I'm 42, overweight, and poor. I'm an elderly middle-aged person who's maybe got 20-25 years to go.
41 but If I go another 20 with my stress ima be amazed.
The way you put it like that sounds so crass and soulless.
It’s true though.
It's just really hard to talk about expected lifetimes and not sound that way.
What should it be, then?
Something like, "I'm alive, in fairly good health, and I do not define my value by how much I'm able to work or how many years I have left to live."
Sounds delusional.
Rude
My kids say:
Birth to 30 is young.
31-60 is middle aged.
Over 60 is old.
Over 90 is fucking old.
People are aging more slowly than they did in the past, better information about health now. Look up 55 year old celebrities. These are certainly middle aged people, they aren't young, and most don't look old either. That is how I would define middle age and it's getting longer. You can't get old at 40, you will be old too long.
A lot of that has to do with smoking. Smoking adds wrinkles. It makes you look older. A lot of older celebrities smoked and a lot of younger ones don't.
Celebrities pay a lot of money to stay looking the way they do, and most people who have to work labor and stuff dont have the privilege to look or feel that way
Sure, totally agree. But average people too - we just are not aging as fast as our parents or their parents. Not so much a longer life, just not as old for as long.
Celebrities also have the best health care, access to the best food, and personal trainers. There's a reason you only really see them either dying from freak accident, substance abuse, or random hard to beat cancer.
Overall average lifespan is a misleading statistic because it includes people who die young (infant mortality for example really brings it down). As you get older, the average lifespan for someone of your specific age increases.
does it... keep increasing?
It does, because we're talking about the total lifespan instead of remaining lifespan. A person who is 120 may have a 10% chance of living another year; but a 50 year old probably has less than a 1% chance living 71 more years. Of course the 50 year old probably has more than a 99% chance of living another year. So the older you are, the older your expected total lifespan is, even if your expected remaining lifetime is shorter.
You're absolutely right, stats are a very misunderstood subject. It's difficult to contextualize stats like this when the population is so large. My measurement for when I got old was when I started to meet old friends and at some point in the conversation we begin talking about other friends who we both knew who've passed away since the last time we've talked.
A person who is 120 has a less than 1 percent chance of living to the next year. 120 is the maximum lifespan of humans so far. Only one person in recorded history has lived past 120, and she made it to 122.
Infinitely. The more you age, the older you get.
At some point it increases by 1 for each year you live!
They exclude infant morality from average lifespan. And there's limited returns. At about 60-65 a large die off starts in an age cohort. Half of them will not make it 75, and three quarters will not make it to 85. Very few make it to 100.
73 seems pretty low. It’s 77,28 years in the US and 81,41 here in the Netherlands.
Still, it’s weird people call 50 middle aged when it’s more like 40.
Well but 50 makes sense though you are kinda useless in your first 20-25 years then you start working acquiring experience etc 25 years later you are in the middle then 25 years later you die
It makes sense if you look at it like that
73 years is the life expectancy of a men in the US. Females tend to get 5-6 years older than men.
Ethnicity, as well as economic resources also play a huge role.
If I understand this correctly, it's life expectancy at birth, right? So if you read this, the relevant-to-you life expectancy is even lower. Though AFAIK you also get a "bonus" for still being alive, so it's probably a wash ...
I'm 50 and definitely working at least to 70. I can't afford life now, I can't afford to retire!
That's how I feel. If I'm lucky, my retirement supports only me and partially my wife for like 10 years. My wife's retirement will stretch us to 15 years.
Society is looking grim.
i have always assumed 'middle aged' meant somewhere 35-40. tbf i dont use or hear the term often.
Regardless of what the median life expectantly is, I don't care I'm living to 100 years old. Barring accident of course. But I'm just too curious what the next 45+ years will be in the world. What are the new discoveries? New shows? What happens to the political situation? Will we become a space faring race? Or will we have to solve the climate crisis first, and stop warring?
I want to know. So I'm working to make that a reality.
Narrator: they didn't figure it out
(Joking OC, even if I think you are a bit too optimistic I do like the optimism)
To be fair most people who live to the average life expectancy do live past it, the average gets skewed down by people dying in car accidents in their 20s and such like.
Eh demographics shows a grim tale. People start really dying around 65 and it accelerates pretty quickly into the next few decades. Very few people live to be 100. About half of an age cohort will make it to 75. A quarter will make it to 85. This is easily visible on demographic charts.
Yep. I wanna see where it goes, so I gotta take better care of my vessel.
I thought it's because it's the middle of your adult life. 50 is the midpoint between 20 and 80.
i think it makes more sense to split it into thirds:
for example in germany, for biological men, its 78 year, meaning you enter your middle ages at 26 years old and your old age at 52 years old.
For biological women, its 83 years of life expectancy, meaning you enter your middle ages at 27.6 years old and your old age at 55.3 years old
edit:
didn't mean to cause a gender debate, i dont think the statistic acounts for trans people, which i don't agree with. i would be curious to see the life expectancy statistics of trans conpared to cis people. i would guess cis would have been a better way for me to say it because i would think official statistics would go with your "official" gender but idk
for biological men,... For biological women
For future reference, the word you're looking for is "cis"
But isn't their point that the life expectancy of "biological men" also apply to trans women, and vice verca? That wouldn't be conveyed if they used the prefix cis.
This would of course only be relevant if life expectancy is a purely biological phenomenon, which I am not so sure it is.
A fair bit of the difference in lifespan isn't genetic, it's social. Statistically, men and women don't do the same jobs, and some of those are much more dangerous than others. Men are also more likely to get into accidents and violence, leading to younger deaths.
None of that cares about your genetics and your reproductive organs and hormones are only peripherally involved in it.
Also on average unmarried men live shorter than married men. While there is no difference between married and unmarried women.
Lol, what a convenient manipulation of reality you've done here!
Not only do married men live longer, but they do it at the expense of their wives, since women who are married live shorter lives (and are less happy!) than women who aren't.
Is "married" a shorthand for "settled down with a partner"?
Yes, that's what I thought as well. Men being socialized to do more stupid stuff that might get you killed is probably the main factor here.
alright scrap the sex split, let's just break it down by household income and access to healthcare
A fair point I hadn't considered, but in that case AFAB/AMAB is still better than "biological male/female", since that's not even something most people know (I don't know my chromosomal, hormonal, or DNA structures, do you?).
AFAB/AMAB
And what does that mean? Biological male/female seems pretty clear to me, whatever you're born with between your legs indicates which of the 2 you are...
Well, if ACAB means All Cops Are Bad, then I'm guessing AFAB and AMAB must be All Females Are Bad and All Males Are Bad.
...Or maybe ACAB is supposed to mean Assigned Cop At Birth?
Both AMAB and ACAB are the same: Assigned Cock At Birth.
Those mean Assigned Female/Male At Birth.
And they exist because despite it being assigned that way at birth, gender or sex aren't actually determined only by "what is between your legs", nor are there just two binary options, since both gender and sex are a spectrum, not simply xx= vagina=female or xy=penis=male.
not really relevant though, xx being biologically male/xy being biologically female are uncommon enough
And yet, they deserve to be included and considered. 🤯
(never mind that variation on the 3rd grade understanding of biology I described above are significantly more common than what I'm sure you're willing to acknowledge. Sex and gender are spectrums, no matter how uncomfortable that might make you or how hard you try to deny it)
you should stop getting annoyed at anyone that mentions a slight thing that might suggest that they're homophobic. They're probably not.
I don't get uncomfortable over the idea of a spectrum, just annoyed when people waste time nitpicking over tiny things like this that aren't part of the actual argument/idea being presented.
And you should really stop tone policing people making relevant points to the subject at hand, because it makes you uncomfortable, transphobe (yes, calling inclusion "nit-picking" is transphobic, no, there is no other reason for you to be dying on this hill, I wasn't even "annoyed" as you put it, just stating the obvious - this isn't my first rodeo, clown, and your reply proves me right, so.. ¯\(ツ)/¯ ).
I'm not dumb enough to not see the tone of your previous comments. goodbye.
It means Assigned Male/Female At Birth, so it seems you agree.
Yeah I suppose, but using random abbreviations everywhere does not make the point any clearer
When the abbreviations are so commonly used that you can ask Google or Siri and get the right answer, then it's fair to assume their meaning is clear to most people
You not knowing a term doesn't mean it isn't useful or important or crystal clear, it just means you don't know it.
So you could either educate yourself if you care, or don't, but don't try to frame the terms as the problem, or dismiss them (and by extension, the people who they apply to/benefit from their use) outright, that's just a cop-out on your end.
Yeah, totally agree with that. But as a commenter above mentioned, the difference in lifespan is probably mostly social anyway, so the whole biology aspect isn't really relevant.
money tends to help soothe one's ailments.
"biological" mf thinks trans people are not organic 😨🥲
I only buy free-range trans people
People/sheep/sheeple dgaf
The definition for middle aged (edit: as I have heard it) has always been 40. Most people live until 80 or a little less, so it makes sense.
Yeah, 40 is the traditional 'over the hill' birthday.
"Most people" live until their late eighties (at least in Western Europe), modal and median ages at death are generally 86-90, whereas the mean is lower as you have around 15 years to die in after 85, but 85 years to die in before which pulls it down
Really? That's higher than I thought. I guess it's increased steadily.
My definition for middle aged will be 40 until I reach 40 at which point I will shift this definition to 45.
If we look past the numbers and mathematical term for middle, the stages of life could be determined by how capable or productive a person is.
In that way, 50 is still a bit high, but it's close to the peak of productivity almost regardless of the job at hand.
On a positive note, we should be happy if this "middle-age" increases, because it means that we're more healthy and capable for longer. This is also very visible. Just during my life (mid 40s) I can see that the people of today in their late 60s look and behave as the people in their 50s did in my youth. It's like the capable years have been extended by 10-15 years.
On a more depressing note, the expected lifespan hasn't increased that much in the meantime, so it's not exactly linear. It seems that the change from being capable to being incapable due to age is really sharp. People don't enjoy long retirements the same way as before.
You know how working 5 days a week to have a 2 days off is bullshit. You can never do all the things in the weekend that you dream about all week. Same thing about retirement. You'll never get to enjoy the carrot at the end of the stick.
If you want to do something, do it now.
If you can't do it now because of obligations, you need to change your obligations. Seize the day.
Could "middle aged" more be referring to the middle after you become a real adult? Like at 18
73-18=55
55/2 =27.5
27.5+18=45.5
So still less than 50 but a lot closer.
I always figured it was older people trying to feel younger. But yeah I think it works this way too.
Those two things are not linked.
A factor might be that no one likes to be remembered theyre soon to die..
Memento Mori. Remind them!
This should start from 18 or 20 though I guess. Most of us don't start working properly until that age.
But then you're doing exactly what the meme is pointing out - measuring life according to years of work, rather than the actual length of life.
But people are only valueable if they work or exploit others to work for them.
I'm 42, overweight, and poor. I'm an elderly middle-aged person who's maybe got 20-25 years to go.
41 but If I go another 20 with my stress ima be amazed.
The way you put it like that sounds so crass and soulless.
It’s true though.
It's just really hard to talk about expected lifetimes and not sound that way.
What should it be, then?
Something like, "I'm alive, in fairly good health, and I do not define my value by how much I'm able to work or how many years I have left to live."
Sounds delusional.
Rude
My kids say:
Birth to 30 is young.
31-60 is middle aged.
Over 60 is old.
Over 90 is fucking old.
People are aging more slowly than they did in the past, better information about health now. Look up 55 year old celebrities. These are certainly middle aged people, they aren't young, and most don't look old either. That is how I would define middle age and it's getting longer. You can't get old at 40, you will be old too long.
A lot of that has to do with smoking. Smoking adds wrinkles. It makes you look older. A lot of older celebrities smoked and a lot of younger ones don't.
Celebrities pay a lot of money to stay looking the way they do, and most people who have to work labor and stuff dont have the privilege to look or feel that way
Sure, totally agree. But average people too - we just are not aging as fast as our parents or their parents. Not so much a longer life, just not as old for as long.
Celebrities also have the best health care, access to the best food, and personal trainers. There's a reason you only really see them either dying from freak accident, substance abuse, or random hard to beat cancer.
The rest of us do not get those allowances.
You stfu, 30s is not middle aged
It blew my mind to learn that Bob Odenkirk was 52 when they started filming Better Call Saul. To me, he looked like he was in his 30s.
(I'm not that great at estimating age just by looking at someone, though.)
Overall average lifespan is a misleading statistic because it includes people who die young (infant mortality for example really brings it down). As you get older, the average lifespan for someone of your specific age increases.
does it... keep increasing?
It does, because we're talking about the total lifespan instead of remaining lifespan. A person who is 120 may have a 10% chance of living another year; but a 50 year old probably has less than a 1% chance living 71 more years. Of course the 50 year old probably has more than a 99% chance of living another year. So the older you are, the older your expected total lifespan is, even if your expected remaining lifetime is shorter.
You're absolutely right, stats are a very misunderstood subject. It's difficult to contextualize stats like this when the population is so large. My measurement for when I got old was when I started to meet old friends and at some point in the conversation we begin talking about other friends who we both knew who've passed away since the last time we've talked.
A person who is 120 has a less than 1 percent chance of living to the next year. 120 is the maximum lifespan of humans so far. Only one person in recorded history has lived past 120, and she made it to 122.
Infinitely. The more you age, the older you get.
At some point it increases by 1 for each year you live!
They exclude infant morality from average lifespan. And there's limited returns. At about 60-65 a large die off starts in an age cohort. Half of them will not make it 75, and three quarters will not make it to 85. Very few make it to 100.
73 seems pretty low. It’s 77,28 years in the US and 81,41 here in the Netherlands.
Still, it’s weird people call 50 middle aged when it’s more like 40.
Well but 50 makes sense though you are kinda useless in your first 20-25 years then you start working acquiring experience etc 25 years later you are in the middle then 25 years later you die
It makes sense if you look at it like that
73 years is the life expectancy of a men in the US. Females tend to get 5-6 years older than men.
Ethnicity, as well as economic resources also play a huge role.
Even your zip code is an indicator:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data-visualization/life-expectancy/index.html
If I understand this correctly, it's life expectancy at birth, right? So if you read this, the relevant-to-you life expectancy is even lower. Though AFAIK you also get a "bonus" for still being alive, so it's probably a wash ...
I'm 50 and definitely working at least to 70. I can't afford life now, I can't afford to retire!
That's how I feel. If I'm lucky, my retirement supports only me and partially my wife for like 10 years. My wife's retirement will stretch us to 15 years.
Society is looking grim.
i have always assumed 'middle aged' meant somewhere 35-40. tbf i dont use or hear the term often.
Regardless of what the median life expectantly is, I don't care I'm living to 100 years old. Barring accident of course. But I'm just too curious what the next 45+ years will be in the world. What are the new discoveries? New shows? What happens to the political situation? Will we become a space faring race? Or will we have to solve the climate crisis first, and stop warring?
I want to know. So I'm working to make that a reality.
Narrator: they didn't figure it out
(Joking OC, even if I think you are a bit too optimistic I do like the optimism)
To be fair most people who live to the average life expectancy do live past it, the average gets skewed down by people dying in car accidents in their 20s and such like.
Eh demographics shows a grim tale. People start really dying around 65 and it accelerates pretty quickly into the next few decades. Very few people live to be 100. About half of an age cohort will make it to 75. A quarter will make it to 85. This is easily visible on demographic charts.
Yep. I wanna see where it goes, so I gotta take better care of my vessel.
I thought it's because it's the middle of your adult life. 50 is the midpoint between 20 and 80.
i think it makes more sense to split it into thirds: for example in germany, for biological men, its 78 year, meaning you enter your middle ages at 26 years old and your old age at 52 years old. For biological women, its 83 years of life expectancy, meaning you enter your middle ages at 27.6 years old and your old age at 55.3 years old
edit: didn't mean to cause a gender debate, i dont think the statistic acounts for trans people, which i don't agree with. i would be curious to see the life expectancy statistics of trans conpared to cis people. i would guess cis would have been a better way for me to say it because i would think official statistics would go with your "official" gender but idk
For future reference, the word you're looking for is "cis"
But isn't their point that the life expectancy of "biological men" also apply to trans women, and vice verca? That wouldn't be conveyed if they used the prefix cis.
This would of course only be relevant if life expectancy is a purely biological phenomenon, which I am not so sure it is.
A fair bit of the difference in lifespan isn't genetic, it's social. Statistically, men and women don't do the same jobs, and some of those are much more dangerous than others. Men are also more likely to get into accidents and violence, leading to younger deaths.
None of that cares about your genetics and your reproductive organs and hormones are only peripherally involved in it.
Also on average unmarried men live shorter than married men. While there is no difference between married and unmarried women.
Lol, what a convenient manipulation of reality you've done here!
Not only do married men live longer, but they do it at the expense of their wives, since women who are married live shorter lives (and are less happy!) than women who aren't.
Men quite literally drain the life out of us.
https://fortune.com/2023/01/13/why-are-married-men-healthier-on-average-women-gender-research/
https://torontosun.com/health/married-men-live-longer-married-women-not-so-much-study
https://www.elle.com.au/life/sex-relationships/single-women-happy-study-20582/
Is "married" a shorthand for "settled down with a partner"?
Yes, that's what I thought as well. Men being socialized to do more stupid stuff that might get you killed is probably the main factor here.
alright scrap the sex split, let's just break it down by household income and access to healthcare
A fair point I hadn't considered, but in that case AFAB/AMAB is still better than "biological male/female", since that's not even something most people know (I don't know my chromosomal, hormonal, or DNA structures, do you?).
And what does that mean? Biological male/female seems pretty clear to me, whatever you're born with between your legs indicates which of the 2 you are...
Well, if ACAB means All Cops Are Bad, then I'm guessing AFAB and AMAB must be All Females Are Bad and All Males Are Bad.
...Or maybe ACAB is supposed to mean Assigned Cop At Birth?
Both AMAB and ACAB are the same: Assigned Cock At Birth.
Those mean Assigned Female/Male At Birth.
And they exist because despite it being assigned that way at birth, gender or sex aren't actually determined only by "what is between your legs", nor are there just two binary options, since both gender and sex are a spectrum, not simply xx= vagina=female or xy=penis=male.
Feel free to educate yourself
not really relevant though, xx being biologically male/xy being biologically female are uncommon enough
And yet, they deserve to be included and considered. 🤯
(never mind that variation on the 3rd grade understanding of biology I described above are significantly more common than what I'm sure you're willing to acknowledge. Sex and gender are spectrums, no matter how uncomfortable that might make you or how hard you try to deny it)
you should stop getting annoyed at anyone that mentions a slight thing that might suggest that they're homophobic. They're probably not.
I don't get uncomfortable over the idea of a spectrum, just annoyed when people waste time nitpicking over tiny things like this that aren't part of the actual argument/idea being presented.
And you should really stop tone policing people making relevant points to the subject at hand, because it makes you uncomfortable, transphobe (yes, calling inclusion "nit-picking" is transphobic, no, there is no other reason for you to be dying on this hill, I wasn't even "annoyed" as you put it, just stating the obvious - this isn't my first rodeo, clown, and your reply proves me right, so.. ¯\(ツ)/¯ ).
I'm not dumb enough to not see the tone of your previous comments. goodbye.
It means Assigned Male/Female At Birth, so it seems you agree.
Yeah I suppose, but using random abbreviations everywhere does not make the point any clearer
When the abbreviations are so commonly used that you can ask Google or Siri and get the right answer, then it's fair to assume their meaning is clear to most people
You not knowing a term doesn't mean it isn't useful or important or crystal clear, it just means you don't know it.
So you could either educate yourself if you care, or don't, but don't try to frame the terms as the problem, or dismiss them (and by extension, the people who they apply to/benefit from their use) outright, that's just a cop-out on your end.
Yeah, totally agree with that. But as a commenter above mentioned, the difference in lifespan is probably mostly social anyway, so the whole biology aspect isn't really relevant.
money tends to help soothe one's ailments.
"biological" mf thinks trans people are not organic 😨🥲
I only buy free-range trans people
People/sheep/sheeple dgaf
The definition for middle aged (edit: as I have heard it) has always been 40. Most people live until 80 or a little less, so it makes sense.
Yeah, 40 is the traditional 'over the hill' birthday.
"Most people" live until their late eighties (at least in Western Europe), modal and median ages at death are generally 86-90, whereas the mean is lower as you have around 15 years to die in after 85, but 85 years to die in before which pulls it down
Really? That's higher than I thought. I guess it's increased steadily.
My definition for middle aged will be 40 until I reach 40 at which point I will shift this definition to 45.
If we look past the numbers and mathematical term for middle, the stages of life could be determined by how capable or productive a person is. In that way, 50 is still a bit high, but it's close to the peak of productivity almost regardless of the job at hand.
On a positive note, we should be happy if this "middle-age" increases, because it means that we're more healthy and capable for longer. This is also very visible. Just during my life (mid 40s) I can see that the people of today in their late 60s look and behave as the people in their 50s did in my youth. It's like the capable years have been extended by 10-15 years.
On a more depressing note, the expected lifespan hasn't increased that much in the meantime, so it's not exactly linear. It seems that the change from being capable to being incapable due to age is really sharp. People don't enjoy long retirements the same way as before.
You know how working 5 days a week to have a 2 days off is bullshit. You can never do all the things in the weekend that you dream about all week. Same thing about retirement. You'll never get to enjoy the carrot at the end of the stick.
If you want to do something, do it now. If you can't do it now because of obligations, you need to change your obligations. Seize the day.
Could "middle aged" more be referring to the middle after you become a real adult? Like at 18
73-18=55
55/2 =27.5
27.5+18=45.5
So still less than 50 but a lot closer.
I always figured it was older people trying to feel younger. But yeah I think it works this way too.
Those two things are not linked.
A factor might be that no one likes to be remembered theyre soon to die..
Memento Mori. Remind them!
This should start from 18 or 20 though I guess. Most of us don't start working properly until that age.
But then you're doing exactly what the meme is pointing out - measuring life according to years of work, rather than the actual length of life.
But people are only valueable if they work or exploit others to work for them.
/s
Who are they?