Age Discrimination and Youth

Appraisement of prosperity discourse of social policy in identification of urban youth in Iran

Ebrahim Mohseni Ahooei^[1]

Abstract: This article examines prosperity of tow discursive approaches against urban youth that shape social policy on national span in Iran. To use of the conceptual frameworks of Ginwright and others (2005), one of these two approaches is the problem-driven perspective that treats urban youth as threats to civil society and another, the possibility-driven approach that views young people as passive consumers of civic life.

Use of discourse analyses in this article shown that miscommunication in intergenerational relations between young people and more adults based on these dual approaches, obscure more than they explain youth's experiences in society. So, urban youth's identity under social policy's dominance, offer what definition of self that, in turn, reproduces ideological relations and renders them second-class citizens who is prevented from full democratic participation. So, it isn’t helpful that urban youth behaviors be conceptualized within the political ideology of urban communities. 

Yet, in use of De Certeau's word (1984), there are many grand tactics that serve to young people in age discrimination terms. Specialization, for example, increases youth ability to conquest on skill based on aging experience in economic life. Also, as another example, indifferently acts in political behaviors and another tactics that are selected specifically for any aspects of everyday life, all disprove discursive dominance prosperity. These examples highlight how young people succeed in building social capital in ways that resist and transform oppressive policies in their communities.

Focus on: social and cultural definition against chronological definition of age (Baltes, 1993; Ericsson & Smith, 1991; Nussbaum & Baringer, 2000; Robertson, 1996; …), age identity (Caporael, Lukaszewski, & Culbertson, 1983; Coupland & Nussbaum, 1993; Doherty, 2002; …), age discrimination (Ginwright, Cammarota &Noguera, 2005; Pecchioni, Ota & Sparks, 2004; …), and intergeneration communication (Coupland, Coupland, & Giles, 1989; Giles, Fox, Harwood & Williams, 1994; …) beside many theories of youth culture (theorists of CCCS, Chicago School and many theorists of lifestyle), constituted basis theoretical approaches in this article.

This article show that how an understanding of the political ideology and of specific forms of social capital in community settings can illuminate an alternative, social justice framework that emphasizes young people's potential to play a vital role in social problem solving.