In 1980, a psychiatric nurse at Chicago's Michael Reese Hospital (and mother of two) divorced her husband in the midst of a particularly troubled married life and decided to pursue her lifelong dream of an acting career. She was 40.
She had a poignant catalyst: her mother's deathbed confession that she regretted not pursuing her own dreams. So, this woman, with no previous experience or training in acting, signed up for classes at the Steppenwolf Theatre Company in Chicago.
For ten years, she made a bumpy transition into acting. To support herself and her kids, she painted houses and hung wallpaper. She slowly learned the craft, winning parts in local theatre productions. And in 1990, at age 50, she was hired as a street performer at Disney World.
She built up her confidence, and after a year there, moved to L.A. to make a full-court push for her dream. Imagine the harsh critiques at this point. Friends and family looking at this incredulously. "You're making a mistake." "Who's going to hire a 50 year-old woman?"
Over the next several years, she worked hard and won guest roles on a long list of notable television shows of the '90s: E.R., Seinfeld, Frasier, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Home Improvement, etc. She just kept driving. She was making enough money doing what she loved.
And in 1999, she got her big break: 60 year-old Kathryn Joosten won the part of Dolores Landingham (Mrs. Landingham) on "The West Wing". The character's death was a crucial plot line in one of the finest episodes of television ever produced: 2nd season finale "Two Cathedrals".
She would go on to have numerous guest roles in other shows--as well as a bit role in 2005's Wedding Crashers--before being cast as Karen McCluskey in "Desperate Housewives", for which she won two Primetime Emmy Awards.
Joosten had survived lung cancer in 2001 and 2009 and became an advocate for awareness on the disease. She died in 2012 at 72, having very much earned the right to say she had lived a full life.
I bring this up because I hate ageism. I hate the way we strip older folks of their humanity by asserting that they can't do something not on the basis of their ability or competence but the date on their birth certificate. As though they just need to accept their lot past 50.
If someone decides in their 50s, 70s, 90s or whatever that they want to go to medical school or become an actor or open a business or run for office, who in the hell are we to say they can't?
If you love something and you're willing to put in the work and meet the standards of excellence in an ethical way, why should age ever matter? Telling someone they're "too old" to do something denies their gifts to the world, and how dare any of us do that.
Vera Wang didn't start designing clothes until she was 40. Laura Ingalls Wilder didn't publish her first book until she was 65. Told as a young woman that being a doctor wasn't "appropriate for women", Genevie Kocourek would go on to graduate medical school at 53.
And in an era of increased and crucial political activism, when women form the bulk of organizing + campaigning, it's simply unconscionable that any person would tell a woman in her 50s, 60s, 70s and up that she shouldn't run for office because she's "too old". That's nonsense.
We should all be so lucky to have that drive and inspiration and reject the naysayers of the world who view dreams as subject to the perceived and arbitrary nature of a number. Stop shaming folks because of age. If they can deliver, honor that. We're all better off. /thread
Now available in essay format on FB for people who hate Twitter threads: facebook.com/cmclymer/posts…
UPDATE: Just wanna say I'm blown away by how much this resonated with people and inspired by all the folks who responded with their stories, dreams, and goals. It's been an honor to hear how folks are embarking on new journeys. You got this! Get get it! ❤️

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Charlotte Clymer 🏳️‍🌈

Charlotte Clymer 🏳️‍🌈 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @cmclymer

Feb 12
Hey y’all, my girlfriends and I are running together tomorrow in our undies for @CupidsUndieRun in downtown D.C. to raise money for research to help end neurofibromatosis (NF)! If you can spare a modest donation, help us out! Donate here: my.cupids.org/CharlotteClymer
Wow, y’all are amazing. Already five donations to help the Children’s Tumor Foundation research neurofibromatosis!

Everyone who donates below will receive the RT of your choice on a tweet (and a follow of course).

DONATE: my.cupids.org/CharlotteClymer
Oh, listen… I will be absolutely be posting pics of my girlfriends and me running in our undies tomorrow. You don’t even have to ask! 😂

Please donate: my.cupids.org/CharlotteClymer
Read 10 tweets
Feb 6
This isn't about "free speech". The government is not punishing Joe Rogan. Private citizens are deciding they no longer want to give their own money and content to Spotify while Joe Rogan fans apparently believe that he and Spotify are entitled to our money and artists' content.
Comedians should be able to say just about whatever they want without fear of being arrested or otherwise punished by the government.

But that doesn't mean Rogan or any other comedian is entitled to the platforms we use, the money we spend, or, least of all, our agreement.
Rogan's fans aren't angry because Rogan's "truth telling" is being attacked. They're angry because they're seriously under the belief that "free speech" somehow means Rogan is exempt from criticism and consequences (and by extension, his fans) just by virtue of having an opinion.
Read 10 tweets
Feb 2
I ended my Spotify subscription. It's a bummer, but there are too many other great music streaming apps out there to continue paying for this service without the guilt of where my money is going (and not going, e.g. artists). And I don't think I'll miss it. Easy decision.
It took me less than five minutes to cancel my Spotify subscription (via desktop) and sign-up for Apple Music, which has a 3-month free trial going. If you're looking for a way to put a bit of cash back in your personal budget for 3 months and listen to tunes, there you go.
There are many other options, and it's easy to switch from Spotify. Check out this helpful article from @joshgnosis:

theguardian.com/technology/202…
Read 4 tweets
Feb 1
Here's the fun bind that trans people are in when it comes to conversations about why people cared about Rogan spreading COVID disinfo enough to boycott but not enough about Rogan attacking trans rights to boycott:
If trans people speak out against Rogan, not really knowing if cis people are going to back us up, we risk being viciously harassed, and thus, we are challenged to wonder if speaking out risks more than it helps.
But if trans people don't speak out against Rogan and cis people claim not to have known about his extensive history of anti-trans propaganda, cis folks can say "well, hey, we didn't know. No one told us."
Read 6 tweets
Jan 28
For about a year and a half, I worked at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum here in D.C. as a visitor services representative. On my first day, I was walking with my supervisor, who nudged me at one point and said: "See that guy? That's Henry. Make sure you talk to him." (thread)
Henry Greenbaum was born in Poland in 1928. His father passed away early in the war, his mother and two of his sisters were murdered at Treblinka, and three more of his sisters died in a nearby labor camp. Only Henry, his sister Dina, and brothers Zachary and David survived.
Henry survived that labor camp and then time at Auschwitz and then Flossenbürg and had he and his fellow Survivors not been liberated enroute on their death march, he would have likely been murdered at Dachau.
Read 23 tweets
Jan 27
The D.A.R.E. program, as numerous studies have found, was abysmally ineffective. That's unsurprising to those of us who went through it as kids. It was very well funded window dressing for incompetent politicians who failed to understand root causes or didn't care about them.
In fact, some studies have shown that children who went through the D.A.R.E. program were more likely to use drugs than those who hadn't been in the program.
I don't pretend to know how "Euphoria" influences teens, but it's incredibly rich for a failed and harmful program that came out of a failed and harmful War on Drugs started by a failed and harmful presidency to lecture a TV show on what kids really need.

Maybe sit this one out.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(