I have been reading an introductory book on sociology. It
was my undergraduate major and I thought I would see what the science has
become, that is, its advances. I was surprised that the core assumptions have
remained relatively the same. They still build on late 19th
century theorists and either affirm or challenge those foundational theories.
Sociology has borrowed much more from psychologists than when I was its student.
Once Social Psychology was a sub set of Sociology and the kissing cousin of Psychology. Now it seems like most Sociological theories are
ardently married to Social Psychology.
In its understanding of life stages and their relative social demands, social theorists
have a division that begins at 55 and ends at one's first retirement. This is where we begin to wind down and transition into a more leisurely life.
Then there is a post retirement productive stage that begins with retirement 60
– 70 and ends at various points depending on one’s health restrictions.
Typically this stage ends when one is between 75 and 85 years old. After that is the
final stage of life, where failing strength and health, places us in the role of one who is in "need of the services of others." This stage which ends with death. (This is, in my view, a point of
transition into a life that is eternal.)
Fundamental to sociology is the notion of role
expectation. Every role we play has societal expectations. Even when we are
sick, there are things expected of us. We are expected to seek medical care; we
are not expected to continue our healthy level of activity, etc. While
the gap between the role expectations of women and men is closing, there remain
distinctions for each. It is not uncommon for a household to have a woman as
its primary wage earner. The man is sometimes the second (lesser) income.
For a man who is the lesser wage earner to retire is
quite different from that of a man who is the primary wage earner or the “sole
provider for his family.” This was once the norm. Now the two income family is
the norm. The expectation of a woman is to earn a wage to the level of her
maximum potential. Her role expectations as wife, mother and manager of
domestic functions have not decreased. The expectations have simply been added
to her role as co-wage earner. In a complete reversal from former times, a wife and mother who does not have a job is looked upon with suspect.
I am suffering some role confusion because the
expectations of a soon to be newly retired person have changed. Between the ages of 65 and
75 one is suppose to be productive in some capacity. It is only after one
cannot work that productivity is optional. I am often asked, “What are you doing after you
retire?” If one says, “Live the life of leisure” there might be a nervous laugh which is a form of a mild sanction. You
are betraying a new social norm.
I am just as much a part of our culture as everyone is. I
too expect myself to be productive in my post retirement years. That
expectation is problematic because, as the trite phrase would say, "my prospects
are slim". I am persona non grata in the liberal denomination I am retiring from and would
need to earn the respect and trust from a less liberal denomination. I am entertaining
the notion of an entirely different line of work. Male dancer, I am thinking.
4 comments:
Having retired at 67 some eight years ago when folks ask me what I do in retirement I say, "I sleep until breakfast, then take a morning nap, wake up for lunch, then an afternoon nap and wake up for supper, then I take a nap until bed time unless, of course, my wife and I are on a cruise, out camping, or traveling, or visiting our children and entertaining with our grandchildren." That's a fast enough loife for me.
Don't over think it. One of the issues many preacher types have is trying to categorize and stuff everything into nice little boxes. As you well know, Life ain't like that.
The good news is you can still vote and serve on Presbytery committees...
Whatever your choice as long as your true to Christ that's what really matters.
Alan Wilkerson
Portland OR.
Ed, what a delightful life you describe. It sound ideal to me.
Alan, while I can't argue with your facts concerning your "good news" about voting and serving on Presbytery Committees, I think my relation with the Presbytery is far more complicated than that - it has, for one thing, become highly political and even, for many, litigious. I try to avoid the mental errors you described with such verbs as categorize and stuff.
I do think deeply and widely. That is an aspect of myself that I am not much interested in changing. Better too much than too little, I think.
Post a Comment