{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02422480620155039, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01065891472868217, 'mean_word_length': 5.3765432098765435, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Challenges for Australian sociology

Sociologist Nicole Asquith argues that, in Australia, when it ‘comes to population ageing, sociology has been, in large part, silent in the face of neo-liberal policies of positive ageing’ (2009: 255). In the absence of such critical research, governments at all levels since the 1990s have pursued policies of ageing that tends to subordinate the social needs of older Australians to the nation’s economic needs. This paper seeks to explain why the critical social gerontology movement has not taken root in Australia through an historical analysis of ageing research in Australia. Furthermore, it aims to demonstrate the rewards of critical analysis through new research into the discourses of positive ageing. It also shows how older Australians resist ‘responsible’ ageing and its regulation of them. This analysis is designed to inspire further critical engagement, which recognizes the diversity of older Australians, giving voice to their resistance, and better inform policy development.