There are too many people who deviate from "generationology gospel".
On "generationology" communities, I would generally see people talk about generations being defined by pop cultural trends (like electropop or mumble rap). People also need to know that people who follow pop culture trends aren't a very large majority. Someone can be born in 2002 and be a major fan of thrash metal bands like it's 1986. There are also people born in 1997 who keep up with current pop cultural trends and follow things like e-boy and e-girl.
Just because someone says the audience of a pop culture movement is a set of birthyears doesn't mean that people born those years will follow it.
The longevity of a generation's "pop culture" really depends on location. It is not a "one size fits all" argument.
On the generationology subreddit that I visit and occasionally posted on from March 2020 until fairly recently, it is common to see people say things like "Gen Z culture began in X year" and other similar things. This is more of a location factor, IMO. 2017 might have still felt "Zillennial" in one town despite feeling more "Generation Z" in another.
I might come across as being biased as someone born in 1999 and not wanting to be seen as "Generation Z", but from what I remembered, I still saw some electropop influences in my freshman year of high school even though the "generationology" community generally think it died in early 2013 and I didn't hear about mumble rap and emo rap until Spring 2018ish. Some people from other areas might have witnessed the electropop dying in around 2012 and first heard about mumble and emo rap in 2017 or possibly even 2016. This is why a generation's pop culture is something that has no definite line you can draw.
15-18 year generation lengths do not make that much sense with nostalgia cycles (This reason may not make that much sense but I still think it can belong here)
My most controversial opinion (IMO). It is a common thing to say that history/pop culture repeats itself. Despite seeing people say that generations last 15-18 years on forums and "generationology" communities, the time between when something is popular and when it experiences a comeback in popularity is typically around 20-25 years (example: the Star Wars original trilogy in 1977-1983 and the Star Wars prequel trilogy in 1999-2005). In fact, this was what inspired me to make my previous thread (Supergroups and the Millennium Saeculum). Since some people talk about the similarities between people of one generation and the previous/next (like one generation passing the torch to the next generation), wouldn't it make more sense if "cultural generations" were similar (maybe more like half of it since 20-25 years is too long for many people)?
When someone's first memories take place is also not a "one size fits all" argument.
Many people (including the people from Pew) believe 1996 is the last Millennial year because they were the last to be at elementary school when 9/11 happened, therefore giving them a supposedly likely chance to remember it. There are also some people who think the "remember 9/11" rule should apply to 1998 borns, since they believe you start remembering things at age 3. But this is not a definite line you can draw. Some people can remember things before age 3 (in fact some can even remember being babies), and some don't even have their first memories until age 6 or 7.
This is also where some hypocrisy can take place. I have seen people born in 1997 say that 1998 borns are the last to have memories of 9/11 but later bring up some memories of 1999 they have or that one starts becoming culturally aware at age 2. I also saw one person born in 1998 say 1998 borns are the last to remember 9/11 but later talks about his/her earliest memories taking place in 1999-2000.
On "generationology" communities, I would generally see people talk about generations being defined by pop cultural trends (like electropop or mumble rap). People also need to know that people who follow pop culture trends aren't a very large majority. Someone can be born in 2002 and be a major fan of thrash metal bands like it's 1986. There are also people born in 1997 who keep up with current pop cultural trends and follow things like e-boy and e-girl.
Just because someone says the audience of a pop culture movement is a set of birthyears doesn't mean that people born those years will follow it.
The longevity of a generation's "pop culture" really depends on location. It is not a "one size fits all" argument.
On the generationology subreddit that I visit and occasionally posted on from March 2020 until fairly recently, it is common to see people say things like "Gen Z culture began in X year" and other similar things. This is more of a location factor, IMO. 2017 might have still felt "Zillennial" in one town despite feeling more "Generation Z" in another.
I might come across as being biased as someone born in 1999 and not wanting to be seen as "Generation Z", but from what I remembered, I still saw some electropop influences in my freshman year of high school even though the "generationology" community generally think it died in early 2013 and I didn't hear about mumble rap and emo rap until Spring 2018ish. Some people from other areas might have witnessed the electropop dying in around 2012 and first heard about mumble and emo rap in 2017 or possibly even 2016. This is why a generation's pop culture is something that has no definite line you can draw.
15-18 year generation lengths do not make that much sense with nostalgia cycles (This reason may not make that much sense but I still think it can belong here)
My most controversial opinion (IMO). It is a common thing to say that history/pop culture repeats itself. Despite seeing people say that generations last 15-18 years on forums and "generationology" communities, the time between when something is popular and when it experiences a comeback in popularity is typically around 20-25 years (example: the Star Wars original trilogy in 1977-1983 and the Star Wars prequel trilogy in 1999-2005). In fact, this was what inspired me to make my previous thread (Supergroups and the Millennium Saeculum). Since some people talk about the similarities between people of one generation and the previous/next (like one generation passing the torch to the next generation), wouldn't it make more sense if "cultural generations" were similar (maybe more like half of it since 20-25 years is too long for many people)?
When someone's first memories take place is also not a "one size fits all" argument.
Many people (including the people from Pew) believe 1996 is the last Millennial year because they were the last to be at elementary school when 9/11 happened, therefore giving them a supposedly likely chance to remember it. There are also some people who think the "remember 9/11" rule should apply to 1998 borns, since they believe you start remembering things at age 3. But this is not a definite line you can draw. Some people can remember things before age 3 (in fact some can even remember being babies), and some don't even have their first memories until age 6 or 7.
This is also where some hypocrisy can take place. I have seen people born in 1997 say that 1998 borns are the last to have memories of 9/11 but later bring up some memories of 1999 they have or that one starts becoming culturally aware at age 2. I also saw one person born in 1998 say 1998 borns are the last to remember 9/11 but later talks about his/her earliest memories taking place in 1999-2000.