Democrats are in turmoil as some call for President Joe Biden to pull out of the presidential race, and others stick by him after his faltering debate performance last month. Polls still held the presidential race essentially even last week, but it’s not yet clear how the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump at a rally over the weekend or his announcement of VP candidate J.D. Vance will affect the race.
In all of the political debate over what’s next in this tumultuous election year, Rev. Lynn Casteel Harper says there’s one thing we’re not talking enough about: Ageism.
Harper is a minister, essayist, chaplain and author of the book "On Vanishing: Mortality, Dementia, and What It Means to Disappear," and, in a recent piece for America Magazine, she argues that “ageism … is so ubiquitous in American culture as to be invisible” — and it’s making it impossible for us to judge Biden clearly.
The Show spoke with her more about it earlier this morning — beginning with her reaction to Biden’s rocky debate.

Full conversation
REV. LYNN CASTEEL HARPER: You know, Lauren, I, I certainly recognize that it was wobbly and not what anyone would consider a top debating form and yet I didn't spiral down in kind of this alarmism and deep, deep worry, partly because I understand that a presidency is much more than a moment.
And that often what happens, especially in the context of ageism, is that we can get hyper focus, especially when older people make mistakes or aren't in their best form and begin to extrapolate all kinds of negative conclusions about their total competency. So, no, I wasn't particularly alarmed or concerned about his universal capacity to lead.
LAUREN GILGER: Can you define ageism for us? Like you compare it to reducing anyone to one aspect of their identity, right?
HARPER: Right. So reducing someone to one aspect of their identity, in this case, age or old age, and then dismissing someone because of it. So, you know, I think about ageism as discrimination against older people largely based on inaccurate and negative stereotypes.
GILGER: So you talked about your own reaction to the president's debate performance. I want to ask you about what you make of the broader reaction from media, culture, columnists, etc., to that debate to performance. Why do you think it looked the way it did?
HARPER: You know, I think that there's a dynamic when we talk about ageism and, and what I was hoping to get out with my article is not weighing in on, you know, yes, Biden should stay in the running or no, he shouldn't. But to see how ageism warps the question and our lens that we bring to it.
And so one of the warping factors that I began to see immediately is this hyper visibility versus invisibility, this double bind of visibility that comes with ages. And so what I mean by that is with hyper visibility, it's the over scrutinizing of every, every slip, every flub and assigning all these perceived deficits to old age and then assigning old age to incompetence, universal incompetence. And so it becomes this kind of fun house mirror and doesn't allow us to kind of step back and take a beat and really fairly judge what is most important in a leader.
GILGER: And you're not arguing here for Biden to stay in the race or for Biden to drop out. You're writing, like you said, that you're concerned with the ways in which ageism distorts the way we even look at the question. You also say, like Biden and his team haven't really shaped this in a helpful way either, like they, they could have taken advantage of his age in some ways, you think.
HARPER: Exactly. I think ageism, one of its manifestations is that we define our worth or our worth is defined by able bodied youthfulness. And I'm not sure the Biden campaign has done a great job of pushing back against that narrative. I think about some years ago when a man challenged Biden's old age as disqualifying, and Biden immediately challenged him to a push up contest. And you know, to me, that's not a helpful response because it sees the premise that old age is inherently disqualifying. And it also says, yes, my worth is defined by these particular capacities that are linked to able bodied youthfulness.
What if instead the conversation had gone another way that yes, I'm not the same person. I was a decade or two or three ago and guess what? That's a good thing. My judgment’s gotten keener. I wouldn't make the same decisions, like say voting for the Iraq war. You know, now with all this experience professionally and personally on my back, in other words, owning aging, for what it is. A long life gives us the potential of refining our senses, refining our perspective. And yes, there are limitations and challenges and it's not to deny age, but it's to say that age can bring other things other than just challenge and limitation and deficit.
GILGER: That's such a countercultural way of looking at it today, isn't it?
HARPER: It is. It is. And I think that's what's so stilting and upsetting about what we're seeing in the media is that there seems to be this universal assumption that aging is, is bad and that to show your worth show that you're not aging, which is just not a realistic or helpful way for any of us to live, not only old people, but all of us across the lifespan.
GILGER: Do you think though, Lynn, there are legitimate concerns here though? Like that it's fair for people to be concerned about the president's capabilities and kind of in the context of this long history of cover ups of presidential health problems?
HARPER: I think it's important that we don't take off the table questions of competency. Absolutely. I think where ageism and ableism really come into play and why it's so important, we have some utility with understanding how they function is that the way we even approach competence becomes skewed.
GILGER: How does ageism affect like the rest of us, Lynn, like we're talking about the president of the United States, like, you know, probably the most famous person in the world. Like, what about the rest of society, the rest of people who are aging?
HARPER: Right. Right. And, you know, I think a lot of times ageism is framed as like, oh, it's just about, you know, kind of inappropriate birthday cards or anti-aging skin products, which are, are actual kind of assaults on, on us as we age. But ageism has a really pernicious effect.
You know, people are barred from, kept out of, fired in employment situations. Age discrimination in the workplace is a huge problem that has economic effects on how people age, you know, health-care disparities for older people. I mean, you know, negative outcomes.
So ageism isn't just innocuous and it, and it affects all of us. And it also creates an environment where when any of us have a limitation or any of us have something that needs accommodation or we're changing physically or mentally or cognitively. It creates a very stigmatizing environment if we can't come forward and be truthful about that and also truthful about those things within ourselves that are our gifts and to be able to kind of hold all of that through every stage of life seems like a more hopeful and helpful way to live for all of us all.