Just Talkin' 'bout my Generation

[Robotengineer]

Some of you may have noticed a recent trend in the media towards calling my generation (currently in their teens or early twenties) 'Generation Z'. I find this label offensive and ridiculous. 

First, what is the 'Z' for? Zombie? Or just some stupid letter that follows X and Y? I object to being just another letter generation; an epilogue to the Baby Boomers. 

Second, we are the real millennials. According to some generational parameters, the earliest millennials are born way back in 1981, meaning that they would be legal adults by the time the new millennium actually came. My generation has grown up in the 21st century, with its technology and its culture (at least thus far). Going by the old millennial definition, a 'millennial' might actually recognize type cassettes and VCR's, late 20th century technologies, certainly not 21st century technologies. Whereas we, the real millennials, can scarcely remember dial up and CD's. We will have the new Star Wars trilogy, while the first trilogy wasn't even completed by the time some of the old millennials were born. 

So, let's say no to Z and retake our rightful title as the millennial generation.

 

 

[StrandedonEarth]

All I can say is that "You young whippersnappers better stay offa my grass!!!"

i have no idea what generation I'm supposed to be. My mom was on the leading edge of the boomers, so I guess I'm genX although I never felt that applied to me either

[Slam_Jones]

Well I rarely (if ever) hear the word 'millenials' associated with anything good.  Usually it's Boomers calling them lazy and such... not sure why you'd prefer that!   'Z,' on the other hand, is just another letter that comes after X and Y.  You can assign any meaning you want to it, but personally I don't think it really matters.

I was born in '89.  No idea what generation I'm 'supposed' to be, but as a general rule, I don't like arbitrary labels like that anyway.  Just causes feuds and problems as far as I've ever seen.

Truthfully, anything you can use to de-humanize someone (or a group of someones) should be avoided really.  That's why there is controversy regarding face masks on soldiers in combat... it removes the human element in a way.  For example: ever notice how 99% of the bad guys in video games have their faces covered?  It's much easier to hurt/kill something that doesn't have human features (even if they're only covered by a thin piece of cloth).  And if they don't have their faces covered, they always give you some reason to hate them, right?  A normal person won't want to kill another person for no reason: they have to be given a reason.  They're this, or that, or they told me you guys look like dorks!  In my opinion, it all comes down to tribalism:  "our group is better than your group, just because!"  If you can reduce the people in the other 'tribe' to sub-human status, it's just that much easier to abuse them.

But then, that's just my opinion.

Edited April 11, 2016 by Slam_Jones

[HebaruSan]

I wish you good luck in your quest to convince the popular media to make sense.

X and Y were no better, frankly. X seems to have originated as a variable name symbolizing their unknown potential (?), and Y simply came after X. Of course if you name something early on, its potential will be unknown! Any generation could have been called X by that logic. (For what it's worth, I tend to think of "Gen X" as people who were young adults in the early 1990s, but apparently that's not the official definition.) "Generation Y" made it obvious they weren't really trying to do anything meaningful with these names and groupings, so I stopped paying attention at that point.

The only cohort resembling a coherent "generation" is the boomers, since all their dads were away fighting in The War and came back to their moms around the same time; their sheer numbers produced a strong sense of belonging among themselves and alienation from older people (see songs like the one you referenced in the thread title). I wonder if we would even be using the word "generation" and debating its span if not for the baby boom. The rest of us have to be defined and divided up arbitrarily.

[tater]

Arbitrary labels are arbitrary.

[Tex]

I personally tend not care one way or another about being labeled as anything because I don't really identify with my own generation. Sure, calculators and Google is nice, but many many things were better in the old days.

[Robotengineer]

25 minutes ago, Slam_Jones said:

Well I rarely (if ever) hear the word 'millenials' associated with anything good.  Usually it's Boomers calling them lazy and such... not sure why you'd prefer that!   'Z,' on the other hand, is just another letter that comes after X and Y.  You can assign any meaning you want to it, but personally I don't think it really matters.

I was born in '89.  No idea what generation I'm 'supposed' to be, but as a general rule, I don't like arbitrary labels like that anyway.  Just causes feuds and problems as far as I've ever seen.

Truthfully, anything you can use to de-humanize someone (or a group of someones) should be avoided really.  That's why there is controversy regarding face masks on soldiers in combat... it removes the human element in a way.  For example: ever notice how 99% of the bad guys in video games have their faces covered?  It's much easier to hurt/kill something that doesn't have human features (even if they're only covered by a thin piece of cloth).  And if they don't have their faces covered, they always give you some reason to hate them, right?  A normal person won't want to kill another person for no reason: they have to be given a reason.  They're this, or that, or they told me you guys look like dorks!  In my opinion, it all comes down to tribalism:  "our group is better than your group, just because!"  If you can reduce the people in the other 'tribe' to sub-human status, it's just that much easier to abuse them.

But then, that's just my opinion.

I rarely hear the Boomers associated with anything good, unless retirement is something good. (Perhaps that is a broader sign that generational terms are primarily used in the negative, though the recent press about Gen Z seems to be mostly positive or observant). 'Z' just sounds too plain, IMO. I agree with your statement on de-humanizing groups. Even iGeneration sounds better than Generation Z. There is also the problem of what to call the next generation if we use Z... Generation #? 

3 minutes ago, HebaruSan said:

I wish you good luck in your quest to convince the popular media to make sense.

X and Y were no better, frankly. X seems to have originated as a variable name symbolizing their unknown potential (?), and Y simply came after X. Of course if you name something early on, its potential will be unknown! Any generation could have been called X by that logic. (For what it's worth, I tend to think of "Gen X" as people who were young adults in the early 1990s, but apparently that's not the official definition.) "Generation Y" made it obvious they weren't really trying to do anything meaningful with these names and groupings, so I stopped paying attention at that point.

The only cohort resembling a coherent "generation" is the boomers, since all their dads were away fighting in The War and came back to their moms around the same time; their sheer numbers produced a strong sense of belonging among themselves and alienation from older people (see songs like the one you referenced in the thread title). I wonder if we would even be using the word "generation" and debating its span if not for the baby boom. The rest of us have to be defined and divided up arbitrarily.

What's funny is that the demographers stretch the Baby Boom from 1946 (a reasonable post war time period) to 1964, 18 years later! I just don't get the 20 year time periods. 

6 minutes ago, tater said:

Arbitrary labels are arbitrary.

But we can fight them! 

 

I also don't like the way marketers and corporations try to cater to my generation (https://hbr.org/2015/05/how-to-market-to-the-igeneration), especially when the activities they identify don't apply to me (I don't use social media, I use an ad blocker, and don't watch youtube often). 

[HebaruSan]

5 minutes ago, Robotengineer said:

I rarely hear the Boomers associated with anything good, unless retirement is something good.

When they were the young generation, they were known for sex, drugs, and rock 'n' roll. They were seen as rebellious and politically subversive until they got old enough to start running the government.

5 minutes ago, Robotengineer said:

There is also the problem of what to call the next generation if we use Z... Generation #? 

I'm hoping this problem makes them give up the whole thing. Or maybe they'll go into Greek letters. Do they still use decade names now that convenient ones like "eighties" and "nineties" are off the table?

5 minutes ago, Robotengineer said:

What's funny is that the demographers stretch the Baby Boom from 1946 (a reasonable post war time period) to 1964, 18 years later! I just don't get the 20 year time periods. 

Yeah, 1966-1984 is similarly ridiculous. On the one hand, someone who watched the last Moon landing on TV at age 6, on the other hand someone who was about that age when 'grunge' started. But the shorter the spans get, the more of them you have.

5 minutes ago, Robotengineer said:

I also don't like the way marketers and corporations try to cater to my generation (https://hbr.org/2015/05/how-to-market-to-the-igeneration),

Hey, at least they don't think your group is obsessed with flannel and torn jeans.

5 minutes ago, Robotengineer said:

especially when the activities they identify don't apply to me (I don't use social media, I use an ad blocker, and don't watch youtube often). 

Well, that's a given. They're not trying to identify trends that apply to literally each and every member of the group. They're trying to identify strategies that will work overall when applied to that group.

[worir4]

How about all KSP players get a special label of generation K!

 

[cubinator]

Something is trending in the media?

<me> 'The Media'? Isn't that that place where millions of people obsess over the daily lives and personal issues of a few hundred or so celebrities? Hm. Sounds like an awful place. Hey, did you know the future started on Friday?

Edited April 12, 2016 by cubinator
There's a reason I want to be the *second* person on Mars.

[monstah]

1 hour ago, Slam_Jones said:

I was born in '89.  No idea what generation I'm 'supposed' to be, but as a general rule, I don't like arbitrary labels like that anyway.  Just causes feuds and problems as far as I've ever seen.

Generation Y, same as me. I agree, tho, it's rather stupid. I got no religion, no soccer team, no political affiliation. If it were up to me, I'd have no nationality and family name, either. If I'm better or worse than anyone else, it's because of what I do, what I know, the choices I made, and not because I had the "privilege" of being born in said place/time/social stratum/whatever.

[Bill Phil]

The only real generation is the baby boomers. There's a clear population spike there, and they're going to start dying soon (increasing the death rate quite a bit).

But generalizing millions of people (a generation) is idiotic. Yu can't generalize that many people into one group. We should group others and ourselves based on other aspects. The only useful application is defining the year of school you're in.

[Nuke]

it sounds better than millennial (which is generation y). according to the sources i can find i fall at the end of generation x, born a year too early to be considered a gen y. but x ran 20 years and saw hippies and discoers, and is not really a culture i identify with. i really dont identify with the millennials either. so i dont think the whole way we define a generation is not very representative of the people that it encompasses. a single decade is enough to result in vastly different cultural identity (did you listen to metal or grunge), so 20 year generation are not granular enough to differentiate cultural identity.

one thing that is changing is that we are becoming more culturally diverse. the number of sub groups is increasing at a much higher rate, and so these generation blocks are even less meaningfull than they were way back in the 50s.

Edited April 12, 2016 by Nuke

[StrandedonEarth]

On 4/11/2016 at 0:13 PM, Robotengineer said:

I object to being just another letter generation

People trying to put you d-down?
Just because you get around?
Things they do look awful c-c-cold
Hope you die before you get old ?

 

[Dispatcher]

I'm all for the Pi generation.

[Stargate525]

On 4/11/2016 at 3:43 PM, Robotengineer said:

What's funny is that the demographers stretch the Baby Boom from 1946 (a reasonable post war time period) to 1964, 18 years later! I just don't get the 20 year time periods.

They're twenty years long because that's the length of time for a person to go from birth to child-rearing age. With a few exceptions, they're arranged so that a parent and child are in subsequent generations. How your parents were raised affects how YOU are raised.

The idea that a generation should be shorter is silly, and an outcropping of the idea that just because tech generations are short that everything else should be. Generation borders are fuzzy, yes, but the political and social landscape doesn't change quickly enough for anything shorter without major upheaval events. That's why the boomers are a static generation; kids born to WWII vets after the peace. It's also why it lasts 18 years (18y.o. veteran at the tail end of the generation is 36, at the twilight of their childbearing years in most cases).

Honestly, the millenial generation should be set ending at September 1998; anyone with memories of a pre 9/11 world and a society without a fetishistic devotion to 'national security.'

Edited April 13, 2016 by Stargate525

[lajoswinkler]

Red knew the proper name.

Edited April 13, 2016 by lajoswinkler

[Guest]

On 4/11/2016 at 0:13 PM, Robotengineer said:

So, let's say no to Z and retake our rightful title as the millennial generation.

Strauss-Howe has you as a proper Millennial, if I'm guessing your age right.  They also put my daughter into a "Homeland Generation", which kind of makes me mad because I am fairly anti-nationalist (but that is apparently a trait of my own generation!) but which also makes sense as I watch nationalist sentiment rise around the globe.  Or maybe that's just a trick of the light?  vOv

Edited April 13, 2016 by regex

[Robotengineer]

1 hour ago, regex said:

Strauss-Howe has you as a proper Millennial, if I'm guessing your age right.  They also put my daughter into a "Homeland Generation", which kind of makes me mad because I am fairly anti-nationalist (but that is apparently a trait of my own generation!) but which also makes sense as I watch nationalist sentiment rise around the globe.  Or maybe that's just a trick of the light?  vOv

You are. But by that marker the Gen Z that the media talks about as being teens and twenty somethings should also be millennials. If any generation deserves a nationalist name it would probably be the millennials born in the 80's that volunteered after 9/11. The Gen Z wiki page says that Howe didn't really like the Homeland Generation name and that the poll that chose it was conducted in 2005, not to long after 9/11 and during the Iraq war. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Z#Terminology)

[Guest]

26 minutes ago, Robotengineer said:

You are. But by that marker the Gen Z that the media talks about as being teens and twenty somethings should also be millennials. If any generation deserves a nationalist name it would probably be the millennials born in the 80's that volunteered after 9/11. The Gen Z wiki page says that Howe didn't really like the Homeland Generation name and that the poll that chose it was conducted in 2005, not to long after 9/11 and during the Iraq war. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Z#Terminology)

Yeah, the "media" is just being sensational.  I can't possibly see how you'd make the generational "leap" from Gen X to Gen Z while skipping "Y" (or treating it as a five year span), unless you're trying to cash in on the zombie popularity nowadays?

[monstah]

3 hours ago, regex said:

I am fairly anti-nationalist (but that is apparently a trait of my own generation!) 

Heh. Reminds me of a friend who told me my 'not believing in the horoscope is *so* sagittarius'. Ech.

9 hours ago, lajoswinkler said:

Red knew the proper name.

Red knew friggin' EVERYTHING.

[Vanamonde]

The years of the baby boom are not an arbitrary period, and it's not to do with the length of a generation. More-than-usual numbers of children were born during those years.