Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

A Friend Stopped By | 11/19/2008 9:20 am

Baby Boomers Beware of the Obama Administration? by Myrna Blyth

By Myrna Blyth

Anyone who has read a women’s magazine in the last 25 years has most likely read the work of Myrna Blyth, who weighs in at wowOwow with this provocative piece. Myrna is the founding editor of More magazine, was the longtime editor-in-chief of Ladies’ Home Journal, and was senior editor for Family Circle magazine. She is the chairman of the President’s Commission on White House Fellowships. She has received many awards including the Matrix Award from New York Women in Communications, Inc., the Woman of Achievement Award from the New York City Commission on the Status of Women, and was named Publishing Executive of the Year by Advertising Age. Currently she writes for The National Review Online.      

Which is the only prejudice that remains acceptable? It is ageism, of course. Voters in the recent election unashamedly told pollsters that age was more of an issue for them than race. More voted against McCain because of his age than voted against Obama because of his race. And nobody seems to think this is a prejudice that even deserves much comment.

Pundits keep lauding Obama’s victory not only because of its inclusiveness but because it is a generational change. Obama, though technically a baby boomer, is being touted as our first post-boomer president. He comes in after two leading-edge boomers who both had seriously flawed presidencies.

It is Obama’s youthful telegenic appearance, his coolness, his understanding of the power of the Internet that are important parts of his appeal to the public and, especially, to the media which needs the young, the hip, the photogenic. There is very much a sense of out-with-the-old and in-with-the-new, and in this case the old seems anything or anyone 55-plus. In fact, one wonders if in the future 55-plus will be the sell-by date for any presidential candidate. 

This election also seemed to reinforce what we already know, that we now live in a society where experience doesn’t matter very much. Both Hillary Clinton and John McCain went down claiming experience counted. It didn’t. Hillary’s harking back and McCain’s reference to even fairly recent history turned people off.  

Americans have had great affection for “the greatest generation,” the generation of Obama’s grandparents, those who grew up during the Depression and fought World War II. Their sacrifices and their selflessness are still admired. But there is a lot less affection or respect for baby boomers, especially leading-edge boomers. McCain’s defeat was the final shrugging off of the sacrifice of the Vietnam vets.     

Add to that baby boomers tend to be as full of ageism as anyone younger. It is boomers who, while still humming “Forever Young,” reach for the Botox, the Restalyne and the Viagra. They have tried, somewhat desperately, to stay ageless rather than become mature. Part of the problem with ageism now is that not only do the young not respect their elders any more, those who are older do not respect themselves.

In a way, ageism is not different from racial prejudice. African Americans always acknowledged that they internalized the negative attitudes society had about them and their physical appearance. It is the same way boomers feel about their wrinkles and themselves. But in the last years the media has helped change the image of black Americans. Karl Rove was right. The Huxtables of the Bill Cosby Show helped prepare the mindset for Obama’s election. But the media, which does not even measure the appeal of their shows to viewers over 49, has no interest in creating flattering portraits of older Americans.          

This young-old divide can become a major problem for the future. Boomers are still the largest segment of the population. And, they are the ones whose 401ks have been decimated. Part of our economy’s two-decade dizzying growth spurt was fueled by the free-spending two-income boomers. Now they will become the major recipients of government programs. During the next decade more and more of them will be getting Social Security and Medicare. More and more of them will be dealing with serious or chronic money-draining illnesses.  

How will the public react if this generation, for which there is little fondness, becomes our society’s greatest financial burden? And how will the Democratic party, which owes its recent victory to its enormous appeal to young voters, deal with the increasing needs of the boomer generation? Perhaps that depends on whether ageism, the prejudice we don’t even have be embarrassed about, becomes even more pervasive.  

114 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Diana T
Country, I think we have been in a rut for so long that to get out of it now is to leave the comfort zone for many people. They are scared. But, it is obvious that (a) things are never going to be the same again due to lots of negative forces like power and greed, and (b) we have a chance to start anew along new paths and new journeys. New Beginnings is what I am calling it. And, if we can remember what it is like to solve problems by concensus and compromise the way our founding fathers envisioned it, we can have a positive result. I tend to see the glass half-full.
By Diana T on 11/19/2008 11:53 pm
~ countrywoman ~
Half-full works for me, Diana. One of the most encouraging shared experiences from this election is the shift in perception and the renewal of hope that is being expressed all around me. In its own special way, it helps to negate and/or neutralize the attempts by the gloom ‘n doomers. We simply cannot allow them to steal the positive momentum. Your point about the BASICS that gave birth to this great nation is right on. I truly believe Obama’s vision for us is rooted in the wisdom of those founding fathers. I have the full front page of my local paper from November 5th (headline: Obama’s Time) laying open on my dining room table. I focus on this visual reminder many times each day. It is testament to our hope for the future; yours, mine, America’s. I am humbly grateful. Sure do appreciate your contributions. It is so generous of you to share your thoughts with us the way you do.
THANKS!
By ~ countrywoman ~ on 11/20/2008 12:50 am
Marjorie C.
Lily: Barack Obama in NOT a baby boomer. Yes he is. Those born between 1946 and 1964 are considered baby boomers. I realize those born in the 60’s seem a bit of a stretch, and many don’t want to be included in the baby boomer demographic, but the reality is that’s where they sit. His mother, Ann Dunham, was born about 1943, so she is not considered a baby boomer. Baby boomers were born after WWII when the soldiers came home. If you are old enough to be Obama’s mother, I suspect you are not a baby boomer, and therefore by your own admission, part of the problem.
By Marjorie C. on 11/19/2008 11:58 am
Marjorie C.
Lily, My bad. I guess you could have been his mother at 13 or 14, it just would have been unusual that’s all.
By Marjorie C. on 11/19/2008 1:45 pm
Patty E
Marjorie—-a little bit of math…adding and subtracting might help you here: Obama is 42 yrs old. If his mother had him when she was 20 yrs old, she would be 62 yrs old now. 2008-62=1946. Guess what? Obama’s mama COULD be a Boomer, now, wouldn;t she? I think I read somewhere that his mother was 19 when she had him—if that is true, she would still be a boomer——1947.
By Patty E on 11/19/2008 7:45 pm
Donna Chee
By Patty E on 11/19/2008 8:45 pm Marjorie—-a little bit of math…adding and subtracting might help you here: Obama is 42 yrs old. If his mother had him when she was 20 yrs old, she would be 62 yrs old now. 2008-62=1946. Guess what? Obama’s mama COULD be a Boomer, now, wouldn;t she? I think I read somewhere that his mother was 19 when she had him—if that is true, she would still be a boomer——1947. ——- Patty, A little research helps with the math … Obama was born on August 4, 1961 (officially, within the baby boomer generation years). He is 47 not 42 (he looks young for his age). His mother was a very young 18 when she had him. This has been well noted. She was born on November 29, 1942 (officially, before the baby boomer generation years). She died on November 7, 1995 at the young age of 52. If she lived to see her son win the election earlier this month, she would have been 64, close to turning 65.
By Donna Chee on 11/19/2008 9:05 pm
Irish Eyes NY
OK donna get out the calculator: I was born in Nov 1944 and I just turned 64 yesterday. If his mother was born in Nov 1942, how can she be the same age as me?????????
By Irish Eyes NY on 11/21/2008 7:40 pm
Donna Chee
If she [Obama’s mother] lived to see her son win the election earlier this month, she would have been 64, close to turning 65. Should have been …she would have been 65, close to turning 66. The dates are correct.
By Donna Chee on 11/24/2008 7:50 pm
Frannie Em
Patty E I thought Obama was born in 1961. I thought he turned 47 this year. Am I crazy. I think I have heard his age a bunch of times. I also thought he wasn’t a boomer. ????
By Frannie Em on 11/20/2008 1:08 am
Marjorie C.
Patty: Obama was born August 4, 1961; I’ve heard it said his mother was 18 years old at the time. 1961 - 18 = 1943. Obama is not 42, he is 47. I’m surprised you don’t know the biographical facts on your hero.
By Marjorie C. on 11/20/2008 11:42 am
rocky rocky
Whoa! Lily! You are fabuuuullllouusss! And so right.
By rocky rocky on 11/19/2008 9:23 pm
rocky rocky
Didn’t realize my applause would be so far from your comment, which was: By Lily Of The Valley on 11/19/2008 12:19 pm. Despite all that math stuff (so what to all that), YAY Lily! You captured the absolute right spirit of it all.
By rocky rocky on 11/19/2008 9:30 pm
Frannie Em
Lily Why is it considered 1964 that the boomer generation ended? I remember as a kid It was considered the boomers were the ones born 10-12 years after the war, or maybe that is just the answer adults gave me as a guess. I wonder what it really is. I will look it up in the dictionary of cultural literacy……….?………..well, it’s not in there. Maybe the US census site has some info. I will check. crazy? Now you guys have got me wanting an answer to this question.
By Frannie Em on 11/20/2008 1:16 am
rocky rocky
Hi Frannie Em. Just so happens I had to look that up for a book I just finished editing. Here’s a link to a Fact Sheet published by the U.S. Census Bureau (below). It says that baby boomers are born between 1946 and 1964. Hey, but keep in mind this is not a great immutable truth; it is only a convenient concept open to some interpretation. http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/facts_for_feat…
By rocky rocky on 11/20/2008 9:45 am
Frannie Em
Rocky I love that page. It is such great trivia, although you can go on the census site and watch the world population clock tick up and down. We are somewhere near 306,000,000. Yikooosss! I use the census site many times to check claims and to make claims on this site, it is a wealth of information. Once you get the hang of where to go, it is fun. I have never been on the page you linked so thanks.
By Frannie Em on 11/20/2008 8:15 pm