Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Generation Z = / = Homelander?
#1
Whenever the term "Gen Z" gets thrown around, it usually refers to the group of people born between around 1997 and 2012, or in other words, those that have very little to no memories of 9/11 but were at school when the Parkland shooting happened (except for those born in 1997-1999, who were already out of school when it happened).

However, when terms like "Homelander" or "Homeland Generation" appear, there are usually three different possibilities it can refer to - born after 9/11, born since 2003, or born since 2005. 

You would occasionally hear of people born in the late 90's, and to some extent, 2000 and 2001, get called Generation Z, but I've almost never heard them referred to as "Homelanders".

It sometimes makes me wonder if Gen Z's official name will be "Homelanders" and if the Gen Z label will fade away overtime.
Reply
#2
(08-04-2019, 02:43 PM)Ghost Wrote: Whenever the term "Gen Z" gets thrown around, it usually refers to the group of people born between around 1997 and 2012, or in other words, those that have very little to no memories of 9/11 but were at school when the Parkland shooting happened (except for those born in 1997-1999, who were already out of school when it happened).

However, when terms like "Homelander" or "Homeland Generation" appear, there are usually three different possibilities it can refer to - born after 9/11, born since 2003, or born since 2005. 

You would occasionally hear of people born in the late 90's, and to some extent, 2000 and 2001, get called Generation Z, but I've almost never heard them referred to as "Homelanders".

It sometimes makes me wonder if Gen Z's official name will be "Homelanders" and if the Gen Z label will fade away overtime.

I hope the Pew dates fade away. Generations are not 15 years long. 2003 is correct; 2004 is OK. Homelanders is just a name thrown around on this forum; it has no other platform and will fade away. It also implies that this generation is about dealing with the aftermath of 9-11. Gen Z seems like it's catching on. I called them that in my 1997 book.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#3
(08-05-2019, 03:05 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-04-2019, 02:43 PM)Ghost Wrote: Whenever the term "Gen Z" gets thrown around, it usually refers to the group of people born between around 1997 and 2012, or in other words, those that have very little to no memories of 9/11 but were at school when the Parkland shooting happened (except for those born in 1997-1999, who were already out of school when it happened).

However, when terms like "Homelander" or "Homeland Generation" appear, there are usually three different possibilities it can refer to - born after 9/11, born since 2003, or born since 2005. 

You would occasionally hear of people born in the late 90's, and to some extent, 2000 and 2001, get called Generation Z, but I've almost never heard them referred to as "Homelanders".

It sometimes makes me wonder if Gen Z's official name will be "Homelanders" and if the Gen Z label will fade away overtime.

I hope the Pew dates fade away. Generations are not 15 years long. 2003 is correct; 2004 is OK. Homelanders is just a name thrown around on this forum; it has no other platform and will face away. It also implies that this generation is about dealing with the aftermath of 9-11. Gen Z seems like it's catching on. I called them that in my 1997 book.

When the term "Gen Z" is used, the 1981-1996 and 1982-2000 definitions are always the most common definitions for Millennials, even though most will probably agree that 1981 is an X year (I'm pretty sure everyone on here, myself included, thinks that 1981 is a Gen X birthyear).

Now regarding the Gen Z name - the only reason why it is named that is because Gen Xers are called Gen X and Millennials were at one point called Gen Y. It'll probably fade away overtime, but I don't doubt that it'll still start in either 1997 or 2000.

The latest birthyear I have seen lumped as being a "Millennial" though is 2006, which might surprise you.
Reply
#4
(08-05-2019, 07:47 PM)Ghost Wrote:
(08-05-2019, 03:05 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-04-2019, 02:43 PM)Ghost Wrote: Whenever the term "Gen Z" gets thrown around, it usually refers to the group of people born between around 1997 and 2012, or in other words, those that have very little to no memories of 9/11 but were at school when the Parkland shooting happened (except for those born in 1997-1999, who were already out of school when it happened).

However, when terms like "Homelander" or "Homeland Generation" appear, there are usually three different possibilities it can refer to - born after 9/11, born since 2003, or born since 2005. 

You would occasionally hear of people born in the late 90's, and to some extent, 2000 and 2001, get called Generation Z, but I've almost never heard them referred to as "Homelanders".

It sometimes makes me wonder if Gen Z's official name will be "Homelanders" and if the Gen Z label will fade away overtime.

I hope the Pew dates fade away. Generations are not 15 years long. 2003 is correct; 2004 is OK. Homelanders is just a name thrown around on this forum; it has no other platform and will face away. It also implies that this generation is about dealing with the aftermath of 9-11. Gen Z seems like it's catching on. I called them that in my 1997 book.

When the term "Gen Z" is used, the 1981-1996 and 1982-2000 definitions are always the most common definitions for Millennials, even though most will probably agree that 1981 is an X year (I'm pretty sure everyone on here, myself included, thinks that 1981 is a Gen X birthyear).

Now regarding the Gen Z name - the only reason why it is named that is because Gen Xers are called Gen X and Millennials were at one point called Gen Y. It'll probably fade away overtime, but I don't doubt that it'll still start in either 1997 or 2000.

The latest birthyear I have seen lumped as being a "Millennial" though is 2006, which might surprise you.

I regard 1981 as a Gen X year, but it's on the cusp; I do accept the idea of cusps; it's just common sense. Nothing is so strictly bordered in the living world.

The most-common definitions and dating of the last millennial year are given by Pew Research, which is not a study of generational traits, but only demographics. It's like saying Boomers began in 1946 because that's when the baby boom started.

Gen Z will eventually be regarded as starting in 2003, at least among those who study generations and not demographics. And Gen Z will go all the way to 2024, because the 1T is not going to start until 2028 or 2029. Mr. Howe still says Gen Z starts in 2004, and we here should use that date or close to it, and not 1997 or 2000.

Gen Z is the name that has caught on so far. But if there's another name that comes along that describes them, and it catches on, the name could change. There's no such name yet, although people on T4T forums have speculated about it and offered names. That's always fun to do, but it doesn't mean that what we say here will catch on in the media zeitgeist. Mr. Howe adopted a name that someone here suggested, years ago now (Homelanders), but that name has not caught on because it doesn't fit. Since letters are used now for generations, as I suggested in my 1997 book, I suspect every generation will have a letter from now on, even if that's not the primary name. Not because I said so though, of course Smile

The next prophets, yet to be born, are already being called Generation Alpha, or the Alpha Wave Generation. I think that's a cool name.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#5
(08-06-2019, 10:56 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-05-2019, 07:47 PM)Ghost Wrote:
(08-05-2019, 03:05 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-04-2019, 02:43 PM)Ghost Wrote: Whenever the term "Gen Z" gets thrown around, it usually refers to the group of people born between around 1997 and 2012, or in other words, those that have very little to no memories of 9/11 but were at school when the Parkland shooting happened (except for those born in 1997-1999, who were already out of school when it happened).

However, when terms like "Homelander" or "Homeland Generation" appear, there are usually three different possibilities it can refer to - born after 9/11, born since 2003, or born since 2005. 

You would occasionally hear of people born in the late 90's, and to some extent, 2000 and 2001, get called Generation Z, but I've almost never heard them referred to as "Homelanders".

It sometimes makes me wonder if Gen Z's official name will be "Homelanders" and if the Gen Z label will fade away overtime.

I hope the Pew dates fade away. Generations are not 15 years long. 2003 is correct; 2004 is OK. Homelanders is just a name thrown around on this forum; it has no other platform and will face away. It also implies that this generation is about dealing with the aftermath of 9-11. Gen Z seems like it's catching on. I called them that in my 1997 book.

When the term "Gen Z" is used, the 1981-1996 and 1982-2000 definitions are always the most common definitions for Millennials, even though most will probably agree that 1981 is an X year (I'm pretty sure everyone on here, myself included, thinks that 1981 is a Gen X birthyear).

Now regarding the Gen Z name - the only reason why it is named that is because Gen Xers are called Gen X and Millennials were at one point called Gen Y. It'll probably fade away overtime, but I don't doubt that it'll still start in either 1997 or 2000.

The latest birthyear I have seen lumped as being a "Millennial" though is 2006, which might surprise you.

I regard 1981 as a Gen X year, but it's on the cusp; I do accept the idea of cusps; it's just common sense. Nothing is so strictly bordered in the living world.

The most-common definitions and dating of the last millennial year are given by Pew Research, which is not a study of generational traits, but only demographics. It's like saying Boomers began in 1946 because that's when the baby boom started.

Gen Z will eventually be regarded as starting in 2003, at least among those who study generations and not demographics. And Gen Z will go all the way to 2024, because the 1T is not going to start until 2028 or 2029. Mr. Howe still says Gen Z starts in 2004, and we here should use that date or close to it, and not 1997 or 2000.

Gen Z is the name that has caught on so far. But if there's another name that comes along that describes them, and it catches on, the name could change. There's no such name yet, although people on T4T forums have speculated about it and offered names. That's always fun to do, but it doesn't mean that what we say here will catch on in the media zeitgeist. Mr. Howe adopted a name that someone here suggested, years ago now (Homelanders), but that name has not caught on because it doesn't fit. Since letters are used now for generations, as I suggested in my 1997 book, I suspect every generation will have a letter from now on, even if that's not the primary name. Not because I said so though, of course Smile

The next prophets, yet to be born, are already being called Generation Alpha, or the Alpha Wave Generation. I think that's a cool name.

1981 is late X. I don't accept the idea of cusps because I'm born outside the XY cusp yet have done many of the things in childhood and teens that pure Millennials supposedly have not done. Since it says I haven't done these things because I was born outside of the range it means the cusp is garbage. If I have experienced these things that "core Millennials" supposedly haven't then what makes me different from this supposed cusp range? I read an article on the cusp and experienced those very same things. This means the category is arbitrary and artificial.
Reply
#6
(08-06-2019, 11:57 AM)AspieMillennial Wrote: 1981 is late X. I don't accept the idea of cusps because I'm born outside the XY cusp yet have done many of the things in childhood and teens that pure Millennials supposedly have not done. Since it says I haven't done these things because I was born outside of the range it means the cusp is garbage. If I have experienced these things that "core Millennials" supposedly haven't then what makes me different from this supposed cusp range? I read an article on the cusp and experienced those very same things. This means the category is arbitrary and artificial.

All T4T categories are general, not all-inclusive. Many people experience life events that don't fit the mold of the time or be non-conforming to the defined archetype of their generation. That's not unusual. If that applied to all, or even most people in a generation, then you really would have a case for arbitrary behavior.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#7
(08-06-2019, 11:57 AM)AspieMillennial Wrote:
(08-06-2019, 10:56 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-05-2019, 07:47 PM)Ghost Wrote:
(08-05-2019, 03:05 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-04-2019, 02:43 PM)Ghost Wrote: Whenever the term "Gen Z" gets thrown around, it usually refers to the group of people born between around 1997 and 2012, or in other words, those that have very little to no memories of 9/11 but were at school when the Parkland shooting happened (except for those born in 1997-1999, who were already out of school when it happened).

However, when terms like "Homelander" or "Homeland Generation" appear, there are usually three different possibilities it can refer to - born after 9/11, born since 2003, or born since 2005. 

You would occasionally hear of people born in the late 90's, and to some extent, 2000 and 2001, get called Generation Z, but I've almost never heard them referred to as "Homelanders".

It sometimes makes me wonder if Gen Z's official name will be "Homelanders" and if the Gen Z label will fade away overtime.

I hope the Pew dates fade away. Generations are not 15 years long. 2003 is correct; 2004 is OK. Homelanders is just a name thrown around on this forum; it has no other platform and will face away. It also implies that this generation is about dealing with the aftermath of 9-11. Gen Z seems like it's catching on. I called them that in my 1997 book.

When the term "Gen Z" is used, the 1981-1996 and 1982-2000 definitions are always the most common definitions for Millennials, even though most will probably agree that 1981 is an X year (I'm pretty sure everyone on here, myself included, thinks that 1981 is a Gen X birthyear).

Now regarding the Gen Z name - the only reason why it is named that is because Gen Xers are called Gen X and Millennials were at one point called Gen Y. It'll probably fade away overtime, but I don't doubt that it'll still start in either 1997 or 2000.

The latest birthyear I have seen lumped as being a "Millennial" though is 2006, which might surprise you.

I regard 1981 as a Gen X year, but it's on the cusp; I do accept the idea of cusps; it's just common sense. Nothing is so strictly bordered in the living world.

The most-common definitions and dating of the last millennial year are given by Pew Research, which is not a study of generational traits, but only demographics. It's like saying Boomers began in 1946 because that's when the baby boom started.

Gen Z will eventually be regarded as starting in 2003, at least among those who study generations and not demographics. And Gen Z will go all the way to 2024, because the 1T is not going to start until 2028 or 2029. Mr. Howe still says Gen Z starts in 2004, and we here should use that date or close to it, and not 1997 or 2000.

Gen Z is the name that has caught on so far. But if there's another name that comes along that describes them, and it catches on, the name could change. There's no such name yet, although people on T4T forums have speculated about it and offered names. That's always fun to do, but it doesn't mean that what we say here will catch on in the media zeitgeist. Mr. Howe adopted a name that someone here suggested, years ago now (Homelanders), but that name has not caught on because it doesn't fit. Since letters are used now for generations, as I suggested in my 1997 book, I suspect every generation will have a letter from now on, even if that's not the primary name. Not because I said so though, of course Smile

The next prophets, yet to be born, are already being called Generation Alpha, or the Alpha Wave Generation. I think that's a cool name.

1981 is late X. I don't accept the idea of cusps because I'm born outside the XY cusp yet have done many of the things in childhood and teens that pure Millennials supposedly have not done. Since it says I haven't done these things because I was born outside of the range it means the cusp is garbage. If I have experienced these things that "core Millennials" supposedly haven't then what makes me different from this supposed cusp range? I read an article on the cusp and experienced those very same things. This means the category is arbitrary and artificial.

I have a feeling that the reason why 1981 borns are occasionally called Millennials is because they apply to the "not at school when the Challenger exploded but were at school when Columbine happened" rule.

Despite applying to the rule, I still believe that they're late Gen X overall and have more in common with people born in 1976 than people born in 1986.
*1981 borns may still remember the Challenger explosion whereas 1986 borns (almost all of them) were born after it happened.
*1981 borns spent most of their elementary school years before the Berlin Wall fell.
*1981 borns were probably too old for Nicktoons despite still being in elementary school when they came out.
*1981 borns were already in high school when Windows 95 came out, a release that changed technology forever.
*1981 borns might have been part of the grunge subculture, which lasted from around 1990/1991 to 1995/early 1996 and peaked in around 1993/1994. Using this reason will break the 18-year generation theory for sure though (because on a similar note, you could argue about 2002 borns being part of the hipster subculture, which lasted from around 2011/2012 to 2016/early 2017 and without a doubt peaked in 2015). This is where the 84-year saeculums and 21-year generations come to play.
*Most importantly to why they are still Gen X, they graduated high school before Y2K, unless they had a late birthday.
*Not necessarily important, but the "stereotypical Millennial" celebrities weren't really born until 1986 because that's when Amanda Bynes, the Olsen twins, and Lindsay Lohan were born. Most people will consider 1981 Gen X but everyone will consider 1986 Millennial.
Reply
#8
(08-06-2019, 02:19 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(08-06-2019, 11:57 AM)AspieMillennial Wrote: 1981 is late X. I don't accept the idea of cusps because I'm born outside the XY cusp yet have done many of the things in childhood and teens that pure Millennials supposedly have not done. Since it says I haven't done these things because I was born outside of the range it means the cusp is garbage. If I have experienced these things that "core Millennials" supposedly haven't then what makes me different from this supposed cusp range? I read an article on the cusp and experienced those very same things. This means the category is arbitrary and artificial.

All T4T categories are general, not all-inclusive. Many people experience life events that don't fit the mold of the time or be non-conforming to the defined archetype of their generation. That's not unusual. If that applied to all, or even most people in a generation, then you really would have a case for arbitrary behavior.

Except this is how it's used in the real world. In the real world a bunch of people like to shout and generalize about experiences or what you think or believe. It's used for the blame game most of all.
Reply
#9
(08-06-2019, 03:41 PM)Ghost Wrote:
(08-06-2019, 11:57 AM)AspieMillennial Wrote:
(08-06-2019, 10:56 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-05-2019, 07:47 PM)Ghost Wrote:
(08-05-2019, 03:05 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I hope the Pew dates fade away. Generations are not 15 years long. 2003 is correct; 2004 is OK. Homelanders is just a name thrown around on this forum; it has no other platform and will face away. It also implies that this generation is about dealing with the aftermath of 9-11. Gen Z seems like it's catching on. I called them that in my 1997 book.

When the term "Gen Z" is used, the 1981-1996 and 1982-2000 definitions are always the most common definitions for Millennials, even though most will probably agree that 1981 is an X year (I'm pretty sure everyone on here, myself included, thinks that 1981 is a Gen X birthyear).

Now regarding the Gen Z name - the only reason why it is named that is because Gen Xers are called Gen X and Millennials were at one point called Gen Y. It'll probably fade away overtime, but I don't doubt that it'll still start in either 1997 or 2000.

The latest birthyear I have seen lumped as being a "Millennial" though is 2006, which might surprise you.

I regard 1981 as a Gen X year, but it's on the cusp; I do accept the idea of cusps; it's just common sense. Nothing is so strictly bordered in the living world.

The most-common definitions and dating of the last millennial year are given by Pew Research, which is not a study of generational traits, but only demographics. It's like saying Boomers began in 1946 because that's when the baby boom started.

Gen Z will eventually be regarded as starting in 2003, at least among those who study generations and not demographics. And Gen Z will go all the way to 2024, because the 1T is not going to start until 2028 or 2029. Mr. Howe still says Gen Z starts in 2004, and we here should use that date or close to it, and not 1997 or 2000.

Gen Z is the name that has caught on so far. But if there's another name that comes along that describes them, and it catches on, the name could change. There's no such name yet, although people on T4T forums have speculated about it and offered names. That's always fun to do, but it doesn't mean that what we say here will catch on in the media zeitgeist. Mr. Howe adopted a name that someone here suggested, years ago now (Homelanders), but that name has not caught on because it doesn't fit. Since letters are used now for generations, as I suggested in my 1997 book, I suspect every generation will have a letter from now on, even if that's not the primary name. Not because I said so though, of course Smile

The next prophets, yet to be born, are already being called Generation Alpha, or the Alpha Wave Generation. I think that's a cool name.

1981 is late X. I don't accept the idea of cusps because I'm born outside the XY cusp yet have done many of the things in childhood and teens that pure Millennials supposedly have not done. Since it says I haven't done these things because I was born outside of the range it means the cusp is garbage. If I have experienced these things that "core Millennials" supposedly haven't then what makes me different from this supposed cusp range? I read an article on the cusp and experienced those very same things. This means the category is arbitrary and artificial.

I have a feeling that the reason why 1981 borns are occasionally called Millennials is because they apply to the "not at school when the Challenger exploded but were at school when Columbine happened" rule.

Despite applying to the rule, I still believe that they're late Gen X overall and have more in common with people born in 1976 than people born in 1986.
*1981 borns may still remember the Challenger explosion whereas 1986 borns (almost all of them) were born after it happened.
*1981 borns spent most of their elementary school years before the Berlin Wall fell.
*1981 borns were probably too old for Nicktoons despite still being in elementary school when they came out.
*1981 borns were already in high school when Windows 95 came out, a release that changed technology forever.
*1981 borns might have been part of the grunge subculture, which lasted from around 1990/1991 to 1995/early 1996 and peaked in around 1993/1994. Using this reason will break the 18-year generation theory for sure though (because on a similar note, you could argue about 2002 borns being part of the hipster subculture, which lasted from around 2011/2012 to 2016/early 2017 and without a doubt peaked in 2015). This is where the 84-year saeculums and 21-year generations come to play.
*Most importantly to why they are still Gen X, they graduated high school before Y2K, unless they had a late birthday.
*Not necessarily important, but the "stereotypical Millennial" celebrities weren't really born until 1986 because that's when Amanda Bynes, the Olsen twins, and Lindsay Lohan were born. Most people will consider 1981 Gen X but everyone will consider 1986 Millennial.

I agree. They remember the challenger explosion, they remember most of the 90s and had their childhood in the cultural 80s. They were also teens in the 90s and became adults before the 08 crash. They are firmly Gen X. However I still don't believe in the cusp. Why should someone born in 1990 who doesn't fit into what researchers say about Millennials get to be grouped with things not true of him yet the person born in 1984 gets to skate by because of the cusp category? If the person in 1990 should be stereotyped so should the person born in 1984. Cusps just allow a range to say "Don't stereotype us. Stereotype these other people!" I don't see the value in them. What makes 1982-1985 so special that they get to escape the scrutiny? I hear many of them running their mouth how they got to do things core Millennials didn't but what's the difference if someone born in 1990 grows up doing these things compared to some kid born in 1984? That's what I don't get. Why does the kid born in 1990 have to be told they didn't do these things in childhood yet the 1984 born gets to skate by?
Reply
#10
(08-06-2019, 06:05 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:
(08-06-2019, 03:41 PM)Ghost Wrote:
(08-06-2019, 11:57 AM)AspieMillennial Wrote:
(08-06-2019, 10:56 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-05-2019, 07:47 PM)Ghost Wrote: When the term "Gen Z" is used, the 1981-1996 and 1982-2000 definitions are always the most common definitions for Millennials, even though most will probably agree that 1981 is an X year (I'm pretty sure everyone on here, myself included, thinks that 1981 is a Gen X birthyear).

Now regarding the Gen Z name - the only reason why it is named that is because Gen Xers are called Gen X and Millennials were at one point called Gen Y. It'll probably fade away overtime, but I don't doubt that it'll still start in either 1997 or 2000.

The latest birthyear I have seen lumped as being a "Millennial" though is 2006, which might surprise you.

I regard 1981 as a Gen X year, but it's on the cusp; I do accept the idea of cusps; it's just common sense. Nothing is so strictly bordered in the living world.

The most-common definitions and dating of the last millennial year are given by Pew Research, which is not a study of generational traits, but only demographics. It's like saying Boomers began in 1946 because that's when the baby boom started.

Gen Z will eventually be regarded as starting in 2003, at least among those who study generations and not demographics. And Gen Z will go all the way to 2024, because the 1T is not going to start until 2028 or 2029. Mr. Howe still says Gen Z starts in 2004, and we here should use that date or close to it, and not 1997 or 2000.

Gen Z is the name that has caught on so far. But if there's another name that comes along that describes them, and it catches on, the name could change. There's no such name yet, although people on T4T forums have speculated about it and offered names. That's always fun to do, but it doesn't mean that what we say here will catch on in the media zeitgeist. Mr. Howe adopted a name that someone here suggested, years ago now (Homelanders), but that name has not caught on because it doesn't fit. Since letters are used now for generations, as I suggested in my 1997 book, I suspect every generation will have a letter from now on, even if that's not the primary name. Not because I said so though, of course Smile

The next prophets, yet to be born, are already being called Generation Alpha, or the Alpha Wave Generation. I think that's a cool name.

1981 is late X. I don't accept the idea of cusps because I'm born outside the XY cusp yet have done many of the things in childhood and teens that pure Millennials supposedly have not done. Since it says I haven't done these things because I was born outside of the range it means the cusp is garbage. If I have experienced these things that "core Millennials" supposedly haven't then what makes me different from this supposed cusp range? I read an article on the cusp and experienced those very same things. This means the category is arbitrary and artificial.

I have a feeling that the reason why 1981 borns are occasionally called Millennials is because they apply to the "not at school when the Challenger exploded but were at school when Columbine happened" rule.

Despite applying to the rule, I still believe that they're late Gen X overall and have more in common with people born in 1976 than people born in 1986.
*1981 borns may still remember the Challenger explosion whereas 1986 borns (almost all of them) were born after it happened.
*1981 borns spent most of their elementary school years before the Berlin Wall fell.
*1981 borns were probably too old for Nicktoons despite still being in elementary school when they came out.
*1981 borns were already in high school when Windows 95 came out, a release that changed technology forever.
*1981 borns might have been part of the grunge subculture, which lasted from around 1990/1991 to 1995/early 1996 and peaked in around 1993/1994. Using this reason will break the 18-year generation theory for sure though (because on a similar note, you could argue about 2002 borns being part of the hipster subculture, which lasted from around 2011/2012 to 2016/early 2017 and without a doubt peaked in 2015). This is where the 84-year saeculums and 21-year generations come to play.
*Most importantly to why they are still Gen X, they graduated high school before Y2K, unless they had a late birthday.
*Not necessarily important, but the "stereotypical Millennial" celebrities weren't really born until 1986 because that's when Amanda Bynes, the Olsen twins, and Lindsay Lohan were born. Most people will consider 1981 Gen X but everyone will consider 1986 Millennial.

I agree. They remember the challenger explosion, they remember most of the 90s and had their childhood in the cultural 80s. They were also teens in the 90s and became adults before the 08 crash. They are firmly Gen X. However I still don't believe in the cusp. Why should someone born in 1990 who doesn't fit into what researchers say about Millennials get to be grouped with things not true of him yet the person born in 1984 gets to skate by because of the cusp category? If the person in 1990 should be stereotyped so should the person born in 1984. Cusps just allow a range to say "Don't stereotype us. Stereotype these other people!" I don't see the value in them. What makes 1982-1985 so special that they get to escape the scrutiny? I hear many of them running their mouth how they got to do things core Millennials didn't but what's the difference if someone born in 1990 grows up doing these things compared to some kid born in 1984? That's what I don't get. Why does the kid born in 1990 have to be told they didn't do these things in childhood yet the 1984 born gets to skate by?

The whole thing is a double standard. Someone born between 1982 and 1985 can easily say that he/she doesn't feel like a Millennial without anyone questioning him/her, but someone born in 2001 will get flamed a lot if he/she says that he/she doesn't feel like a Gen Z.

I have a feeling that the reasons why even people born in 1985 can get away with not wanting to be a Millennial is because they were already in high school when Y2K happened, spent most of their high school years before 9/11, graduated high school before Millennium-era culture completely fizzled out sometime in the summer of 2003, and were already out of college before the Recession. They are also the last people that are seen as "Xennials" according to various sources.

The cultural/political 80's were something like Late 1980-Mid 1991 (give or take a year). You could argue about 'having a childhood in the cultural 80's" for 1982 and possibly even 1983, but not really so much for 1984 and 1985 because they would spend most of their elementary school years after the "end of the cultural/political 80's".
Reply
#11
Why is Parkland considered so much more important than Columbine?
Reply
#12
(08-14-2019, 09:04 AM)Hintergrund Wrote: Why is Parkland considered so much more important than Columbine?

Simple: the Parkland students stood-up and made it important.  That's not to say that Columbine wasn't important, but it was considered an outlier then, and only time has shown that I was actually a precursor.  What has shocked me is how \little attention has been focused on Newtown.  That was more than tragic; it was truly abhorrent.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#13
(08-14-2019, 09:04 AM)Hintergrund Wrote: Why is Parkland considered so much more important than Columbine?

I never said that.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Silent Generation Sub Forum sbarrera 7 120 Yesterday, 02:05 PM
Last Post: sbarrera
  Generation is a social construct and doesn't tell all experiences AspieMillennial 3 70 08-14-2019, 08:30 AM
Last Post: Hintergrund
  The "Bad Apples" of each generation Ghost 50 6,270 08-10-2019, 05:20 AM
Last Post: Ghost
  Name people who were anomalies for their generation disasterzone 33 5,822 08-08-2019, 01:44 PM
Last Post: Ghost
  Choosing your generation? Bill the Piper 49 1,646 07-13-2019, 08:44 PM
Last Post: Warren Dew
  Controlling Cohort in Each Generation jleagans 17 2,047 02-06-2019, 10:38 AM
Last Post: Hintergrund
  A personal anecdote about the Silent generation sbarrera 2 430 12-19-2018, 07:37 AM
Last Post: sbarrera
  What made the GI generation so trusting of authority? disasterzone 11 4,308 07-29-2017, 10:11 PM
Last Post: gabrielle
  The Silent Generation and comedy pbrower2a 3 2,000 04-10-2017, 10:16 PM
Last Post: Eric the Green
Sad The last American member of the Lost Generation has died. Odin 4 2,352 11-23-2016, 04:52 AM
Last Post: Galen

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)