Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
I’m a millennial?
#1
Here comes the old debate of whether people born around the turn of the millennium are millennials or “zoomers”. I’m currently 19, (born 2001) and although S&H suggest that I should be a millennial, it doesn’t feel right that I’m in the same generation as 39 year olds. Even worse, I cannot imagine current 16 year olds (born in 2004) to be in the same generation either. At the same time, I don’t believe that the 3T ended until perhaps 2017 or even has just ended this year. Does anyone here share this cognitive dissonance?
Reply
#2
(07-30-2020, 07:34 PM)RadianMay Wrote: Here comes the old debate of whether people born around the turn of the millennium are millennials or “zoomers”. I’m currently 19, (born 2001) and although S&H suggest that I should be a millennial, it doesn’t feel right that I’m in the same generation as 39 year olds. Even worse, I cannot imagine current 16 year olds (born in 2004) to be in the same generation either. At the same time, I don’t believe that the 3T ended until perhaps 2017 or even has just ended this year. Does anyone here share this cognitive dissonance?

Yeah sure. We Jonesers get that a lot as well. Nature hates straight lines.
---Value Added Cool
Reply
#3
(07-30-2020, 07:53 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote:
(07-30-2020, 07:34 PM)RadianMay Wrote: Here comes the old debate of whether people born around the turn of the millennium are millennials or “zoomers”. I’m currently 19, (born 2001) and although S&H suggest that I should be a millennial, it doesn’t feel right that I’m in the same generation as 39 year olds. Even worse, I cannot imagine current 16 year olds (born in 2004) to be in the same generation either. At the same time, I don’t believe that the 3T ended until perhaps 2017 or even has just ended this year. Does anyone here share this cognitive dissonance?

Yeah sure. We Jonesers get that a lot as well. Nature hates straight lines.


mikebert does. I myself do not. But I agree with Ragnarok too.

I prefer the ideas of cusps (narrowly defined as a year or two) and sub-generations (within generations).
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#4
(07-31-2020, 04:43 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: mikebert does. I myself do not. But I agree with Ragnarok too.

I prefer the ideas of cusps (narrowly defined as a year or two) and sub-generations (within generations).

Essentially zoomers are a sub-generation of millennials?

That could support the my suspicion that the 3T may have ended later than previously thought.
Reply
#5
(08-01-2020, 08:35 AM)RadianMay Wrote:
(07-31-2020, 04:43 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: mikebert does. I myself do not. But I agree with Ragnarok too.

I prefer the ideas of cusps (narrowly defined as a year or two) and sub-generations (within generations).

Essentially zoomers are a sub-generation of millennials?

That could support the my suspicion that the 3T may have ended later than previously thought.

No it would not do that. But it would support the idea that late millennials 1996-2003/4 are a bit different from earlier ones.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#6
(07-30-2020, 07:34 PM)RadianMay Wrote: Here comes the old debate of whether people born around the turn of the millennium are millennials or “zoomers”. I’m currently 19, (born 2001) and although S&H suggest that I should be a millennial, it doesn’t feel right that I’m in the same generation as 39 year olds. Even worse, I cannot imagine current 16 year olds (born in 2004) to be in the same generation either. At the same time, I don’t believe that the 3T ended until perhaps 2017 or even has just ended this year. Does anyone here share this cognitive dissonance?

I agree: People 22/23 and under today are definitely *not* Millenials, they are Zoomers.

In hindsight, people born in the late 70s through to about 1990 share a common childhood, and seem to be very similar.

From about 1990 on, there is a different flavor of millenial. 

People born from 1997 on onwards are definitely a different generation.

Maybe a good updated generation list looks something like this:

Boomer 1945-1960
X 1961-1976
Millenial 1977-1992
Zoomer 1993-2009
Reply
#7
(08-03-2020, 03:03 PM)2Legit2Quit Wrote:
(07-30-2020, 07:34 PM)RadianMay Wrote: Here comes the old debate of whether people born around the turn of the millennium are millennials or “zoomers”. I’m currently 19, (born 2001) and although S&H suggest that I should be a millennial, it doesn’t feel right that I’m in the same generation as 39 year olds. Even worse, I cannot imagine current 16 year olds (born in 2004) to be in the same generation either. At the same time, I don’t believe that the 3T ended until perhaps 2017 or even has just ended this year. Does anyone here share this cognitive dissonance?

I agree: People 22/23 and under today are definitely *not* Millenials, they are Zoomers.

In hindsight, people born in the late 70s through to about 1990 share a common childhood, and seem to be very similar.

From about 1990 on, there is a different flavor of millenial. 

People born from 1997 on onwards are definitely a different generation.

Maybe a good updated generation list looks something like this:

Boomer 1945-1960
X 1961-1976
Millenial 1977-1992
Zoomer 1993-2009

Generation means different things to different people, and the marker police have really been out in force since technology kicked-in in earnest.  In a way, I understand this, because the entire concept of "shared social experience" seems to have a decreasing shelf life as time passes.  How we all interact is constantly in flux -- especially now that the social environment is often dictated by what aps we use and how we use them.  OK, but does that really create generational boundaries or merely a series of social boundaries separate from the less frenetic economic, political and familial boundaries that constitute life?
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#8
(08-03-2020, 05:14 PM)David Horn Wrote: Generation means different things to different people, and the marker police have really been out in force since technology kicked-in in earnest.  In a way, I understand this, because the entire concept of "shared social experience" seems to have a decreasing shelf life as time passes.  How we all interact is constantly in flux -- especially now that the social environment is often dictated by what aps we use and how we use them.  OK, but does that really create generational boundaries or merely a series of social boundaries separate from the less frenetic economic, political and familial boundaries that constitute life?

If that is the case, wouldn’t that discredit the whole generational theory?
Another possibility is that generational differences only really crystallise after the crisis event, because that is the primary thing that causes people of different ages to experience differently and shape (or traumatise) them for life.

Actually it’s hard to qualify what actually causes people to think that they’re part of a generation, such as the separation between Millennials and Zoomers. Thinking about it more, the differences that come to mind to me between the two generations are due to age alone, not necessarily due to differing generational environments and upbringing.

It’s quite clear that if we use the classical birth years of millennials and “zoomers”, the tail end of the millennial generation (which I am part of) is still in late childhood, while the rest of the millennial are in varying ages of early adulthood, all the way up to mid life. Perhaps it’s hard to tell what the younger millennials will be like later, and we might be more similar to older millennials later.
Reply
#9
(08-03-2020, 08:20 PM)RadianMay Wrote:
(08-03-2020, 05:14 PM)David Horn Wrote: Generation means different things to different people, and the marker police have really been out in force since technology kicked-in in earnest.  In a way, I understand this, because the entire concept of "shared social experience" seems to have a decreasing shelf life as time passes.  How we all interact is constantly in flux -- especially now that the social environment is often dictated by what aps we use and how we use them.  OK, but does that really create generational boundaries or merely a series of social boundaries separate from the less frenetic economic, political and familial boundaries that constitute life?

If that is the case, wouldn’t that discredit the whole generational theory?
Another possibility is that generational differences only really crystallise after the crisis event, because that is the primary thing that causes people of different ages to experience differently and shape (or traumatise) them for life.

Actually it’s hard to qualify what actually causes people to think that they’re part of a generation, such as the separation between Millennials and Zoomers. Thinking about it more, the differences that come to mind to me between the two generations are due to age alone, not necessarily due to differing generational environments and upbringing.

It’s quite clear that if we use the classical birth years of millennials and “zoomers”, the tail end of the millennial generation (which I am part of) is still in late childhood, while the rest of the millennial are in varying ages of early adulthood, all the way up to mid life. Perhaps it’s hard to tell what the younger millennials will be like later, and we might be more similar to older millennials later.

The Gen Z designation that has been widely adopted comes from Pew Research, and indeed it is just a convenient dating tool based only on an age group that they chose. Meanwhile, Millennials, including their late cohorts grouped by Pew as Gen Z or Zoomers, are behaving like civics, just as the authors predicted, and social media involvement is the best example of that networking tendency of civics. And so is their more-liberal outlook on the need for collective institutional power, a necessary corrective to the neo-liberal Reaganomics they grew up in. Their networks may have a lot of diversity and separation from each other, but the fact that they are all so fully attached to social networks is the main trend, and a lot of the social networks overlap. Things on these networks can migrate to other platforms easily.

Not that very much of it gets here. This forum uses tech that is cumbersome (and not well suited to smart phones) and thus is probably more well-adapted to older generations. But that probably makes it somewhat better for actual communication, maybe. Even if not highly populated by millennials.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#10
(08-03-2020, 08:20 PM)RadianMay Wrote:
(08-03-2020, 05:14 PM)David Horn Wrote: Generation means different things to different people, and the marker police have really been out in force since technology kicked-in in earnest.  In a way, I understand this, because the entire concept of "shared social experience" seems to have a decreasing shelf life as time passes.  How we all interact is constantly in flux -- especially now that the social environment is often dictated by what aps we use and how we use them.  OK, but does that really create generational boundaries or merely a series of social boundaries separate from the less frenetic economic, political and familial boundaries that constitute life?

If that is the case, wouldn’t that discredit the whole generational theory?

Another possibility is that generational differences only really crystallise after the crisis event, because that is the primary thing that causes people of different ages to experience differently and shape (or traumatise) them for life.

Actually it’s hard to qualify what actually causes people to think that they’re part of a generation, such as the separation between Millennials and Zoomers. Thinking about it more, the differences that come to mind to me between the two generations are due to age alone, not necessarily due to differing generational environments and upbringing.

It’s quite clear that if we use the classical birth years of millennials and “zoomers”, the tail end of the millennial generation (which I am part of) is still in late childhood, while the rest of the millennial are in varying ages of early adulthood, all the way up to mid life. Perhaps it’s hard to tell what the younger millennials will be like later, and we might be more similar to older millennials later.

All good points that need to be tested, and the test is running as we speak.  Both Bob Butler and I share a distrust of using older saeculae too strictly as guides to this one because the Information Age is unprecedented.  That said, we shouldn't ignore them entirely either.  You're part of the solution, whatever it will be -- and rightly so. You'll live your life in the new reality.  We older folks will observe for a while and move on.  So this belongs to you.  Do what you think is best, and take advice with the appropriate skepticism of one with more skin in the game.  Your generation(s) will succeed or not on your efforts.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The mystery of Millennial politics Dan '82 66 27,473 03-10-2020, 02:46 PM
Last Post: Eric the Green
  So why aren't Millennial adults spending enough? pbrower2a 2 1,054 12-02-2018, 02:17 AM
Last Post: pbrower2a
Video The Millennial Counter Argument - Millennials and their videos debunking everything sbarrera 9 3,474 10-12-2018, 06:36 AM
Last Post: sbarrera
  No more Millennial children Craig '84 20 6,960 09-28-2018, 06:23 AM
Last Post: Tuss
  AB/DL - The Millennial Fetish? Lemanic 2 4,200 04-25-2017, 01:22 PM
Last Post: beechnut79
  Harvard Business Review: Are U.S. Millennial Men Just as Sexist as Their Dads? Odin 10 4,830 07-19-2016, 11:30 AM
Last Post: MillsT_98
  Diversity defines the millennial generation Dan '82 0 1,331 07-02-2016, 11:01 AM
Last Post: Dan '82

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)