Life expectancy
Short report on the Conference
It is seen as a clear and true fact in policymaking and economic life that “men” have a shorter life expectancy than “women”. What are the causes for men dying earlier than women? This conference cast a differentiated eye over current results of social sciences research on this topic. The results presented supported the assumption that the lower average life expectancy of men is a phenomenon with social and structural causes in which biological causes are at most subordinate in importance.
This brings into focus the differences in living conditions of men and their possible impacts on life expectancy. For if there are groups of men whose average life expectancy is in line with that of women, then this raises the question as to how women’s life situations and lifestyles differ from those of men. To what extent can this be the starting point for a critical discussion of existing concepts of masculinity and gender relations?
Prof. Susanne Baer introduced the conference and localized it within the framework of the work of the GenderCompetenceCenter, the job of which is to bring differentiated findings on the complexity of gender into subject areas which have not previously been “gendered” or which have been using stereotypes of knowledge derived from popular science. In this conference, some of the few secured findings concerning gender and life expectancy were brought together into a dialogue.
Jochen Geppert of the GenderCompetenceCenter chaired the podium discussion and in his introductory statement concretized the intention of the conference to concentrate in this case on men in a differentiated way and without the victim rhetoric that is so often heard.
Dr. Cornelia Lange, a population scientist at the Robert Koch Institute presented some findings of demographic research into gender-specific life expectancy and mortality. Life expectancy “at birth” is statistically six years longer for women than for men, while the difference in “distant life expectancy” at age 65 is just 3.5 years. This finding shows clearly that mortality figures in various age groups should be looked at more closely. Here we see that men in the age range 15 – 20 years have double, and from 20 – 25 even triple the mortality rate of women. In middle age (30 – 64) mortality in men in also higher by a factor of 2, and increases to a factor of 3 for external causes of death. The figures converge towards old age, until for the age group over 90 years the mortality rate for women is slightly higher. A glance at causes of death illuminates the differences more exactly. The main causes of the higher mortality in men are
Prof. Marc Luy, a population scientist at the University of Rostock [German homepage] also dealt with the causes of gender differences in life expectancy from a demographic point of view. He presented on the one hand the geographical spread and historical development of this difference and on the other hand the results of the “Convent and Monastery Study”, a comparative “micro-demographic” study of the life expectancy in convents and monasteries.
The geographical spread shows that nearly everywhere men do not live as long as women. Exceptions to this are mainly countries in Africa and Asia in which there is low life expectancy and a high rate of infant and child-bed mortality. The general observation is that the higher the level of life expectancy, the greater the difference is between the sexes.
A historical look at Germany shows in part a similar connection with the level of life expectancy. While in the mid-nineteenth century life expectancy was equally high (and previously lower for women, presumably, because of child-bed mortality, but there are no official figures for this), there was a difference of three years in 1900. Until 1950 life expectancy for women and for men rose parallel to each other (incidentally, war deaths are not included in the official German statistics). By 1980 the gap had widened to nearly 7 years, but since then has narrowed again slightly to 6 years by 2000.
The dominant causes of death have shifted since the nineteenth century from infectious diseases (TB) to road accidents to cardio-circulatory diseases and neoplasms (cancer).
This empirical data shows, in an international and historical comparison, such a variance that biologically-oriented explanations do not seem plausible on their own. To investigate the causes of the difference more closely, Luy compared the life expectancy of monks and nuns with each other and with the general population. If the difference is due to biological causes over which humans have no influence, there should be no difference between the populations of religious communities and the general population. But if behavior and environment, i.e. factors subject to influence, are the causes, nuns and monks should have a similar life expectancy. In all, the study used data from 11,600 persons from 11 Bavarian religious communities with practically identical daily routines.
The results showed that the increase in the difference in life expectancy since 1950 did not take place among the population of convents and monasteries. Nuns and women in the general population live almost as long, with monks close behind. In mortality reduction trends, men in the general population are far behind the level of women, nuns and monks. The cause of the difference must be in the behavior and environment of this group, since, on the evidence of the data for monks, biology can only explain 1 – 2 years of the difference. The question for future research is therefore: which groups of men die earlier and thus affect the statistical difference?
Dr. Paola Di Giulio, a population scientist at the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research in Rostock, has made a study of how the difference in life expectancy is influenced by health behavior, lifestyles and living arrangements. The object of inquiry was to explain how the excess mortality of men has come about. It was intended to investigate whether the difference is less sharp / high in certain sub-groups. As the strongest difference is in the 55 – 80 age group, a sub-group was chosen from this age range of those who were between 60 and 69 years old in the last survey (Life Expectancy Survey (LES)) in 1984-86 and whose survival status in the follow-up study in 1998 was known (n = 1353).
On the basis of 20 items, e.g. smoking habits, body mass index, health and work behavior, four lifestyle groups were formed.
As well as lifestyles, living arrangements were also looked at: what is the effect on life expectancy of living in a couple, alone or in other arrangements (with other members of the household, e.g. children)? It was shown both that life expectancy is higher and the gender difference is smallest in the group of “others”. A promising approach would therefore be to start with lifestyle and living arrangements to increase life expectancy in men.
Sebastian Schädler is a practitioner of the gender-aware educational work of Pat-Ex e.V. and works as an art educationalist at the University of Bremen. In his cultural studies talk he discussed the role of “early death” as part of or “fulfillment of the construction of masculine identity”. As an example, he contrasted Bremen’s symbol Roland with Saint Sebastian. While Roland presents a medieval armoured warrior image of hegemonic manhood, Saint Sebastian presents the opposite image of the defenceless, naked man. Two images of manhood which for all their differences are both defined via their relationship to physicality and death. Death functions as the initiation into manhood. After a brief summary of the theories of gender relations from biologism through equality feminism to post-structural feminism, he criticized the perspective of (popular) science that is currently holding sway, which seeks the causes of gender in the genes, a perspective which attempts to explain, for example, the presence of an equal number of “super old” women and men on Sardinia with a “genetic advantage” of the men there instead of asking about the living conditions there for the two sexes. Post-structural feminism could help here, if not directly with concrete answers, at least with finding the right questions. It helps, for example, in understanding where resistance to gender equality policy measures can come from; gender identity then appears as a resource of the person’s own self which has been fought for by hard work in a long process of socialization and the formation of the person’s own body. Many people would never want to give this resource up, even if they could live a few years longer if they did so.
Schädler showed in what way and how heavily gender identity is inscribed in the physicality of men by using a few illustrations. It is not very promising to try changing men by telling them that a certain relationship to their own bodies will lead to a shorter life expectancy; it is not that the masculine role endangers health, but rather the other way around, that endangered health stabilizes the masculine role. Therefore there is no point in promising not only possibly a longer life but also more manhood if men engage in healthier behavior. The change in gender relations should not pursue the aim of stable masculine (and gender) identity.
Following this, there was a heated discussion of this and other propositions.
Announcement:
At the end of the year, the GenderCompetenceCenter will be publishing a collection on this topic including complete versions of the talks given in this conference.
“Women live longer? (So) men have short lives???
Research in Gender and life expectancy
Monday, May 9, 2005 from 1.30 p.m. to 5.30 p.m.
in the Senatssaal of the Humboldt University of Berlin
in the Senatssaal of the Humboldt University of Berlin
It is seen as a clear and true fact in policymaking and economic life that “men” have a shorter life expectancy than “women”. What are the causes for men dying earlier than women? This conference cast a differentiated eye over current results of social sciences research on this topic. The results presented supported the assumption that the lower average life expectancy of men is a phenomenon with social and structural causes in which biological causes are at most subordinate in importance.
This brings into focus the differences in living conditions of men and their possible impacts on life expectancy. For if there are groups of men whose average life expectancy is in line with that of women, then this raises the question as to how women’s life situations and lifestyles differ from those of men. To what extent can this be the starting point for a critical discussion of existing concepts of masculinity and gender relations?
Prof. Susanne Baer introduced the conference and localized it within the framework of the work of the GenderCompetenceCenter, the job of which is to bring differentiated findings on the complexity of gender into subject areas which have not previously been “gendered” or which have been using stereotypes of knowledge derived from popular science. In this conference, some of the few secured findings concerning gender and life expectancy were brought together into a dialogue.
Jochen Geppert of the GenderCompetenceCenter chaired the podium discussion and in his introductory statement concretized the intention of the conference to concentrate in this case on men in a differentiated way and without the victim rhetoric that is so often heard.
Dr. Cornelia Lange, a population scientist at the Robert Koch Institute presented some findings of demographic research into gender-specific life expectancy and mortality. Life expectancy “at birth” is statistically six years longer for women than for men, while the difference in “distant life expectancy” at age 65 is just 3.5 years. This finding shows clearly that mortality figures in various age groups should be looked at more closely. Here we see that men in the age range 15 – 20 years have double, and from 20 – 25 even triple the mortality rate of women. In middle age (30 – 64) mortality in men in also higher by a factor of 2, and increases to a factor of 3 for external causes of death. The figures converge towards old age, until for the age group over 90 years the mortality rate for women is slightly higher. A glance at causes of death illuminates the differences more exactly. The main causes of the higher mortality in men are
- external causes (i.e. accidents),
- cardio-circulatory diseases,
- malignant neoplasms (cancer),
- diseases of the respiratory system (e.g. chronic diseases of the lower respiratory tracts),
- diseases of the digestion system (e.g. liver cirrhosis).
Prof. Marc Luy, a population scientist at the University of Rostock [German homepage] also dealt with the causes of gender differences in life expectancy from a demographic point of view. He presented on the one hand the geographical spread and historical development of this difference and on the other hand the results of the “Convent and Monastery Study”, a comparative “micro-demographic” study of the life expectancy in convents and monasteries.
The geographical spread shows that nearly everywhere men do not live as long as women. Exceptions to this are mainly countries in Africa and Asia in which there is low life expectancy and a high rate of infant and child-bed mortality. The general observation is that the higher the level of life expectancy, the greater the difference is between the sexes.
A historical look at Germany shows in part a similar connection with the level of life expectancy. While in the mid-nineteenth century life expectancy was equally high (and previously lower for women, presumably, because of child-bed mortality, but there are no official figures for this), there was a difference of three years in 1900. Until 1950 life expectancy for women and for men rose parallel to each other (incidentally, war deaths are not included in the official German statistics). By 1980 the gap had widened to nearly 7 years, but since then has narrowed again slightly to 6 years by 2000.
The dominant causes of death have shifted since the nineteenth century from infectious diseases (TB) to road accidents to cardio-circulatory diseases and neoplasms (cancer).
This empirical data shows, in an international and historical comparison, such a variance that biologically-oriented explanations do not seem plausible on their own. To investigate the causes of the difference more closely, Luy compared the life expectancy of monks and nuns with each other and with the general population. If the difference is due to biological causes over which humans have no influence, there should be no difference between the populations of religious communities and the general population. But if behavior and environment, i.e. factors subject to influence, are the causes, nuns and monks should have a similar life expectancy. In all, the study used data from 11,600 persons from 11 Bavarian religious communities with practically identical daily routines.
The results showed that the increase in the difference in life expectancy since 1950 did not take place among the population of convents and monasteries. Nuns and women in the general population live almost as long, with monks close behind. In mortality reduction trends, men in the general population are far behind the level of women, nuns and monks. The cause of the difference must be in the behavior and environment of this group, since, on the evidence of the data for monks, biology can only explain 1 – 2 years of the difference. The question for future research is therefore: which groups of men die earlier and thus affect the statistical difference?
Dr. Paola Di Giulio, a population scientist at the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research in Rostock, has made a study of how the difference in life expectancy is influenced by health behavior, lifestyles and living arrangements. The object of inquiry was to explain how the excess mortality of men has come about. It was intended to investigate whether the difference is less sharp / high in certain sub-groups. As the strongest difference is in the 55 – 80 age group, a sub-group was chosen from this age range of those who were between 60 and 69 years old in the last survey (Life Expectancy Survey (LES)) in 1984-86 and whose survival status in the follow-up study in 1998 was known (n = 1353).
On the basis of 20 items, e.g. smoking habits, body mass index, health and work behavior, four lifestyle groups were formed.
- “Active bon-vivants”: working, smoking, frequently overweight, frequently men.
- “Interventionists”: don’t smoke, don’t drink, eat healthily, have no (stressful) jobs. Mainly women.
- “Nihilists”: do nothing for their health and no sport or exercise, are corpulent. A smaller group made up more or less equally of women and men.
- “Past workaholics”: had stressful jobs in the past. A small group.
As well as lifestyles, living arrangements were also looked at: what is the effect on life expectancy of living in a couple, alone or in other arrangements (with other members of the household, e.g. children)? It was shown both that life expectancy is higher and the gender difference is smallest in the group of “others”. A promising approach would therefore be to start with lifestyle and living arrangements to increase life expectancy in men.
Sebastian Schädler is a practitioner of the gender-aware educational work of Pat-Ex e.V. and works as an art educationalist at the University of Bremen. In his cultural studies talk he discussed the role of “early death” as part of or “fulfillment of the construction of masculine identity”. As an example, he contrasted Bremen’s symbol Roland with Saint Sebastian. While Roland presents a medieval armoured warrior image of hegemonic manhood, Saint Sebastian presents the opposite image of the defenceless, naked man. Two images of manhood which for all their differences are both defined via their relationship to physicality and death. Death functions as the initiation into manhood. After a brief summary of the theories of gender relations from biologism through equality feminism to post-structural feminism, he criticized the perspective of (popular) science that is currently holding sway, which seeks the causes of gender in the genes, a perspective which attempts to explain, for example, the presence of an equal number of “super old” women and men on Sardinia with a “genetic advantage” of the men there instead of asking about the living conditions there for the two sexes. Post-structural feminism could help here, if not directly with concrete answers, at least with finding the right questions. It helps, for example, in understanding where resistance to gender equality policy measures can come from; gender identity then appears as a resource of the person’s own self which has been fought for by hard work in a long process of socialization and the formation of the person’s own body. Many people would never want to give this resource up, even if they could live a few years longer if they did so.
Schädler showed in what way and how heavily gender identity is inscribed in the physicality of men by using a few illustrations. It is not very promising to try changing men by telling them that a certain relationship to their own bodies will lead to a shorter life expectancy; it is not that the masculine role endangers health, but rather the other way around, that endangered health stabilizes the masculine role. Therefore there is no point in promising not only possibly a longer life but also more manhood if men engage in healthier behavior. The change in gender relations should not pursue the aim of stable masculine (and gender) identity.
Following this, there was a heated discussion of this and other propositions.
Announcement:
At the end of the year, the GenderCompetenceCenter will be publishing a collection on this topic including complete versions of the talks given in this conference.
zurück
nach oben
drucken
erstellt von Administrator
—
zuletzt verändert:
02.01.2010 20:08
