On 2002-04-13 23:05, Terminator X wrote:
The new adaptives started getting born in 1999 at earliest, 2001 at latest.
I just know.

1999 was when I noticed that babies out in strollers were shrouded -- with blankets in the winter time and with netting in the summer. They didn't get to see the light of day or feel the sun shine on their face. Sounds pretty "smothered" to me. :sad:

I realize that skin cancer and whatnot is a valid concern. Any parents of "shrouded babies" or babies born in 1999 or later (Neisha?) care to comment?

On 2002-04-13 23:05, Terminator X wrote:
The new adaptives started getting born in 1999 at earliest, 2001 at latest.
I just know.

For the moment, I tend to go with 2001 as the first birth-year for the Homeland Generation (New Adaptive).

In my life I have been exposed to many people of many ages.
I didn't know the Lost/GI divide well enough to comment, but I would guess that Hemingway and Bob Hope weren't in the same "generation."
As for GI's, I'd guess that Bob Dole and Allen Ginsberg weren't in the same generation.
I know the Silent/Boom divide well.
I'd say 1942/43 is the leading edge of the Boom.
My 1940 born teacher was an expert on Doo Wop music, a real 50s guy. He had his fun in the 60s and 70s, but he was Silent true and true. Actually used to wear black everyday, all the time. He said 1968 was the worst year he's ever seen in America.
My 1943 born professor (he said he was 25 in '68) is a Boomer to the core.
The end of the Boom is 1959-60.
From relatives, entertainment personalities, and the sheer historical facts that seems the right end.
I see people born in the early 60s as having more in common with me than kids only a few years younger.
The X/Mil divide is 80-81/81-82.
In high school several of my friends identified those in the Class of 2000 as just being weird and different. That was a fairly obvious divide to pick out.
The kids that I have come in contact with that are younger have the same basic quality to them. Those are the best boundaries I can delineate with my perception.

That would be something like
GI 1901/2-1923/24 23 yrs.
Silent 1924/25-1941/42 18 yrs.
Boom 1942/43-1959/60 18 yrs.
X 1960/61-1980/81 21 yrs.
Mill 1981/82-1999/2000 19 yrs.
....................................
It makes sense.
Remember if you are giving into the theory that the begining of a gen isn't necessarily like the end of a gen.
It changes through out, but I think the break is made when a gen directly distinguishes itself from another and no longer is sucked in by it, but put into another group.
For example, late Boomers were sucked into Boom culture in the late 70s, yet early Xers were not, they were treated differently.
Late Xers have also been sucked into Xer culture and treated similarly, while Millies have been given their own designated culture, even if they don't like it (probably like Boomers didn't like Fabian, Frankie Avalon, or any of the late-Silent stars that were similarly peddled to their youth the way NSYNC is peddled now.)

In looking at a White House bio page at work, it was pretty obvious to me that Dick and Lynne Cheney (both born 1941) are Silents and George and Laura Bush (both born 1946) are Boomers.
Id say the Cheney offspring are all Xers (correct?) and the Bush offspring are Millies
(although a little odd).

Oops, Jenny, I posted this on the Homelander Generation thread by accident:

I'm not sure about birthyears, but I do know that I get about 4 copies of a catalogue called One Step Ahead that sells yuppie parents all kinds of safety devices using fear as a marketing tactic.

Here's a link to their site:

http://www.onestepahead.com/jump.jsp...83725421737994

Well I have been thinkinh
uh oh uh oh uh oh uh oh
Ive been thinking.
Thinking numbers were only applied to generation once.
1946 to 1964.
Now we act like they can be reapplied again to everyone in our own weird way.
S and H they get them pretty right.
But now i think numbers are more ridiculous than ever.
Ban them beat them and burn them.
Have a good day too.

I have read that Mr. Strauss has children on both sides of the divide. I have a feeling since he is the author and these are his guidlines, that he should have made a pretty good guess about where the generational boundaries lie.

On 2002-04-25 16:05, Darling wrote:
I have read that Mr. Strauss has children on both sides of the divide. I have a feeling since he is the author and these are his guidlines, that he should have made a pretty good guess about where the generational boundaries lie.

But it's also VERY regional (ESPECIALLY the X/Millie divide) so Strauss would probably have a good idea about 80 or 84 cohorts in, say, his own Northern Virginia enclave, but having kids born in the mid to late 70s and early to mid 80s would not necessarily have any insight with respect to the rest of the country (I'd say that all his lines are pretty good as average demarcation lines tho except Lost/GI and Silent/Boom - the first should be pushed at least two years back and the second should also be pushed back by a year or two - maybe that latter one is just where I live tho as well)

Maillw,

Maybe what you are getting at isn't "regional." I think it deals more with class issues. I have an inclination to believe that an upper middle class enclave in Northern Virginia has probably alot in common with upper middle class enclaves in Northern Illinois, in New York, in Massachusetts, in San Francisco.
"Regional differences," may only be expressed through economics.

Maillw,

This book was intended for the middle class, I believe. They are the ones who would want to buy and read things like this about their special children. Take Al gore's family. The older Gore daughters are obviously Xers, especially the eldest two, with the last one representing the type of blurring that occurs. Precious Al Gore III, born in 1982, was so precious that his mother launched a campaign to ban explicit lyrics after she caught him listening to them. He is definitely a Millennial. These are the type of people that they cater the book towards. Strauss lives in Washington; this is his circle.

Heres a great article I found by somebody born the same year as me.
I really think it sums up how I feel about most things generational.
............................................


This Ain't My Generation

THE SOUND OF THE SUBURBS all the way live with Kaptain Powers

4
"It`s a beautiful world.....for you. Not me." -Devo, "Beautiful World"

I have often felt very different from the people I suppose one would call my "generation." I never really saw myself as part of one. The entire "generation" issue is rather murky. Like Sham 69 asked all those years ago, "Who`s Generation?"

I mean, think about it. I was born in 1979. Am I part of the world-famous Generation X? Am I Generation Y? Who the hell is in charge of keeping track of these things anyway? I myself have never found it important really but everyone always asks me what generation I`m in. People over 40 insist I`m a "Gen-Xer", with all the rather demeaning qualities that names signifies (namely being a slacker and a good-for-nothing, ungrateful slob). However the boundaries of Generation Y seem rather hazy and grey at this point. I`m right on the razor`s edge between the 70`s and the 80`s and that, to paraphrase Robert Frost, seems to have made all the difference.

People Born In The Eighties (I shall name it as if it were a condition), while not much younger than me, seem to me to be completely from another context. I think the gap between those of us in our 20s and teenagers is pretty vast when you get down to the brass taks of it all. A lot of people my age I talk to refer to "the kids" and how different they are from "us", as if anyone born on or after January 1st, 1980 has a different genetic makeup than those of born on or before December 31st, 1979. However I must say I can understand what they`re saying. With some exceptions, a majority of the time when I interact with people who were Born In The Eighties I feel considerably older. The cultural touchstones are not there with a lot of them and the later in the 80`s you go the less touchstones you have. People born in 1980 or 1981 seem the closest obviously but as soon as you get to those born in 1982 or after forget it. It`s like you`re from another world or something.

Now you`re going to say, "No duh Kap, they`re 17 (or 16 or 15 or whatever), of course they`re going to be different", but to that I say- that never happened before. People born in the 1950`s, let`s say 1950 to 1955, seem to share a great deal of touchstones and while being born 5 years apart can have a conversation about "Remember That?" and stay pretty much on the same page. My parents are 3 years apart and they seem like they`re the same age alot of the time. In fact I was probably 6 or 7 before I figured out my dad was older. They talked about "the good old days" and "back then", as if they had the exact same experiences even though my father has 3 years on my mom. My sister is 5 years younger than I am. Only a 2 year differential. Megan, bless her little `N Sync-loving heart, can only hold a conversation with me because we grew up together and can use our common experiences as a blueprint for conversation. Her friends doubtlessly call me her "weird older brother". I cannot talk to most of her friends because we have absolutely zilch in common on the cultural touchstone front.

Seems weird doesn`t it? People born in the 1950`s (and for that matter 1960`s and 1970`s), can hold conversations and relate to each other even if one is older or younger than the other by a good 3 or 4 years. I can relate much more to someone 23 or even 27 than I can to someone 16 or 17. As close as I can figure out, this has all to do with the fact that technology (and therefore life) moves a hell of a lot faster these days than it did when I was young and when my parents were young. When I was little, Nintendo ruled supreme and unchallenged on the video game front for a good 5 or so years before Sega came out with the Sega Genesis. So everyone around my age remembers playing classics like "Zelda" and "Tecmo Bowl". The technology didn`t change very quickly, allowing people of different ages to experience it. Nowadays your system will be obselete by the time you get it home and plugged in. Does anybody remember the Atari Jaguar system?

The same holds for music. To a 16 year old, grunge is their older sibling`s music. Kurt Cobain redecorated that shack with his brain matter when they were in 4th or 5th grade. The Gulf War might as well be Vietnam for all they remember. They`ve got MP3`s and Sony Minidiscs and they can burn their own CDs. Your Walkman is so 1988 man. Doesn`t really seem that long ago to me that Vanilla Ice caused a big uproar when his "To The Extreme" became the first album to NOT be on vinyl. To your teenager of the early 2000`s, vinyl is what is on his/her kitchen or bathroom floor. Copy an album to a tape? Why would I do that? I`ll just make my own mix CD. Sheesh, you Generation X-ers. Live in the now would you?

Remember Commodore 64`s? Of course you do, come on now. Green and black screens, the hum of the hard drive, the floppy discs, ah memories. Watch "War Games" with Matthew Broderick. There`s a scene where he hooks his computer up to his high school`s computer system. He has enough hardware on his computer desk to make his own smart bomb. Hackers today can shut down IBM service in Montana with a portable hand-held job from Nokia. Watch "Hackers", a film about well, what do you think? That`s only about 3 or 4 years old. I watched it with my friend B-Ryan (a man for whom hacking is a way of life) and he said it was like watching one of those old car training films in Driver`s Ed. "Wow, look at those old dial-up computers, haha can you imagine we ever used those things?"

This my friends (those of you in your 20s) is why when you talk to a person who doesn`t seem much younger than you yet seems to be from Planet You`re An Old Bastard, you can`t understand. With the pace of modern technology (and like I said, life) I`m sure the gap will only widen further and further. Garcon, fetch monsieur`s studded leather lane would you?

ENDNOTES-
01.) Speaking of age, if you`re 18 or older register your ass to vote! Hell you can do it at WWF.com for Zahd`s sake. The first person who starts to complain come November about whatever guy gets in yet did not vote shall suffer a wrath the likes of which has not been seen since the days of the Roman Empire.
02.) What the hell is this malarkey about a "punk government?" Cruise on over to punkrock.net and find yourself a post about some well-intentioned yet totally misguided attempt to set up some abominable thing called The Punk Government. Don`t forget to point and laugh.
03.) Didn`t you used to be Wank? I remember you. Oh yeah, you sucked then too.
04.) I love kids who say that ska is dead. That really makes me laugh from the gut. It makes me wanna say- "No it`s not dead it`s just not on MTV anymore which shows where you get YOUR information."
05.) Bush and Gore make me wanna Ralph. Nader that is. ("I made a funny"- Splinter)
06.) Boston area people! I am among you now. I wanna know what`s going on. Got a show? Want to get interviewed? Then get off your arse and send me some flippin` mail....BloodlessPharoah@aol.com

On 2002-04-26 06:41, Darling wrote:
Maillw,

Maybe what you are getting at isn't "regional." I think it deals more with class issues. I have an inclination to believe that an upper middle class enclave in Northern Virginia has probably alot in common with upper middle class enclaves in Northern Illinois, in New York, in Massachusetts, in San Francisco.
"Regional differences," may only be expressed through economics.

True, that explains it somewhat, but in MY upper middle class locale (Howard County is the richest county in the richest state by medians and the #9 richest county in the country; all right, fairfax and loudon are SLIGHTLY richer, but still...) the 82 cohorts still identify with most items on a 'child of the 80s' list (despite what i term as the C2K phenomenom - that C2K got so much media attention throughout the country that that cohort AND THAT COHORT ONLY became MUCH more millennialized than it should be; this attention made the two neighboring cohorts, the class of 1999 and my class of 2001, feel isolated and left out - if anything they might have made us MORE xer and less millennial than before); my mom, a pediatrician, says that the people who were listening to britney spears in early to mid 99 when it came out were primarily girls from 8 - 12 (late 86 - late 90); here the teenybopper millie culture seems to begin around 85 and predominate by 87 - maybe it's just MY upper middle class locale that's different because it's a planned community though...

hmm... this article's description of being 'born in the 80's' doesn't seem to describe me all that well or anyone else where i live until you get at least halfway through the decade; I remember playing lots of NES at my friends' houses when I was younger (genesis didn't get really popular till like 93 - 94 there); grunge (among other 90s non-pop things) was popular among my peers, the gulf war's ending was the ONLY event we were called for in a challengeresque assembly (I remember Barbara Bush, in a grandmotherly voice, calling for a 'moment of science'; also misinterpreting Saudi Arabia as 'Salty Arabia'); while my 86 bro feels at home with minidiscs, i do not (while i consider vinyl dated, i remember listening to cassettes in the 80s and seeing them last well into the 90s because of the recording technology; in fact my 92 car has a cassette deck and not a CD/minidisc player!) I don't remember the NAMES of the computers I used in the late 80's/early 90's (except the ubiquitous Apple II!) but I DO remember "Green and black screens, the hum of the hard drive, the floppy discs"... so the system i had in the late 80s could very well be that! but then again i'm not a typical 84 baby... or am i?

from the same site:
"PROSTI-TOT MAIL!! RETRO 1998 NYC SKA SCENE HARD DATA!"
1998 is 'retro' already? I knew that the 90s ended in 97 and the last gasp died out completely in 98 but that IS scary to me, "Born In The Eighties" or not

On 2002-04-26 09:18, Terminator X wrote:
Heres a great article I found by somebody born the same year as me.
I really think it sums up how I feel about most things generational.

(snip)

Terminator, a three-year difference between two middle-aged adults is not much. A five-year difference between a young adult (22 or 23) and a teen still in high school (17 or do) is huge. But in 20-30 years, that 5-year-gap will seem much smaller.

I think that is true generational theory or no generational theory. A

Although it is true that even now, from my vantage point as a middle-aged adult (born 1956), generationally I feel more in tune with the 1951 cohort than the 1961 cohort. (In terms of life-style, since I became a mom at age 38, I'm probably more in synch with the 1961 cohort, who is more likely than the 1951 cohort or even a 1956 cohort to have a kid in grade school).

I wouldn't get too hung up on the computer hardware. I am a computer moron, which may explain why I felt so old in 97 when the incoming fresh and sophs in my newspaper were emailing stories to each other. But still, that is how Captain Kozmo or whatever feels, and i also identify with it.
I like how he says "People Born in the 1980s" like its an affliction.
.........................
I have a trio of new generation cousins born in 1984. They are all the start of their gen, in that they have younger brothers and sisters, that dont seem too different from them. Theyre not all civic, but they certainly have had parents with high expectations. I remember watching my uncle telling one of them to sit on the stairs and count to ten. This was funny because I was never punished for anything, ever. I think I was grounded once for about 5 hours.
To me they have grown up in a different context. I mean theyre graduating from high school and the Gen Xers in the family are thinking "Werent you born like 2 years ago?"
But here they are. Ive ignored them for so long because they were always babies when I was a kid, and children when I was a teen, but theyre are becoming adults now.
Makes a fellow feel kind of old.

Jenny, I didn't write the article.
I think the boundary will always be there.
When I was 17 I felt more in common with my 20 year old and even 25 year old friends and family than teens just a few years younger.
You say that you identify with the 51 cohort more than the 61 one. If I am 23 years old why is everyone assuming I will somehow change dramatically in X number of years. Im here this is the world as how I see it.
This whole "you will change" argument has been fleshed out in many ways, especially by my parents in thinking that one day I will be a Yuppie scumbag sipping Starbucks and watching West Wing.
My Mother makes similar distinctions about those older than her.
She doesnt identify with people born a few years oledr (she is born in 1947) but she identifies with those 7, 8 years younger (my aunt is born in 54 and it is like they are the same age.
She identifies more with her 1960 born brother than her early 40s born cousins.
Why? because they are "Fifties guys"
(and she loathes anything 50s) and she is a "60s/70s" person.
That lumps her in with the people born in the 50s, but not those born just a few years earlier.
Similarly, I identify with people born 11 or more years older than me than those born only 3 or 4 years younger.
Seems odd at first, but when you think of it in your context, or in my mothers context, or in Captain Kozmos context, it makes perfect sense.

On 2002-04-26 10:10, Terminator X wrote:
Jenny, I didn't write the article.
I think the boundary will always be there.
When I was 17 I felt more in common with my 20 year old and even 25 year old friends and family than teens just a few years younger.
You say that you identify with the 51 cohort more than the 61 one. If I am 23 years old why is everyone assuming I will somehow change dramatically in X number of years. Im here this is the world as how I see it.
This whole "you will change" argument has been fleshed out in many ways, especially by my parents in thinking that one day I will be a Yuppie scumbag sipping Starbucks and watching West Wing.
My Mother makes similar distinctions about those older than her.
She doesnt identify with people born a few years oledr (she is born in 1947) but she identifies with those 7, 8 years younger (my aunt is born in 54 and it is like they are the same age.
She identifies more with her 1960 born brother than her early 40s born cousins.
Why? because they are "Fifties guys"
(and she loathes anything 50s) and she is a "60s/70s" person.
That lumps her in with the people born in the 50s, but not those born just a few years earlier.
Similarly, I identify with people born 11 or more years older than me than those born only 3 or 4 years younger.
Seems odd at first, but when you think of it in your context, or in my mothers context, or in Captain Kozmos context, it makes perfect sense.

OTOH, you're not truly representative of the 1979 cohort (remove your birth year and your graduation year and based on everything else it would seem as if you were born in 75 or 76) and you always will be; 1975 is closer than 1968 than to 1983! I personally find it hard to believe that just because I was born after the S & H cutoff date I'll soon identify more with the 89-92 set than my closest friends from HS (all born in 81)... i feel the chasm between myself and the people i know born in 87 the same way - is it regional? are there TWO generational splits? only time will tell...

Well you have that Doogie Howser/Little Man Tate thing going on, which distinguishes you from your cohort.
I cannot "represent" 1979. Most 79ers I think are way more Xerish than I ever was.
Plus its hard for me to tell on sight a 79 person from a 76 person. We all feel the same to me.

Terminator
What does a 79 person look like to you? I've always known what a 76 cohort (me) looks like. And it ain't pretty in the morning.

William '84
Don't give up hope about being included in X just yet. Strauss and Howe did write (and back in 1990 at that) that it would be several decades before we knew for sure the boundary between us (Xers) and them (Mills). Personally, I've never felt sure but I just feel like I don't belong to any generation. Like I'm just outside time. I think a lot of later Xers and some early Mills get that feeling and rebel against societal attempts to classify them. But I really do think Millenials start way after 1982. More like 1985. And 84 can be squeezed into X. I guess to paraphrase Jesse Jackson, Keep hope alive!

I dunno.
I feel like I am the last of the name-dropping, 80s-centered, cynical, often lost and alienated, Generation between those born in the 50s and those born in the 80s.
Its hard for me to forsee Taylor Hanson and janeane Garafolo winding up in the same Gen.
It isnt as hard to see Clare Danes and janeane Garafolo winding up in the same Gen.
DUH. Theyre both Gen Xers.
If 1984 becomes part of Gen-X, what does Gen-X even mean anymore?
It has no historical relevance, or cultural commonality.
It just becomes absolutely obsolete as far as trying to work with what a "generation" means.
Maybe that is the end all desire.

I'll agree with that, X.

I definitely want to see an end to the concept of generations as something to work with.

It gives me permission to be myself.

And if William wants to fancy himself an Xer what harm comes of that? I thought generations is based on attitudes? If William and others like him are cynical they may really be more Xer.

Does it really matter? Is Jan 1, 1980 as important a breaking point?

If you really want to keep the Strauss and Howe then I think it just makes more sense to look at generations as waves that may overlap in certain years (like 1980 or 1981) then as bumps rigidly divided.

I could go on and on but I'm really getting tired of these debates. If we really want to determine who's in what generation then we have to do more than interview a few thousand '82 cohorts in Northern Virginia.

It's my opinion that kids that age in other places may be more Xerish. I can't say.
Whew!

On 2002-04-26 16:22, JayN wrote:
I'll agree with that, X.

I definitely want to see an end to the concept of generations as something to work with.

It gives me permission to be myself.

And if William wants to fancy himself an Xer what harm comes of that? I thought generations is based on attitudes? If William and others like him are cynical they may really be more Xer.

Does it really matter? Is Jan 1, 1980 as important a breaking point?

If you really want to keep the Strauss and Howe then I think it just makes more sense to look at generations as waves that may overlap in certain years (like 1980 or 1981) then as bumps rigidly divided.

I could go on and on but I'm really getting tired of these debates. If we really want to determine who's in what generation then we have to do more than interview a few thousand '82 cohorts in Northern Virginia.

It's my opinion that kids that age in other places may be more Xerish. I can't say.
Whew!

Northern Virginia sucks anyway! And I guess I'll have to say the same for the members of my age cohort who live there...

Don't give up hope about being included in X just yet. Strauss and Howe did write (and back in 1990 at that) that it would be several decades before we knew for sure the boundary between us (Xers) and them (Mills).

Maybe, but for some bizarre reason I just can't picture Robert Reed '82 being a Gen-Xer.
:smile: