Jenifer Frost discussed how youth activism to lower the voting age emphasised education and maturity as well as disparities in their responsibilities, hence the phrase “Old enough to fight old enough to vote”.
This got me wondering about which age barriers could be challenged.
Issues including marriage, sex, and incarceration, age barriers are necessary to protect young people from being exploited.
Rules differ significantly across the world. While it may be argued some countries require stricter or more relaxed regulations, what remains consistent is the use of age as a barrier.
Age promotes equality but not necessarily equity. Some youth might be more ’mature’, but if measures other than age are used to determine someone’s ability to take on ‘adult’ responsibilities, perspectives would differ greatly.
Responsibilities such as driving require both a license and have an age limit. But where there is not a clear roadmap to assess someone’s competence, this can be more complex.
Scientifically, age provides insight into cognitive ability. However, age is also a social construct used to undermine young people and their opinions. The phrase “Ok Boomer”, a testament to this frustration. Green MP, Chlöe Swarbrick directed the phrase towards recently appointed opposition leader Todd Muller six months ago when he dismissed her claim that the average age of New Zealand parliament is 49.
Even when legal age barriers are removed, age discrimination still apparent. The lack of work surrounding youth civic engagement during the period of Frost’s study show the lack of acknowledgment for youth’s contribution to informing the legislative change of the 26th amendment.
The main takeaway I got from Frosts session is that if a group or individual has the ability to do something, I think it’s getting old to be told they aren’t old enough.
