of biopsychosocial processes, age strata, and age cohorts that neglects diversity on the basis of other structures such as gender, class, or ethnicity/race (Dannefer 1988; Dowd 1987; Tindale and Marshall 1980). When gender, class, or ethnicity/race are mentioned in this research they are viewed as separate systems of inequality (Foner 1974, Foner 1986; Riley et al. 1972, Riley et al. 1988). Researchers tend to treat these systems of difference as if they cross-cut each other in similar ways, rather than to assess their interlocking nature. Age stratification researchers also tend to treat the age system of inequality as if it is similar in nature and process to gender-, ethnicity/race-, and class-based structures of inequality. According to Foner 1986(p.85), "if we view the age stratification system as similar to other forms of social stratification, then age, like class, race, or sex, is potentially a focal point around which intragroup solidarity develops and political conflicts between age strata emerge in the society." A quick comparison of age strata and social class characteristics reveals their differences (see Dowd 1987). Probably most central is that whereas an individual's social class tends to be permanent, membership in different age strata is a fluid and expected process. However, overstating the differences may be as misleading as inflating the similarities. For instance, Dowd 1987 suggested that a central difference between social class and age lies in the existence of legal statutes that prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of age; no laws prohibit the hiring of managers over workers. He went on to state that
This argument is somewhat misleading because it simplifies the complex and subtle structures of employment that perpetuate gender-, ethnic-, and age-based inequality. Mandatory retirement, for instance, is an age-based event that often results in lower incomes and limited life chances. Substituting mandatory retirement and age hierarchy for social class and class hierarchy in the previous quotation illustrates that there are some similarities between class and age stratification. This is not to say that they are the same. Rather, exaggerating the differences leads to the treatment of age as a secondary source of inequality, which may be as problematic as assigning primacy to it. In sum, its normative tendencies; reification of chronological age; treatment of class, gender, and ethnicity/race as separate systems of inequality if at all; and assumptions about the similarity between age and other bases of inequality are problems in the age stratification approach that limit its usefulness as a theoretical paradigm in research on approach diversity. However, within the context of these limitations, researchers and theorists should not lose sight of the importance of this approach in conceptualizing age as a system of inequality. By unraveling the effects of individual aging and age strata from cohort flow within the context of historical time, this approach provides useful tools for those developing theories on approach diversity (see Appendix, Note 4). The Political Economy of AgingIn the late 1970s and early 1980s social gerontologists began to critique the normative and highly individualistic theories that were then prominent in aging research (Marshall and Tindale 1978–79; Tindale and Marshall 1980). Responding to these critiques and the calls for a more radical and critical approach, several scholars from different countries began to assess old age from a political economy perspective (Estes 1979; Estes, Swan, and Gerard 1982; Guillemard 1982, Guillemard 1983; Myles 1980, Myles 1984, Myles 1989; Phillipson 1982; Townsend 1981; Walker 1981). To explain age-based inequality, political economists focus on the interrelationships among the economy, the polity, and the ideological structures that these systems of domination construct and reconstruct. Political economists account for the problems that older people face by considering structural characteristics of the state, the economy, and inequalities in the distribution and allocation of resources that these institutions create. Hence, political economy theories focus on social structural explanations of inequality rather than on individual reasons such as the naturally diminishing physical or mental capacities of older people (Estes 1979; Guillemard 1983; Myles 1984, Myles 1989; Phillipson 1982; Townsend 1981, Townsend 1986; Walker 1981). A substantial body of aging research has emerged over the last 20 years that draws on the political economy perspective. Studies from this camp that are among the most provocative have examined the following:
To a greater or lesser extent, these studies consider the socially constructed nature of aging, old age, and dependency; the influence of ideology in this construction; the legitimation of social interventions pertaining to elderly people; the influence of state, capital, and labor relations on aging and old age; and the effects of social policy for elderly people (Estes 1991; Estes, Linkins, and Binney 1996). Although a discussion of the specifics of each of these arguments is beyond the scope of this article, it is important to briefly consider the role of the state in political economy research. Although the state comprises many institutions (education, criminal justice, health care), researchers from the political economy of aging perspective generally equate the state with the governing bodies responsible for the policies relating to social welfare. The term social welfare in studies of aging most often refers to social security and health benefits (Estes et al. 1996). The importance of the state in this research stems from the power that it has over resource allocation and distribution in the context of its relation to capital and to labor and its ultimate responsibility for the survival of the economic system (Estes et al. 1996; Myles 1989). In the political economy perspective, the state is thought to reflect the interests of the most powerful members of society and the existing social order is thought to be the result of power struggles in which the state participates (Estes 1991; Estes et al. 1996). Unlike consensus models where the state is considered a "neutral entity, operating in the universal interests of all members of society" (Estes 1991, p. 22), political economy scholars generally believe either that the state acts to maintain its own bureaucratic control (Offe & Ronge, 1982, cited in Estes 1991) or that power struggles within the state represent class struggles (Myles 1989). Important advances in the study of social inequality and aging have come from the political economy analysis of state policies relating to retirement and pensions. For instance, Myles 1980, Myles 1984, Myles 1989 showed that income inequality in older age is a function of both the overall levels of inequality in a given society and the way pension systems alter or reproduce that inequality. Although inequalities in preretirement years persist after retirement, an understanding of income inequalities among older people and between the old and the young requires an analysis of public pension structures. Traditionally, public pension structures have either been based on preretirement incomes or on the idea of a national minimum benefit. In the first instance, pensions perpetuate class-, gender-, and ethnicity-based inequalities in older age by "graduating" pension incomes according to preretirement income. In the second instance, income equality among older people is achieved because the same sum of money is paid to everyone on the basis of citizenship only (flat benefit structure; Myles 1980, Myles 1984, Myles 1989). Most Western capitalist nations have pension structures that combine flat and graduated pension schemes (Myles 1980). The interplay between graduated and flat benefit structures highlights a contradiction in modern, liberal democratic states between the rights attached to the ownership of property and rights afforded to persons in their capacity as citizens (Myles 1984, Myles 1989). According to Myles 1989, the strategies that different countries use to come to terms with this contradiction determine the relative pension benefits of older people and are a reflection of class struggles within the state. Thus, Myles 1989 suggested that the quality and quantity of pension benefits are largely a function of the political mobilization of the working class and the election of working class parties. This brief summary of Myles's work illustrates the power that the state has in determining the economic status of older adults. Few scholars would dispute this point, although political economists disagree over the precise conceptualization of the state (see Estes 1991; Estes et al. 1996) and the relative emphasis that should be placed on the state relations (Myles 1989) versus the relations of production (Guillemard 1982, Guillemard 1983) in assessments of inequality. Most would also agree that old age and aging are socially constructed, in part, through these and other state policies. The Social Construction of Aging and Old AgeThe preceding discussion of the state illustrates that scholars who study age from a political economy perspective tend to conceptualize age as strata. Thus, from this perspective Western capitalist societies are thought to be organized on the basis of whether one is old, middle aged, or young. Unlike age stratification researchers, political economists are critical of these divisions and question how a particular chronological age becomes the marker by which one is defined as old and how the polity and the economy legitimize old age by defining it as a problem and then by developing solutions to deal with the problem (Estes 1979; Guillemard 1982, Guillemard 1983; Myles 1989; Phillipson 1982; Walker 1981, Walker 1983). Several political economists have argued that the transformation of old age into a social category based on chronological age was made possible by the establishment of a set of age-based pensions administered by the state and that old age has come to be defined in terms of retirement (Guillemard 1982, Guillemard 1983; Myles 1989; Phillipson 1982; Walker 1981). Estes described an "aging enterprise" that comprises "programs, organizations, bureaucracies, interest groups, trade associations, providers, industries, and professionals that serve the aged in one capacity or another" (Estes 1979, p. 2). The interests of those that constitute the aging enterprise are realized by making elderly persons dependent upon the services they offer. In doing so, aged persons are processed and treated as a commodity (Estes 1979; Estes et al. 1982). Further, this
The crisis ideology perpetuated by the state and the media regarding the aging of the population and social welfare is another example of how old age becomes socially constructed as a problem. The message conveyed is that with the increasing number of elderly people will come a financial burden too large to bear (the emphasis is usually on the baby boom generation reaching old age). However, Myles 1980 has demonstrated that although the structure of state spending, ownership, and control will likely change, it is unlikely that population aging will bankrupt nations. Political economists have advanced the state of theorizing in gerontological research over the last 20 years by examining issues relating to older age through a critical lens. Nonetheless, the conceptualization of age by political economists is somewhat problematic. First, although this approach places emphasis on the structural characteristics that frame the aging experience and older age, age relations themselves are often considered secondary to issues of social class. The following quotation, which demonstrates this position, is typical of the way age relations are handled in the political economy perspective. In describing the political economy of aging, Estes, and her colleagues (1982, p. 155) stated that
Thus, aging and age relations do not seem to be central to one's position within the social structure. Rather, political economists tend to treat other structures of domination, particularly that of class, as the key determinant relations that affect the life situations of older adults and the aging process. Second, political economists of aging have been critical, and rightly so, of gerontological researchers who seek to explain older age by "naturalizing" the biological conditions of aging but by doing so, these researchers tend to understate the significance of the biological aging process. Such researchers fail to examine the subtle institutional procedures that discriminate on the basis of biopsychosocial aging and thus render the aging process invisible (see Appendix, Note 6). Conceptualizing Social ClassSocial class is a key concept in the political economy of aging approach and it is in discussions of social class that the Marxian influence in this perspective is most evident (Marx, 1867/Marx 1967; Marx & Engels, 1848/Marx and Engels 1970). Political economy of aging researchers emphasize the relations of production in their conceptualization of social class and specifically the relations between those who own the means of production and those who do not (Guillemard 1982, Guillemard 1983; Myles 1980, Myles 1984, Myles 1989; Phillipson 1982; Townsend 1981; Walker 1981). Thus, according to Guillemard 1982(p. 228), "the traditional Marxist definition, which analyzes the class structure of the capitalist mode of production by basically contrasting the two antagonistic classes—capitalist and proletarian—must be upheld." Among political economy of aging researchers, this understanding of social class is generally enhanced by the work of contemporary Marxist scholars such as Poulantzas 1975, who stressed the effects of economic, political, and ideological structures in class relations, or Wright 1978, Wright 1985, who emphasized the control as well as the ownership of property and resources (see Estes et al. 1982; Guillemard 1982; Walker 1981). The emphasis on the relations of production in the political economy of aging approach is paradoxical because most older people are no longer directly engaged in socially defined productive relations (Dowd 1980; Estes 1991; Estes et al. 1982). One strategy political economists use to deal with this paradox is to use a life course framework to assess the class relations of older adults on the basis of their preretirement social class (Guillemard 1982, Guillemard 1983; Phillipson 1982; Walker 1981). Aware of life course processes, these political economists believe that power relations and resources in later life are shaped by people's earlier location within the social structure or their class position. Missing in these accounts is an analysis of the relationship between age relations and class relations as they structure inequality in later life. As others have pointed out (Kohli 1988; Myles 1980), the economic and social locations of older people reflect not only class inequalities in early life but also unique processes that are structured by age relations. Estes dealt with the contradiction between the Marxist emphasis on productive labor and assessments of the social location of older people by turning to a more Weberian view of class. Specifically, Estes 1991(p. 25) drew on Ehrenreich and Ehrenreich 1979(p.11) and suggested that a social class is "characterized by a coherent social and cultural existence; members of a class share a common life style, educational background, kinship networks, consumption patterns, work habits, and beliefs." This definition of social class, Estes 1991; Estes et al. 1982 argued, is analytically appropriate for older people because it does not necessarily reflect productive relations and can capture the dynamics involved with aging and social inequality. Although a reformulation of social class is no doubt necessary for researchers to fully assess the structural nature of inequality among older people and between older and younger people, it is unlikely that a better understanding of inequality will be achieved if the relations of production and distribution are ignored, as this definition seems to do. The definition is limiting because it does not consider relations or the processes involved in inequality. Rather, as in stratification research, its goal seems to be to assess differences on the basis of categorizing people according to similar life situations. Another strategy political economists use to deal with this paradox is to assume that more than one structure of domination influences social inequality. Myles 1989 used this approach and argued that two structures of domination in Western capitalist societies structure inequality in older age. One is based on the productive relations whereby power is afforded to those who control economic resources. The other is based in the polity where power is maintained by those who control political resources. The interplay between these power sources determines, both in principle and in practice (these do not often converge), the value of old age pensions and, hence, structures economic inequality in later life. According to Myles 1989, arbitrations between the polity and the economy over old age benefits are framed in contradictions because the principles of democratic politics are inconsistent with the principles of a capitalist economy. Public pension systems represent the compromise between these sets of principles that has been negotiated within the political arena. Thus, Myles 1989 argued that income inequality in old age is structured by the state rather than by the market's invisible hand. However, a critical factor determining the extent of pension entitlements is the political mobilization of the working class (defined in Marxist terms), for Myles believed that power struggles within the state are essentially class conflicts. Myles 1989 improved on the other life course work because he assessed the structure of inequality in older age as a result of both preretirement class-based inequalities and socially constructed age-based inequalities that come with retirement. In doing so, he stressed the importance of class relations and their influence on the state relations of distribution. The most significant problem for studies of diversity in Myles's analysis, and one that he acknowledged, is the neglect of gender. Conceptualizing Gender and Ethnicity/RaceThe significance of gender, race, and ethnicity in assessments of social inequality is often acknowledged by political economy of aging theorists. For instance, Myles 1989 noted the significance of gender by stating that a major problem with his thesis is that it ignores the situation of women. Estes 1979, Estes 1991, Estes 1999; Estes et al. 1982, Estes et al. 1996 highlighted the importance of gender, race, and ethnicity by acknowledging them in her overviews of the political economy perspective and by stressing their structural significance in discussions of inequality. In light of the recognition of gender, race, and ethnicity in political economy accounts, it is rather surprising that most political economists, like other aging theorists, have yet to afford serious theoretical attention to the structural nature of gender (Estes 1999, is the notable exception) and ethnic/racial relations. Some political economy researchers have assessed differences between men and women in their work (Olson 1982; Orloff 1993) or have considered gender as fundamental to their analyses (Arber and Ginn 1990, Arber and Ginn 1991, Arber and Ginn 1995; Quadango 1988). However, to the best of my knowledge, Estes 1991, Estes 1999 is the only political economist who has systematically attempted to theorize gender. In 1991 Estes began this work by expanding Acker 1988 thesis on the gendered nature of social class, conceived as both the relations of distribution and the relations of production, to include older women. In her argument, Estes 1991 highlighted the point that Acker made regarding the indifference of capitalist economic systems to the reproduction of the working class and the demands of working class daily life. According to Estes 1991, a research focus on the relations of reproduction allows for an analysis of the gendered division of paid and unpaid labor throughout the life course. Because the concept of social reproduction moves beyond the economic sphere, a new and more accurate light may be cast on "the role of women and the elderly (men and women) in the daily activity of the productive sphere" (Estes 1991, p. 27). In this work, it is not entirely clear what is meant by gender and ethnic/racial relations. For instance, Estes 1991(p. 20) noted that "class is broadly conceived to include the impact of gender and racial/ethnic relations on the relations of production." On one hand, this statement could imply that Estes has reconceptualized class by extending the traditional Marxist definition of class to include the gendered and ethnic/racial-based processes that structure the relations of production. On the other hand, it might mean that gender and ethnic/racial divisions may be reduced to class relations. Estes 1999 addressed this problem in her most recent work by carefully discussing how gender, class, race, and ethnicity are implicated within the state and within symbolic and cultural institutions. By using many concrete examples of social life, she showed that gender relations and, to a lesser extent, ethnic and race relations are sets of power structures in their own right that cannot be reduced to class structures of inequality. Estes 1999 also pointed out that her approach recognizes standpoint theory and conceptualizes race, class, and gender as interlocking systems of oppression, two theoretical issues that lend themselves well to research on approach diversity. Despite the latter claim, Estes often reverted back to documenting differences between men and women, racial or ethnic groups, classes, and the young and old without thoroughly considering the intersections among these sets of power relations. This tendency is problematic because readers are occasionally left with an uneasy feeling that gender, race, and ethnicity are being added to an existing paradigm, a difficulty that feminist researchers have often pointed out (Acker 1988; McMullin 1995). Nonetheless, this new work in the political economy approach is promising, if underdeveloped, and shows useful directions for advancing diversity research. In summary, assessments of inequality and diversity would be incomplete if they did not take into account the role of the state in resource allocation and distribution and how these processes are influenced by class struggles. However, in tending to compare elderly with nonelderly persons, political economists oversimplify the complexities of age relations by not considering issues relating to cohorts, more specific age strata divisions, or aging processes. Further, the a priori emphasis on class relations over and above age relations leads to assessments of social inequality in later life that reflect class inequalities in early life. Missing in many political economy accounts are the unique processes of age relations that structure inequality. The traditional view of class relations in much of this work also leads to a neglect of gender and ethnic/racial relations (see Estes 1999, for an exception). Socialist-Feminist Perspectives in Aging ResearchTo better understand the complex interplay between gender and social class, feminist scholars believe that theories need to be rethought and categories reconceptualized (Acker 1980, Acker 1988; Calasanti and Zajicek 1993; Dressel 1988; Fox 1988; McMullin 1995). Although this type of rethinking is rare in aging research, a handful of feminists have engaged in such theoretical development (Arber and Ginn 1990, Arber and Ginn 1991, Arber and Ginn 1995; Calasanti and Zajicek 1993; see Appendix, Note 7). Calasanti and Zajicek 1993 provided the most succinct theoretical statement on aging from a feminist perspective in their article titled "A Socialist-Feminist Approach to Aging: Embracing Diversity." They began by discussing two problematic ways in which gender has been examined in aging research. First, researchers, assuming that there are gender differences, have established separate models for men and women. In this approach, women are compared to the ideal, normative, male model and differences are noted. Second, single models are estimated that include gender as a variable in the analysis. According to Calasanti and Zajicek, this strategy is particularly problematic because researchers treat women as if they were men, using models that were developed to assess men's experiences. The resulting research reinforces gender hierarchies, treats women as the deviant "other," and obscures similarities between women and men. Along with this androcentric bias in aging research, Calasanti and Zajicek also suggested that this research favors individuals from the White middle class. Thus, according to Calasanti and Zajicek, what is needed is an understanding of the ways in which gender, class, and ethnicity/race structure life chances (see Appendix, Note 8). According to Calasanti and Zajicek 1993, five of the concepts that inform socialist-feminist thought are necessary for embracing diversity in gerontological research. These concepts are "(1) patriarchy or the paradigm of domination; (2) gendering processes within organizations; (3) production and reproduction as delineated relations between private and public spheres; (4) family; and (5) the gendered welfare system" (Calasanti and Zajicek 1993, p. 120–121; see Appendix, Note 9). Calasanti and Zajicek discussed these concepts and addressed how a better understanding of the life situations of elderly people could be gained by adapting them. This discussion speaks to how gender, class, and ethnicity/race are conceptualized in socialist-feminist thought. Conceptualizing Gender, Class, and Ethnicity/RaceCalasanti and Zajicek 1993 suggested that early socialist-feminists viewed patriarchy as a system of oppression that underlies gender inequality and is distinct from, yet related to, capitalism. Recognizing that some socialist-feminists find the term "patriarchy" problematic because its use leads to the analytic separation of gender and class oppression, Calasanti and Zajicek 1993(p. 121) introduced the term paradigm of domination to reflect an "interlocking system of oppression." Two recent developments in socialist-feminist theory have led to the ideas that underlie this concept. First, there is a general recognition that to understand inequality researchers need to address the interlocking nature of gender, class, and ethnic/racial relations (Calasanti and Zajicek 1993). Thus, the paradigm of domination eliminates the necessity to talk in separate systems terms, a discourse that seems to be necessary if the concept of patriarchy is used (Acker 1989; Fox 1988). Second, socialist-feminists understand that gender relations are historically rooted and that they derive their meanings from economic, social, and political processes. Calasanti and Zajicek 1993(p. 122) suggested that the paradigm of domination concept captures
Thus, Calasanti and Zajicek 1993 suggested that gerontologists should adopt a socialist-feminist view and start with the assumption that researchers cannot understand inequality without considering the interdependent nature of gender, class, and ethnic/racial relations. This view is analytically distinct from separate systems approaches that posit independent structures and then look for linkages between them (Acker 1989). Rather,
Calasanti and Zajicek 1993 went on to discuss gendering processes within organizations, production and reproduction, the family, and the gendered welfare system. To summarize briefly, they drew on published research to show that organizations are gendered and that gendered processes in organizations affect pensions. The authors demonstrated that men and women have different relations of production and reproduction because of the gendered division of labor and gendered ideology. These factors structure and are structured by women's and men's labor force participation. Calasanti and Zajicek noted that it is important to consider the feminist deconstruction of the family and feminists' rejection of the idea that the family is the center of loving relations. Finally, Calasanti and Zajicek demonstrated that the welfare system is gendered and that its gendered nature is reinforced by ideology that promotes gender inequality. Most of the points that Calasanti and Zajicek 1993 made represent a summary of socialist-feminist research and theory. Occasionally, they brought aging research into the discussion to demonstrate that there are variations between different groups of older people according to their class, gender, and race. In fact, a key contribution that Calasanti and Zajicek made is in demonstrating the significance of ethnicity/race. In each of the research domains discussed previously, Calasanti and Zajicek made the point that current research and theorizing is not sufficient because it does not consider race and ethnicity. They suggested that if socialist-feminism was adopted, race and ethnicity would become focal, and racial differences among older adults, some of which they mention, would be better understood. Calisanti and Zajicek's (1993) emphasis on ethnicity/race is important and clear. However, the precise theoretical conceptualization of ethnicity/race is ambiguous. For instance, the mechanisms and processes through which ethnicity/race are implicated in power hierarchies are not specified. Rather, it is assumed that the reader knows what is meant by ethnicity/race and what, if any, distinctions there are between these two concepts. The theoretical conceptualization of social class is also a bit unclear. Socialist-feminist theorists argue that social class (and other concepts) needs to be reconceptualized if the gendered nature of social inequality is to be better understood (Acker 1988). Yet, Calasanti and Zajicek 1993 did not tackle the difficulties associated with social class and other concepts but framed their discussion under what seem to be traditional conceptualizations. This is particularly surprising given their reliance on the work of Acker 1988, Acker 1989, who has gone beyond critique in attempting to transform the way in which social class and organizations are viewed. Age Relations in Socialist Feminism and in Other Feminist WorksThe neglect of a conceptualization of age relations in Calasanti and Zajicek 1993 article is most problematic and reflects the general neglect of age relations and older women by socialist-feminists (see Appendix, Note 10). Calasanti and Zajicek occasionally referred to the different gender, race, and class experiences of older adults but focused on difference and not the structural implications of age relations. Although the title of their article promised a socialist-feminist approach to aging, they stated in the last paragraph of the article that their goal "has been to put forward an approach to gender (as well as ethnic/racial and class) relations which is embracing, meaning both multidisciplinary and encompassing of diversity" (p. 127). Using this approach Calasanti and Zajicek suggested that diversity can be understood through common and divergent aging experiences. Further, they suggested that this approach allows for examination of the ways in which power relations influence the lives of elderly people. Yet, for Calasanti and Zajicek, power relations are those among the genders, classes, and the races, and do not encompass those among generations, age strata, or cohorts. The neglect of age relations (see Appendix, Note 11), conceptualized as a dimension of diversity and inequality that intersects with gender, class, and ethnicity/race, runs through other works that use socialist-feminist perspectives (Blieszner 1993; Calasanti 1993; Gratton and Haber 1993; Palo Stoller 1993). Although these scholars agreed that adding gender to research is not adequate in the assessment of inequality, the sensitivity in this research to gender, ethnicity/race, and class relations takes precedence over age relations. Instead, these scholars assess issues that are pertinent to older people—retirement, lay health care, widowhood, and intimacy at a distance—with recognition of the importance of the intersections between gender, race, and class relations. These researchers tend to agree with Hess 1990(p. 12) and start with the assumption that inequalities between the sexes in old age "are not unique to that life stage but are continuous, with patterned inequalities throughout the life course." This is the view adopted in other feminist accounts of aging and older women as well. For example, in their excellent collection of essays on inequality in the aging experience, Palo Stoller and Campbell Gibson 1997(p. xix) emphasized "that hierarchies based on gender, race, and class create systems of privilege as well as of disadvantage… [D]iscrimination throughout the life course translates into an accumulation of disadvantage in old age." Hooyman and Gonyea 1995(pp. 24–25) argued for a "feminist framework on caregiving across the life span" that considers "variations in caregiving experiences by race, ethnicity, social class and sexual orientation." Although I do not disagree with these views, I believe that they miss a crucial point. Researchers must recognize that inequality in later life is both patterned throughout the life course and unique. In other words, potential power imbalances that are structured by age relations must be considered. Missing from most feminist accounts of older age, older women, or aging experiences are assessments of age relations themselves. The underlying assumption, then, is that age, however conceptualized, is not a basis of diversity. Thus, although these researchers attack the gender, class, and ethnicity/race issues head on, they leave issues of age relations undertheorized and in the periphery. This separation of age relations from other bases of inequality leads to the conclusion either that they are of considerably less significance than are gender, class, race, and ethnicity or that they stand apart from the rest as a separate basis of inequality. What is needed, then, is what Browne 1998 referred to as a new epistemology on women and aging. Such an approach "acknowledges the interlocking nature of a lifetime of what are often multiple oppressions, the interconnections between ageism and all forms of oppression" (Browne 1998, p. 263). Toward a Theoretical Coalescence of Class, Age, Gender, and Ethnicity/RaceIn the literature on aging and old age there have been calls for research that embraces diversity, at both an empirical and conceptual level. Although there has been an increasing body of empirical research that documents group differences on the basis of one or more of class, age, gender, and ethnicity/race (i.e., content diversity), this research tends to neglect issues of power and standpoint (i.e., approach diveristy). Almost simultaneously, there have been calls for scholars in the aging field to link theory to their empirical work (Bengtson et al. 1997). In this article, I have argued that theoretical assessments of diversity are rare in the gerontological literature because dominant sociological theories of aging and social inequality are somewhat limited in their conceptualization of power hierarchies that are based on interlocking sets of social relations. At least two conditions are necessary to improve theories of diversity and social inequality. First, class, age, gender, and ethnicity/race must be conceptualized as sets of social relations, characterized by power, that are fundamental structures or organizing features of social life (Calasanti 1996). Conceptualizing class, age, gender, and ethnicity/race as social relations involves moving beyond the view that these are individual characteristics that create difference. Rather, such a conceptualization suggests that these sets of relations are "fundamental elements of the social structure that are characterized … more by conflict than by consensus" (McMullin and Marshall 1999, pp. 308–309). A relational understanding of class, age, gender, and ethnicity/race requires an emphasis on "structured forms of power, organization, direction, and regulation that exist in modern societies and through which ruling groups maintain and reproduce their dominant positions" (Layder 1994, p. 159; see also Smith 1987). These structured forms of power are established and reproduced through daily experiences as groups interact with one another (Grabb 1990; Smith 1987). Conceptualizing age relations in such a way requires a shift in focus away from distributive issues (which does not imply that these issues are unimportant) that are at the fore of gerontological research and theory to a focus that addresses age-based domination, authority, and power. This conceptualization of age relations is foreshadowed in some recent research by McMullin and Marshall 1997, McMullin and Marshall 1999 that shows that older workers in a manufacturing industry have less power and authority in productive relations because they are considered old. Older workers assign meaning to their age on the basis of their interactions with managers and other workers. Old age is used by managers to conceal their underlying concerns about "problem workers," and there is a perception among older workers that age-based wage differences lead to job loss and conflict among workers and between workers and managers. In this context, age relations (in combination with gender, class, and ethnic/racial relations) structure the everyday experiences of the workers and place older workers at a disadvantage relative to younger ones. Daily experiences are shaped by taken-for-granted assumptions about what it means to be old, young, or middle aged and are influenced by perceived and real differences in power and authority. One key limitation of McMullin and Marshall 1997, McMullin and Marshall 1999 research is that age relations are conceptualized as the power and authority relations that evolve through interactions between older and younger workers and managers. Generational issues, in the Mannheimian sense, are not considered. Future research and theorizing in this regard must take generational and strata dimensions of age relations simultaneously into account. The second condition necessary in conceptualizing diversity is that social class, age, gender, and ethnicity/race must be viewed as interlocking sets of power relations (Calasanti 1996; McMullin 1995). None of the theoretical approaches discussed previously assigns equal weight to each of these sets of relations in their theorizing. Of course, whether any of these sets of power relations matter more than any other to a particular outcome is an empirical issue. However, assigning a priori theoretical emphasis to one or more sets of relations over others creates bias that could result in misleading research findings. Related to this point is the tendency in adherents of the theories discussed previously to treat class, age, gender, and ethnicity/race as separate systems. This occurs in one of two ways. First, in theories where one or another of these bases of diversity is not considered the omission suggests that they should be viewed as separate. Second, in theories that mention more than one base of diversity, scholars tend to start with a theory that assigns priority to one of these bases and then adds another to the approach. Although socialist-feminist theorists come closest to a fully integrated assessment of diversity by treating class, gender, and ethnicity/race as interacting systems of power, socialist-feminists' neglect of age relations suggests that more work needs to be done. What is needed is a theoretical framework that fully integrates class, age, gender, and ethnicity/race as power relations that structure social life. Researchers will then be better able to integrate theory and content diversity and provide analyses that fully encompass approach diversity in assessments of inequality. Theorists who have attempted to integrate one or more of these bases of diversity into an established paradigm have advanced our understanding of inequality, but a fully integrative and interconnected approach to diversity requires rethinking much of the theoretical work that has been done to date so that problems associated with adding dimensions to existing theory can be avoided (McMullin 1995). Rethinking does not, however, imply abandoning. Rather, one might carefully draw on the strengths of existing theory and modify them in such a way that the emerging paradigm is one that embraces the components and complexities of approach diversity. In this vein, it might be useful to briefly point out some of the key issues that require consideration for theorists developing a theoretical framework that integrates class, age, gender, and ethnic/racial relations. However, advancing the current understanding of social inequality by focusing on these interconnected sets of social relations is not a simple task and it is well beyond the scope of this article to embark on a major development of theory. In my view, to better understand social inequality scholars must create a theory of approach diversity that considers at least three interconnected processes of social life—the processes of production, reproduction, and distribution. According to Marxist scholarship, processes of production refer to the ways by which raw materials are converted into useful and valuable objects (Allahar 1995). Processes of distribution are the ways in which material resources change hands in society (Acker 1988, Acker 1999; Weber, 1922/Weber 1978). Distributive processes include wage, state, personal, and marital transfers (Acker 1988). Processes of reproduction refer to the ways in which life is maintained both daily and intergenerationally and include "how food, clothing, and shelter are made available for immediate consumption, the ways in which the care and socialization of children are provided, the care of the infirm and elderly, and the social organization of sexuality" (Laslett and Brenner 1989, p. 382; see Appendix, Note 12). The mere fact of these social processes does not necessarily imply an outcome of social inequality. Rather, understanding the historical context and the nature of the social relations that frame these domains is of fundamental importance in understanding and explaining social inequality. One task for theorists should be to elaborate on how the processes of production, reproduction, and distribution are shaped by the power relations that are assumed among class, age, gender, and ethnic/racial relations. In other words, theorists and researchers must ask how social relations of class, age, gender, and ethnicity/race structure these processes. With respect to inequality, how these sets of relations evolve into exploitive, oppressive, and alienating processes of production, distribution, and reproduction is of central concern. At this juncture a point of clarification is necessary. For Marx and to a lesser extent Weber, the relationships of groups of individuals to the means of production constitute class relations—put simply, those who own the means of production comprise the bourgeois class and those who do not represent the working class. However, empirical evidence suggests there are other social groups whose relative power is differentially affected by their relationship to the means of production—women, young and very old workers, and workers of various ethnic and racial backgrounds. In other words, class does not account for all of the power differentials that occur as a result of production processes. Thus, researchers must consider the interconnections between these sets of relations in assessments of social inequality. A paradigm shift is necessary whereby the relations of production assume not only class relations but gender, ethnic/racial, and age relations as well. The same difficulties in conceptual clarity do not arise with respect to the relations of distribution and reproduction—class, age, gender, and ethnic/racial relations are all clearly implicated in distributive and reproductive processes. Class, age, gender, and ethnic/racial relations are not thought to be causally linked, in any linear sense, to the processes of production, distribution, and reproduction. Rather, they mediate these processes and cannot be separated from them. This approach allows for considerable latitude in assessments of both the independent and combined effects of these sets of relations on the processes of inequality. This suggests that some of what is consequential about each of these sets of relations occurs independent of the others, yet an assessment of inequality would be incomplete without consideration of the intersecting influences as well (see Wright 1997 for a similar discussion of the connection between gender and class). However, one cannot pick and choose among the components of the framework that one deems worthy of study. Rather, and importantly, the issue of coalescence in this approach suggests that inaccurate assessments of social inequality will result from such strategies. Although one can examine both the independent and interlocking effects of this framework's components, one must consider the processes and sets of relations contained within it as a whole to fully understand the nature of social inequality. To examine one component without the other will present a distorted picture of social reality. Thus, the coalescence represented in this approach might be visualized as a colorful and tightly woven fabric; the threads may be discernable from one another, but removing any one of them distorts the overall pattern. Conclusions and Directions for Future ResearchThe framework to diversity that I have introduced here is informed by all of the approaches discussed previously, especially by the work of Estes 1991, Estes 1999 and Calasanti 1993, Calasanti 1996. However, this framework differs from their work in two key ways. First, I conceptualize age as a set of social relations that structures social life and influences inequality. In this framework I seek not only to explain inequality among elderly people as a function of some combination of class, gender, and ethnicity/race, or to use feminist approaches to explore issues that are pertinent to older people, but also to examine how age relations themselves are implicated in such explanations. Of course, researchers should not abandon older adults as the subjects of their research. Rather, researchers might better understand social inequality if age relations are considered as well. In this view of age, theorists would rethink statements such as "social class, race, ethnicity, and gender are seen as directly related to the resources upon which persons may draw in old age" (Estes 1999, p. 17) to incorporate age as being directly related to the resources upon which persons may draw in old age. And the following statement,
would consider age as one of the sets of power relations that individuals simultaneously experience. The second way in which this approach differs from others is in its conceptualization of age, class, gender, and ethnic/racial relations as a single, interlocking system of power relations. Such an interlocking system is the approach that Calasanti 1996 favored and one that Estes 1999 suggested is consistent with the new political economy perspective. However, in Calasanti's work, class, gender, and ethnic/racial relations take precedence over age relations, and in Estes, work, class and gender relations reign over both age and ethnic/racial relations. This points to the problems inherent in adding dimensions to existing theory (McMullin 1995) without carefully rethinking the central processes and categories of analysis, a problem that feminists have acknowledged for quite some time (Acker 1988; Fox 1989). A subtle shift in focus may be all that is required. Perhaps what researchers need to do is ask how three central and interrelated processes of social life—distribution, production, and reproduction—are shaped by interlocking sets of power relations and, in turn, how this leads to inequality for some and privilege for others. In such an approach, no set of relations is given a priori theoretical weight, and indeed a key research question in this approach would be how these relations coalesce in structuring the interrelated processes of distribution, production, and reproduction throughout life. The preceding introduction to the ways in which theorizing about approach diversity might proceed suggests many research questions that require further study. Among the most provocative are the following:
By taking these questions into account and by acknowledging that theories must be rethought in ways that privilege the knowledge of groups whose knowledge has previously been neglected (Calasanti 1996; Smith 1987), scholars will make useful steps in research and theory on diversity. Notes
Thus, in the first place Mannheim believed that a generation represents a unique type of social location based on the dynamic interplay between being born in a particular year and the sociopolitical events that occur while a birth cohort comes of age. For Mannheim, generational location is an objective fact similar to that of class position. Hence, all individuals, whether they acknowledge it or not, belong to a particular generational location within a given society.
ReferencesAcker J., 1980 . Women and stratification: A review of recent literature. Contemporary Sociology 9: 25 -34. Acker J., 1988 . Class, gender, and the relations of distribution. Signs 13: (8) 473 -497. Acker J., 1989 . The problem with patriarchy. Sociology 23: (2) 235 -240. Acker J., 1999 . Rewriting class, race, and gender: Problems in feminist rethinking. Marx Ferree M., Lorber J., Hess B., , ed. Revisioning gender 44 -69. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Allahar A., 1995 . Sociology and the periphery: Theories and issues 2nd ed. Garmond Press, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Arber S., Ginn J., 1990 . Gender in later life Sage, London. Arber S., Ginn J., 1991 . The invisibility of age: Gender and class in later life. The Sociological Review 39: 260 -291. Arber S., Ginn J., , ed. Connecting gender and ageing: A sociological approach 1995 Open University Press, Buckingham, England. Bengtson V. L., Burgess E. O., Parrott T. M., 1997 . Theory, explanation, and a third generation of theoretical development in social gerontology. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences 52B: S72 -S88. Blieszner R., 1993 . A socialist-feminist perspective on widowhood. Journal of Aging Studies 7: 171 -182. Browne C. V., 1998 . Women, feminism, and aging Springer, New York. Calasanti T. M., 1993 . Bringing in diversity: Toward an inclusive theory of retirement. Journal of Aging Studies 7: 133 -150. Calasanti T. M., 1996 . Incorporating diversity: Meaning, levels of research, and implications for theory. The Gerontologist 36: 147 -156. Calasanti T. M., Zajicek A. M., 1993 . A socialist-feminist approach to aging: Embracing diversity. Journal of Aging Studies 7: 117 -131. Calasanti T. M., Zajicek A. M., 1997 . Gender, the state, and constructing the old as dependent: Lessons from the economic transition in Poland. The Gerontologist 37: 452 -461. Charness, N., Dykstra, K., & Phillips, C. (1995, June). Luminance and legibility in the workplace. Paper presented at the Canadian Aging Research Network 5th Annual Colloquium, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Dannefer D., 1988 . What's in a name? An account of the neglect of variability in the study of aging. Birren J. E., Bengtson V. L., , ed. Emergent theories in aging 356 -384. Springer, New York. Dowd J. J., 1980 . Stratification among the aged Brooks/Cole, Monterey, CA. Dowd J. J., 1987 . The reification of age: Age stratification and the passing of the autonomous subject. Journal of Aging Studies 1: 317 -335. Dressel P. L., 1988 . Gender, race, and class: Beyond the feminization of poverty in later life. The Gerontologist 28: 177 -180. Ehrenreich B., Ehrenreich J., 1979 . The professional managerial class. Walker P., , ed. Between labor and capital 5 -45. South End Press, Boston. Elder G. H., Jr. 1974 . Children of the Great Depression: Social change in life experience University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Elder G. H., 1994 . Time, human agency, and social change: Perspectives on the life course. Social Psychology Quarterly 57: 4 -15. Elder G. H., O'Rand A. M., 1995 . Adult lives in a changing society. Cook K., Fine G., House J. S., , ed. Sociological perspectives on social psychology 452 -475. Allyn & Bacon, New York. Estes C. L., 1979 . The aging enterprise Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Estes C. L., 1991 . The new political economy of aging: introduction and critique. Minkler M., Estes C., , ed. Critical perspectives on aging: The political and moral economy of growing old 19 -37. Baywood, Amityville, NY. Estes C. L., 1999 . The new political economy of aging: Introduction and critique. Minkler M., Estes C., , ed. Critical gerontology 17 -35. Baywood, Amityville, NY.
Estes C. L., Linkins K. W., Binney E. A., 1996 . The political economy of aging. Binstock R. H., George L. K., , ed. Handbook of aging and the social sciences 4th ed. 346 -361. Academic Press, San Diego. Estes C. L., Swan J. H., Gerard L. E., 1982 . Dominant and competing paradigms in gerontology: Towards a political economy of ageing. Ageing and Society 12: 151 -164. Foner A., 1974 . Age stratification and age conflict in political life. American Sociological Review 39: 187 -96. Foner A., 1986 . Aging and old age: New perspectives Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Foner A., Schwab K., 1981 . Aging and retirement Brooks/Cole, Monterey, CA. Fox B., 1988 . Conceptualizing patriarchy. Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 25: 163 -181. Fox, B. J. (1989). The feminist challenge: A reconsideration of social inequality and economic development. In R. J. Brym & B. J. Fox, From culture to power: The sociology of English Canada (pp. 120–167). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Oxford University Press. Gibson D., 1996 . Broken down by age and gender: "The problem of old women" redefined. Gender and Society 10: 433 -448. Grabb E., 1990 . Theories of social inequality: Classical and contemporary perspectives 2nd ed. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Gratton B., Haber C., 1993 . In search of "intimacy at a distance": Family history from the perspective of elderly women. Journal of Aging Studies 7: 183 -194. Guillemard A., 1982 . Old age, retirement, and the social class structure: Toward an analysis of the structural dynamics of the later stage of life. Hareven T. K., Adams K., , ed. Aging and the life course transition: An interdisciplinary perspective 221 -243. Guildford Press, New York. Guillemard A. M., 1983 . The making of old age policy in France. Guillemard A. M., , ed. Old age and the welfare state 75 -99. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA. Hendricks J., 1996 . The search for new solutions. The Gerontologist 36: 141 -144. Hess B. B., 1990 . Gender and aging: The demographic parameters. Generations 14: 12 -15. Hooyman N. R., Gonyea J., 1995 . Feminist perspectives on family care: Policies for gender justice Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Kohli M., 1988 . Ageing as a challenge for sociological theory. Ageing and Society 8: 367 -394. Laslett B., Brenner J., 1989 . Gender and social reproduction: Historical perspectives. Annual Review of Sociology 15: 381 -404. Laws G., 1995 . Understanding agism: Lessons from feminism and postmodernism. The Gerontologist 35: 112 -118. Layder D., 1994 . Understanding social theory Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Maddox G. L., Wiley J., 1976 . Scope, concepts and methods in the study of aging. Binstock R. H., Shanas E., , ed. Handbook of aging and the social sciences 1 -34. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York. Mannheim K., 1952 . The problem of generations. Kecskemeti P., , ed. Essays on the sociology of knowledge 276 -321. Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Original work published 1928), London. Marshall V. W., 1983 . Generations, age groups, and cohorts: Conceptual distinctions. Canadian Journal on Aging 2: 51 -61. Marshall V. W., 1996 . The state of theory in aging and the social sciences. Binstock R. H., George L. K., , ed. Handbook of aging and the social sciences 4th ed. 12 -30. Academic Press, San Diego, CA. Marshall V. W., Tindale J., 1978 . Notes for a radical gerontology. International Journal of Aging and Human Development 9: 163 -175. Marx, K. (1967). Capital Vol. 1 New York: International. (Original work published 1867) Marx K., Engels F., 1970 . The Communist manifesto Washington Square Press. , New York. McMullin J., 1995 . Theorizing age and gender relations. Arber S., Ginn J., , ed. Connecting gender and ageing: A sociological approach 30 -41. Open University Press, Buckingham, England. McMullin, J., & Marshall, V. W. (1997, August). Age relations: A basis of inequality in the garment industry in Montreal. Paper presented at the 92nd annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. McMullin J., Marshall V. W., 1999 . Structure and agency in the retirement process: A case study of Montreal garment workers. Ryff C. D., Marshall V. W., , ed. The self and society in aging processes 305 -338. Springer, New York. Moen P., 1996 . Gender, age, and the life course. Binstock R. H., George L. K., , ed. Handbook of aging and the social sciences 4th ed. 208 -228. Academic Press, San Diego, CA. Moen P., Erickson M. A., Dempster-McClain D., 1998 . Their mother's daughters? The intergenerational transmission of gender attitudes in a world of changing roles. Journal of Marriage and the Family 59: 281 -293. Myles J. F., 1980 . The aged, the state and the structure of inequality. Harp J., Hofley J., , ed. Structural inequality in Canada 317 -342. Prentice-Hall, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Myles J. F., 1984 . The political economy of public pensions Little, Brown, Boston. Myles J. F., 1989 . Old age in the welfare state: The political economy of public pensions University Press of Kansas, Lawrence. Nelson E. A., Dannefer D., 1992 . Aged heterogeneity: Fact or fiction? The fate of diversity in gerontological research. The Gerontologist 32: 17 -23. Olson L., 1982 . Political economy of aging Columbia University Press, New York. Orloff A. S., 1993 . The politics of pensions: A comparative analysis of Britain, Canada and the United States University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. O'Rand A. M., 1996 . The cumulative stratification of the life course. Binstock R. H., George L. K., , ed. Handbook of aging and the social sciences 4th ed. 188 -207. Academic Press, San Diego, CA. O'Rand A. M., 1996 . The precious and the precocious: Understanding cumulative disadvantage and cumulative advantage over the life course. The Gerontologist 36: 230 -238. Palo Stoller E., 1993 . Gender and the organization of lay health care: A socialist-feminist perspective. Journal of Aging Studies 7: 151 -170. Palo Stoller E., Campbell Gibson R., 1997 . Worlds of difference: Inequality in the aging experience Pine Forge Press, Thousand Oaks, CA. Passuth P. M., Bengtson V. L., 1988 . Sociological theories of aging: Current perspectives and future directions. Birren J. E., Bengtson V. L., , ed. Emergent theories of aging 335 -355. Springer, New York. Phillipson C., 1982 . Capitalism and the construction of old age MacMillan, London. Poulantzas N., 1975 . Classes in contemporary capitalism New Left Books, London. Quadango J. S., 1988 . Women's access to pensions and the structure of eligibility rules: Systems of production and reproduction. The Sociological Quarterly 29: 541 -558. Ray R., 1996 . A postmodern perspective on feminist gerontology. The Gerontologist 36: 674 -680. Riley M. W., 1988 . On the significance of age in sociology. Riley M. W., Huber B. J., Hess B. B., , ed. Social structures and human lives 24 -45. Sage, Newbury Park, CA. Riley M. W., 1994 . Aging and society: Past, present and future. The Gerontologist 34: 436 -446. Riley M. W., Foner A., Waring J., 1988 . Sociology of age. Smelser N. J., , ed. Handbook of sociology 243 -290. Sage, Newbury Park, CA. Riley M. W., Johnson M., Foner A., 1972 . Aging and society: Vol. 3. A sociology of age stratification Russell Sage, New York. Riley M. W., Riley J. W., Jr. 1994 . Structural lag: Past and future. Riley M. W., Kahn R. L., Fonner A., , ed. Age and structural lag: Society's failure to provide meaningful opportunities in work, family, and leisure 15 -36. Wiley, New York. Ryder N., 1965 . The cohort as a concept in the study of social change. American Sociological Review 30: 834 -861. Smith D., 1987 . The everyday world as problematic: A feminist sociology Northeastern University Press, Boston. Tindale J., Marshall V. W., 1980 . A generational-conflict perspective for gerontology. Marshall V. W., , ed. Aging in Canada: Social perspectives 43 -50. Fitzhenry & Whiteside, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Townsend P., 1981 . The structured dependency of the elderly: A creation of social policy in the twentieth century. Ageing and Society 1: 5 -28. Townsend P., 1986 . Ageism and social policy. Phillipson C., Walker A., , ed. Ageing and social policy 15 -44. Gower, Aldershot, England. Uhlenberg P., Minor S., 1996 . Life course and aging: A cohort perspective. Binstock R. H., George L. K., , ed. Handbook of aging and the social sciences 4th ed. 208 -228. Academic Press, San Diego, CA. Walker A., 1981 . Towards a political economy of old age. Ageing and Society 1: 74 -94.
Walker A., 1983 . Social policy and elderly people in Great Britain: The construction of dependent social and economic status. Guillemard A.-M., , ed. Old age and the welfare state 143 -168. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA. Weber M., 1978 . Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology (E University of California Press, Fischoff, H. Gerth, A. M. Henderson, F. Kolegar, C. Wright Mills, T. Parsons, M. Rheinstein, G. Roth, E. Shils, & C. Wittich, Trans.). Berkely. Wright E. O., 1978 . Class, crisis and the state New Left Books, London. Wright E. O., 1985 . Classes Verso, London. Wright E. O., 1997 . Class counts: Comparative studies in class analysis Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. The Gerontological Society of America What is age stratification theory focus?Age stratification is a conceptual framework for exploring both how individuals age over the life course and what meaning is given to age in a society.
Which of the following is an aspect of age stratification theory quizlet?Which of the following is an aspect of age stratification theory? The pattern of biological aging and the sequence of age-related roles are altered by historical events. June's generation grew up in a society that had been oppressed by a monarchy but had overthrown the monarch and created a communist government.
Which of the following typically exerts the least influence on age structure?the movement of people across borders. typically exerts the least influence on age structure.
Which statement is a criticism of the activity theory of aging quizlet?One criticism of activity theory is that it overestimates the ability of the elderly to maintain their level of activity: Although some elders can remain active, others cannot.
|
Which of the following is NOT a central concern of age stratification theory
zusammenhängende Posts
Urheberrechte © © 2024 decemle Inc.
