Baby Boomers vs. Generation X vs. Millennials

dressed cool, slacked

sold out, man

Hm

https://uproxx.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/k-bigpic.jpg

I feel like there is a split between older and younger millennials. Like a dramatic rapid shift in what it means to be a 21 year old from 2010 to now.

On another thread ryan said that everything has become political now, which feels right. Aesthetics/taste seems way more marginal in how people position themselves in the culture now. Maybe. Just spitballing.

millennials be spitballing

Old millennials.

Young millennials have better sense than that.

I'm "Generation XY Cusp" so I proudly embody the worst characteristics of both generations.

slacker narcissist

nice

On another thread ryan said that everything has become political now, which feels right. Aesthetics/taste seems way more marginal in how people position themselves in the culture now. Maybe. Just spitballing.

― Treeship, Saturday, June 3, 2017

I'm under this impression as well, though I obviously have no way of proving it empirically. Although aesthetics is never devoid of politics, the two aren't one and the same. Simply glossing over the former as though it were mere window dressing is an existential mistake.

The archetypal "hipster" would either ironically re-appropriate mass culture or reject it in favor of some underground "alternative" culture. In both cases, the goal was to carve a space for oneself outside the mainstream, which is political definitely but quietist as well.

Nowadays the zeitgeist is so loud people don't even try to pretend they can avoid it.

tbh you would be amazed how good parents with young kids are at avoiding a lot of the zeitgeist that doesn't involve either tv that happens after their kids go to bed or headlines that are on whatever news site they check at work over lunch

I don't meet enough gen'xers that aren't reasonably pissed off by their day jobs. Most either cynical or apathetic about their work.

I'm "Generation XY Cusp" so I proudly embody the worst characteristics of both generations.

you own your own business, right? and stick around Texas despite itself. you really don't - you are responsible, determined and least of all "all about me" - I'm just saying it's demonstrable even if you leave out the self-awareness which is an instant DQ for anybody trying to belong to any stereotype

I embody 2009

I work for a big evil corp and actually enjoy my job too often

https://i.imgur.com/Req588D.jpg

seems accurate

Eh, fair point. Whatever.

https://i.imgur.com/dw2ywqs.jpg

Boomers: actual phone calls
Xers: email threads
millennials: slack
gen z: discord

Folks... https://t.co/WU9JgfGwxo pic.twitter.com/pRAHrFIdBc

— Osita Nwanevu (@OsitaNwanevu) September 4, 2018

https://i.imgur.com/buvDZ5Z.jpg

* really good use of that King Crimson song

* i was at a house show over the weekend and this guy started talking about his taste in house music and how he liked old school stuff from when his parents were his age -- his parents were young enough to be my high school classmates.

which got me thinking -- were baby boomers the first generation that really tried to socially/culturally integrate with younger generations -- or is it just another boomer myth? Like the stereotype of the aging gen-x hipster just seems like an update of the "weird old guy" at punk shows in the 90s?

The weird old person has been hanging around at the the young people since ancient Mesopotamia, I’d guess

Wait what xp

were baby boomers the first generation that really tried to socially/culturally integrate with younger generations

there's also the flipside of that which is that so many of the touchstones of the boomer generation never went away - you can still go and see the rolling stones in concert, paul mccartney's still pumping out albums, music and film from the late sixties and early seventies are still forever being referenced in new art etc

speaking of younger generations, a couple of friends and I were wondering: were millennials the first generation to think (collectively, as much as a "generation" can think or exist really) the generation after them was unambiguously better in any single way? given that every single "the first generation to" complaint/theory is wrong, the answer has to be no, right?

Are men’s sperm counts really dropping that dramatically with no explanation? That is definitely a symptom of more things going wrong in public health

Btw i don’t think generation Z is better than me and ky fellow millennials.

BPA and phthalates in plastics, according to the article

there's also the flipside of that which is that so many of the touchstones of the boomer generation never went away - you can still go and see the rolling stones in concert, paul mccartney's still pumping out albums, music and film from the late sixties and early seventies are still forever being referenced in new art etc

and boy did they

i feel the boomers should be split into two generations. my parents were born in the early sixties and i don't associate them with any of that stuff.

they're not big pop culture people in any case, but if anything the 80s and 90s were their era. when they were my age, it was already the early 90s.

your parents are generation x

or possibly "generation jones"

Technically they are boomers, as the cut off is 64. Mt mom was the youngest of seven so she does seem knowledgeable about the whole “boomer experience,” although she somewhat despises that era (vietnam/counterculture) which she says “destroyed her family.”

yeah boomers need a subgeneration because it's demographically viable to say there was this continuous baby boom through the mid 60s but you end up with a twenty-year span for the "generation," such that first-round boomers could have kids that would also qualify as baby boomers. and then culturally, yeah, there's very little affinity between ppl who graduated high school in 1967 and in 1985 or what have you.

hence the "generation jones" concept

yeah boomers need a subgeneration because it's demographically viable to say there was this continuous baby boom through the mid 60s but you end up with a twenty-year span for the "generation,"

I feel like the fact that people feel the need to subdivide these 'generations' to spans far shorter than actual human generations points to a flaw in the original theory.

otm. so so tired of people talking about generation whatever.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/05/sally-rooney-millennials-normal-people

I feel this could have been written about so many books of the last 40 years. "[...] her characters use irony to dilute their existential anxiety about being over-educated and aimless in a time when the very world order seems up in the air."

Sund4r, my point is just that if a parent and child can belong to the same "generation" then either that generation has been too widely drawn or we should stop talking about "generations." i agree with the latter in principle but it can be a nice pointless diversion and if one doesn't want to engage in it one can just avoid this thread, idk.

I do want to engage in it!: I'm pointing out that I think the theory is deeply flawed.

The thread started out mocking generational theory don’f forget 🌈⭐️

Either you have to draw the generations widely enough that a parent and child can be part of the same generation or you have to draw them so narrowly that their spans have nothing to do with generations in the biological sense.

(That's not the only flaw, though.)

But the theory has nothing to do with biology and everything to do with culture, I assume