These two comments highlight contrasting approaches to aging for Western theatrical dancers. The first, a quote from movement practitioner Elizabeth Cameron-Dalman, reflects the expectation in Western cultures that professional dancers fortunate enough to have escaped major injury will not stay in their careers beyond their early to middle thirties. Consequently, despite some notable exceptions, there are few mature dancers regularly performing in classical and contemporary dance companies throughout these cultures. This expectation is based on a tacit, naturalized belief that beyond this age dancers' bodies become increasingly unable to cope with the physical demands of performing and that therefore they must retire. Furthermore, this is assumed to be a universal effect, rather than one that is relative to the individual dancer's physical capacities. By contrast, the second comment suggests that dancers can negotiate cultural constraints and continue their dance practice and performance in midlife and beyond.

While some social pressures that influence retirement from dancing might have a direct (although not necessarily causal) relationship with chronological age, there are many reasons why dancers might retire from performing in their perceived prime. Comments from the interviews in my study suggest that these reasons can include financial and job instability, difficulty competing with younger dancers for scarce contracts, and increasing problems in maintaining peak physical condition as dancers age (Leach 1997, 47–49). These are complex issues and at present not clearly understood, but they suggest that age as a stand-alone category or as a means of defining a cohort has little meaning and limited utility in accounting for the cessation of dancing.