So at my job we've hired a few guys who are in their early 30's (I'm 45 and I'm actually still below the average age of my co-workers) and there's one newer guy in particular that I'll give a hard time (in a friendly way, of course). We always give each other a bunch of sh!t but then I'll make some remark about "you damned millennials" and he'll turn red and say, "I'M NOT A F**KIN' MILLENNIAL!!!" That seems to be the one thing that annoys him, and then I'll ask him if I "triggered" him and if he needs to go to his "safe space."

My question is: He's 32 years old. Is he a damned millennial???

If he's 32 he was born in 1984, or 1983. Hell yeah, he's a Millenial! Someone is in DEEP DENIAL!  ::)  ::)

Honestly, though. If something bothers someone, don't do it, or say it.

Honestly, though. If something bothers someone, don't do it, or say it.


No, he knows I'm just messing with him. I've even asked him if it bothers him just to be sure.

It's weird though. It seems like, at every job I've had, when I started out I'd be really nice to my co-workers and they were all like, "meh." But as soon as I started acting cocky and joking around and being a sarcastic asshole they liked me a lot more. 

No, he knows I'm just messing with him. I've even asked him if it bothers him just to be sure.

It's weird though. It seems like, at every job I've had, when I started out I'd be really nice to my co-workers and they were all like, "meh." But as soon as I started acting cocky and joking around and being a sarcastic asshole they liked me a lot more.


Because you're funny.  ;D

So at my job we've hired a few guys who are in their early 30's (I'm 45 and I'm actually still below the average age of my co-workers) and there's one newer guy in particular that I'll give a hard time (in a friendly way, of course). We always give each other a bunch of sh!t but then I'll make some remark about "you damned millennials" and he'll turn red and say, "I'M NOT A F**KIN' MILLENNIAL!!!" That seems to be the one thing that annoys him, and then I'll ask him if I "triggered" him and if he needs to go to his "safe space."

My question is: He's 32 years old. Is he a damned millennial???

Gen Y and Millenial are the same thing. He was born in the 80's and first wave Gen Y don't do the whole "triggered" and "safe space" thing. That's associated with Y/Z cusp people, and even then it doesn't apply to most of them.

Gen Y and Millenial are the same thing. He was born in the 80's and first wave Gen Y don't do the whole "triggered" and "safe space" thing. That's associated with Y/Z cusp people, and even then it doesn't apply to most of them.


It mostly applies towards those who are still in college, so basically those who were born in the mid-late 90s. Possibly the early 2000s, since I see some sophomores in my high school say it as well.

Gen Y and Millenial are the same thing. He was born in the 80's and first wave Gen Y don't do the whole "triggered" and "safe space" thing. That's associated with Y/Z cusp people, and even then it doesn't apply to most of them.


I can see the confusion that Y/Z cusps get. They exist between two generations and share different traits. But the issue is that if despite being a mix of both Y and Z it's not a 50/50 mix. Some are more Y than Z while others may be slightly more Z than (for example you could push the oldest Y/Z cuspers into the Y group and they'd fit it pretty well as the differences between the youngest Y member and the oldest Y/Z cusper is extremely minimal to the point where you will have to nitpick some arbitrary things in order to claim a set of differences).  And to make things worse there are places and people (such as myself) that don't believe in cusps. We'd end just sticking the cusps into either the whole Y or Z group which ends up leading to generalization, people feeling left out, or people feeling unfairly judged.

Although if someone is from the mid '80s then he/she is an early Y in my book. I don't see Gen X as extending to the mid 1980s.

Millennials are born roughly between 1982 to 2000, so year a 32 year old would be considered a millennial. Although I hear a lot about how any young person is considered a millennial, even if they're born long after 2000.

Millennials are born roughly between 1982 to 2000, so year a 32 year old would be considered a millennial. Although I hear a lot about how any young person is considered a millennial, even if they're born long after 2000.


Some people still don't know that Gen Millennial has ended. They think that the gen has went all the way up to 2008 or that it's still going. To some people a Gen Plural or Alpha doesn't exist yet.

Some people still don't know that Gen Millennial has ended. They think that the gen has went all the way up to 2008 or that it's still going. To some people a Gen Plural or Alpha doesn't exist yet.

Yeah that's what I hear from the media and the general public. It feels like they just don't know what Gen Z means.

Yes, he or she is. Those folks need to understand they are NOT associated with the MTV generation in any way. Like others have said, that term and Gen Y ARE the same thing! They don't recall the Challenger or the Cold War; they couldn't vote for Bill Clinton; they were adolescents in the Millennial era; 9/11 and the recession had a huge impact on them, and they were the social media crowd during the 2000s. Besides, the negative stereotypes about this generation are actually false especially the "trigger warning" and "safespace" mentality.

It has been discovered that they are NOT lazy, entitled or even narcissistic. They don't bounce from job to job and/or breakdown when someone says something offensive. Hell, some even have families, have a career, and are married which applies to all age groups of this generation very well.


Gen Y and Millenial are the same thing. He was born in the 80's and first wave Gen Y don't do the whole "triggered" and "safe space" thing. That's associated with Y/Z cusp people, and even then it doesn't apply to most of them.



It mostly applies towards those who are still in college, so basically those who were born in the mid-late 90s. Possibly the early 2000s, since I see some sophomores in my high school say it as well.
Those whole "triggered" and "safe space" people are actually in the minority. Everywhere I go I don't anyone in this generation act like that at all.


I can see the confusion that Y/Z cusps get. They exist between two generations and share different traits. But the issue is that if despite being a mix of both Y and Z it's not a 50/50 mix. Some are more Y than Z while others may be slightly more Z than (for example you could push the oldest Y/Z cuspers into the Y group and they'd fit it pretty well as the differences between the youngest Y member and the oldest Y/Z cusper is extremely minimal to the point where you will have to nitpick some arbitrary things in order to claim a set of differences).  And to make things worse there are places and people (such as myself) that don't believe in cusps. We'd end just sticking the cusps into either the whole Y or Z group which ends up leading to generalization, people feeling left out, or people feeling unfairly judged.

Although if someone is from the mid '80s then he/she is an early Y in my book. I don't see Gen X as extending to the mid 1980s.
Folks in the Y/Z transition are those currently in college and the HS upperclassmen. They are the ones who don't seem to fit in any generation because of their experiences and outlook on the world.


Millennials are born roughly between 1982 to 2000, so year a 32 year old would be considered a millennial. Although I hear a lot about how any young person is considered a millennial, even if they're born long after 2000.



Some people still don't know that Gen Millennial has ended. They think that the gen has went all the way up to 2008 or that it's still going. To some people a Gen Plural or Alpha doesn't exist yet.



Yeah that's what I hear from the media and the general public. It feels like they just don't know what Gen Z means.
Well they need to stop. Millennials are NOT synonymous with young people since most of them are 25 and over with the oldest ones already pushing 40! If you look the majority of sources, they place 1994/95 as the end with 1995/96 as the beginning of the next generation. However, remember this only applies to the U.S. generational cohorts as the other countries would obviously have their own cutoffs.

The Homelanders are the ones in school, and they are most of the young people who we see in the city. Their viewpoint of the world is entirely different compared to the Millennial generation.

The Alpha generation are the babies and they are currently being born since about 2010.

Um yeah....😅

Folks in the Y/Z transition are those currently in college and the HS upperclassmen. They are the ones who don't seem to fit in any generation because of their experiences and outlook on the world.
Well they need to stop. Millennials are NOT synonymous with young people since most of them are 25 and over with the oldest ones already pushing 40! If you look the majority of sources, they place 1994/95 as the end with 1995/96 as the beginning of the next generation.

The Homelanders are the ones in school, and they are most of the young people who we see in the city. Their viewpoint of the world is entirely different compared to the Millennial generation.

The Alpha generation are the babies and they are currently being born since about 2010.

Well... those born in 1993 and 1994 still go to college at my University.


If millennials aren't young folk anymore, then what are they?

Also, 2013 class is considered the end and 2014 class is the beginning of something new?! :o I wonder why? ???

Well they need to stop. Millennials are NOT synonymous with young people since most of them are 25 and over with the oldest ones already pushing 40! If you look the majority of sources, they place 1994/95 as the end with 1995/96 as the beginning of the next generation. However, remember this only applies to the U.S. generational cohorts as the other countries would obviously have their own cutoffs.

Maybe not all young people, but definitely those born up to 2000. Saying that the millennial generation stopped in the year 1995 is ridiculous. Everyone in their 20s today is a millennial and everyone in their late teens is a millennial as well. And there's no such thing as Y/Z cusp.

Maybe not all young people, but definitely those born up to 2000. Saying that the millennial generation stopped in the year 1995 is ridiculous. Everyone in their 20s today is a millennial and everyone in their late teens is a millennial as well.

Agreed 100%

Maybe not all young people, but definitely those born up to 2000. Saying that the millennial generation stopped in the year 1995 is ridiculous. Everyone in their 20s today is a millennial and everyone in their late teens is a millennial as well. And there's no such thing as Y/Z cusp.
Well that's what the majority of sources are saying (except the cusps which don't exist in their mind). If you look at events, traits, other misc. etc., there are plenty of reasons why the end is 1994, and not 2000 as some people believe.  Hell, if you even look at the comments from the Millennials themselves not just on here, but all other sites, they say the same thing as well.

Well that's what the majority of sources are saying (except the cusps which don't exist in their mind). If you look at events, traits, other misc. etc., there are plenty of reasons why the end is 1994, and not 2000 as some people believe.  Hell, if you even look at the comments from the Millennials themselves not just on here, but all other sites, they say the same thing as well.

No, you've got it wrong. Go on Google and most sources will say 2000 is the end. I've never heard a public source say anything other than 2000 being the end for millennials... And you're saying 20 year olds aren't mellennials?  You must be joking... Nobody else thinks that.

No, you've got it wrong. Go on Google and most sources will say 2000 is the end. I've never heard a public source say anything other than 2000 being the end for millennials... And you're saying 20 year olds aren't mellennials?  You must be joking... Nobody else thinks that.

Agreed man. He needs to come up with proper examples.

Agreed man. He needs to come up with proper examples.

Well, if you type "Generation Z" into Google, most of the sources are going with 95/96 (or just "mid-1990s") as starting dates. :P

No, you've got it wrong. Go on Google and most sources will say 2000 is the end. I've never heard a public source say anything other than 2000 being the end for millennials... And you're saying 20 year olds aren't mellennials?  You must be joking... Nobody else thinks that.
Public sources? So you mean to tell to me that the organizations are wrong? They are the public data. Even academic institutions are using that span.

If I was joking, then there wouldn't be many sources saying 1994 is the end. The associations are not only using that span for marketing, but even for historical, political and technological purposes as well. 

Well, if you type "Generation Z" into Google, most of the sources are going with 95/96 (or just "mid-1990s") as starting dates. :P

No, most sources actually say 2001. I really don't know where you're getting mid 1990s from...

Public sources? So you mean to tell to me that the organizations are wrong? They are the public data. Even academic institutions are using that span.

If I was joking, then there wouldn't be many sources saying 1994 is the end. The associations are not only using that span for marketing, but even for historical, political and technological purposes as well.

1994 the end? That's just crazy and inaccurate. If you said something like 1998 I would understand it a little better but 1994? Such a random year to choose and nowhere near the end of the birth years for millennials... And if 1994 was the ending year, are you saying all the profs in my school who call us who were born 1995 - 1997 millennials wrong? Are you saying the people who call me a millennial (1995 born) are wrong? All of these people know what a millennial is, you apparently don't. I can't take you seriously if you think I, who is born in January 1995, isn't a millennial or is part of Gen Z. That's just laughable.

No, most sources actually say 2001. I really don't know where you're getting mid 1990s from...



1994 the end? That's just crazy and inaccurate. If you said something like 1998 I would understand it a little better but 1994? Such a random year to choose and nowhere near the end of the birth years for millennials... And if 1994 was the ending year, are you saying all the profs in my school who call us who were born 1995 - 1997 millennials wrong? Are you saying the people who call me a millennial (1995 born) are wrong? All of these people know what a millennial is, you apparently don't. I can't take you seriously if you think I, who is born in January 1995, isn't a millennial or is part of Gen Z. That's just laughable.
He's right. If you type in "1995 generation", then Z/Homeland will appear in the article headlines instead of the Millennials.

As for your statement, no they're not wrong. You would still be considered a Millennial since you're Canadian. Only the U.S. cutoff is 1994. Everywhere else is different.

Oh, and here are some articles on about the year spans.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/20/fashion/move-over-millennials-here-comes-generation-z.html?_r=0

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-burrus/gen-z-will-change-your-wo_b_9150214.html#comments

http://neatoday.org/2015/07/13/here-comes-generation-z-what-makes-them-tick/

http://www.voicesofyouth.org/en/posts/generation-z--who-we-are

http://www.prsa.org/Intelligence/Tactics/Articles/view/11057/1110/Move_Over_Millennials_Here_Comes_Generation_Z_Unde#.WBZ5CI8rLIU

http://news.cuna.org/articles/109192-be-ready-to-win-with-generation-z

http://www.jmudukes.org/recreation/_files/presentations/gen-z-social-media.pdf

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/25/millennials-overtake-baby-boomers/

Well, if you type "Generation Z" into Google, most of the sources are going with 95/96 (or just "mid-1990s") as starting dates. :P

Tell that to Chloe Grace Mortez. ;D
D7tRZgMaLG4

Looks like the generation spans will keep changing forever. It's just like how people pronounce the 21st century years differently.

Looks like the generation spans will keep changing forever. It's just like how people pronounce the 21st century years differently.

It's pretty frustrating and annoying!

He's right. If you type in "1995 generation", then Z/Homeland will appear in the article headlines instead of the Millennials.
Oh, and here are some articles on about the year spans.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/20/fashion/move-over-millennials-here-comes-generation-z.html?_r=0

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-burrus/gen-z-will-change-your-wo_b_9150214.html#comments

http://neatoday.org/2015/07/13/here-comes-generation-z-what-makes-them-tick/

http://www.voicesofyouth.org/en/posts/generation-z--who-we-are

http://www.prsa.org/Intelligence/Tactics/Articles/view/11057/1110/Move_Over_Millennials_Here_Comes_Generation_Z_Unde#.WBZ5CI8rLIU

http://news.cuna.org/articles/109192-be-ready-to-win-with-generation-z

http://www.jmudukes.org/recreation/_files/presentations/gen-z-social-media.pdf

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/25/millennials-overtake-baby-boomers/

That's pretty annoying, it makes me feel like a little kid! :\'( >:(

Looks like the generation spans will keep changing forever. It's just like how people pronounce the 21st century years differently.



It's pretty frustrating and annoying!
Not exactly. The generations prior to the MTV cohort are set in stone. One of the reasons the generation spans keep changing is that there are lots of myths about the 13th cohort (X), Millennials and Homelanders (Z).


That's pretty annoying, it makes me feel like a little kid! :\'( >:(
I totally understand; however, remember these generational names are about social cohorts, NOT personal ones. You're personally still in the same group as those a year older than you.

Tell that to Chloe Grace Mortez. ;D
D7tRZgMaLG4

I just read the YouTube comments on that video and everyone is calling her a millennial.

The fact is nobody uses the term "Gen Z" for young people. They all call them millennials, which is fine for now.

The fact is nobody uses the term "Gen Z" for young people. They all call them millennials, which is fine for now.
That's because some organizations are stuck seeing them as a 1980+ generation despite the fact that cohorts aren't even ridiculously that long.

I totally understand; however, remember these generational names are about social cohorts, NOT personal ones. You're personally still in the same group as those a year older than you.

Aww I see. :o  What's the difference with social cohorts? ???

Aww I see. :o  What's the difference with social cohorts? ???
Social cohorts is more on everything that we're always talking about. Music, events, movies, etc. For example, there are certain songs and films that define generations.  (Ex. Teen Spirit for MTV (X), American Idiot for Millennials.)

You're all very analytical. Perhaps I should buy some of that analytical-ness!

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRq4_KvPCL6FKvpMsUwHdADY5PqztS6fUvMWmgFulvr7V0Hi2O49g

Tell that to Chloe Grace Mortez. ;D
D7tRZgMaLG4

It's funny, I've never seen any of her movies or shows, but it seems she's unanimously hated for some reason?

Like, when it was posted on Twitter that she had cancelled all her acting projects, every single response was "good"! :o

A 32 year old is an early Millennial. I consider 35 and younger to be "young" so yes Millennials are a young Generation.
In some definitions, it goes up to 2004, where the youngest Millennials would be 12 or even 11.

Yes. If someone graduates high school at any point in the 2000s or 2010s, then that person is a millennial.

A 32 year old is an early Millennial. I consider 35 and younger to be "young" so yes Millennials are a young Generation.
In some definitions, it goes up to 2004, where the youngest Millennials would be 12 or even 11.

As the years go by, it feels like this is more and more accurate.

Yes. If someone graduates high school at any point in the 2000s or 2010s, then that person is a millennial.

I agree.

Yes. If someone graduates high school at any point in the 2000s or 2010s, then that person is a millennial.
Can the same viewpoint apply to previous and next generations as well? For example:

HS grads of the 2020s and 30s: Homelanders

HS grads of the 1980s and 90s: 13th Generation

HS grads of the 1960s and 70s: Boomers

HS grads of the 1940s and 50s: Silents

HS grads of the 1920s and 30s: GIs

It really seems like generational definitions have totally gone out the window in recent years and "Millennial" has come to be defined not by a specific set of birth years, but rather any person that is under the age of about 35.

Case in point, I was watching a college football game on Saturday afternoon, and late in the game, after it was well in hand, the announcer started telling a story about all of the things he grew up with this that his 5-year-old son isn't aware of and then joked "Millennials just don't understand".

Now, as a 29-year-old, I'm more than old enough to have a 5-year-old son myself. This guy is effectively saying that I'm in the same generation with somebody who's young enough to be my kid! And this isn't the first time I've noticed people on TV referring to kids that young as "Millennials" either! :o

You're all very analytical. Perhaps I should buy some of that analytical-ness!

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRq4_KvPCL6FKvpMsUwHdADY5PqztS6fUvMWmgFulvr7V0Hi2O49g


It ain't worth it. As analytic as all this is they also miss the mark to some degree.

He's a Millennial, but like most generations, the term is vague and has about 194328538463489634 different definitions.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cv3RuRwWIAAI06R.jpg


Xennials? Lucky Ones? Oregon Trail Generation??????


Welp! I give up. Some many different definitions. Wonder what those born between Millennials and Plurals would be called.

Not exactly. The generations prior to the MTV cohort are set in stone. One of the reasons the generation spans keep changing is that there are lots of myths about the 13th cohort (X), Millennials and Homelanders (Z).


Makes it worse that most of the myths/"facts" are a bit arbitrary. Using things that don't matter in the grand scheme of things to define/generalize an entire generation or group of people is insane.

It really seems like generational definitions have totally gone out the window in recent years and "Millennial" has come to be defined not by a specific set of birth years, but rather any person that is under the age of about 35.

Case in point, I was watching a college football game on Saturday afternoon, and late in the game, after it was well in hand, the announcer started telling a story about all of the things he grew up with this that his 5-year-old son isn't aware of and then joked "Millennials just don't understand".

Now, as a 29-year-old, I'm more than old enough to have a 5-year-old son myself. This guy is effectively saying that I'm in the same generation with somebody who's young enough to be my kid! And this isn't the first time I've noticed people on TV referring to kids that young as "Millennials" either! :o


Ever since the media got obsessed with my generation and started flooding the screens and books on guidelines for what millennials supposedly are all about, the word millennial is more of an insult these days.

I was born in '90 and I see myself part of Gen Y and not a millennial. I feel like I have nothing in common with people born in '96 and after. I know that Gen Y and Millennials are the same thing.

So at my job we've hired a few guys who are in their early 30's (I'm 45 and I'm actually still below the average age of my co-workers) and there's one newer guy in particular that I'll give a hard time (in a friendly way, of course). We always give each other a bunch of sh!t but then I'll make some remark about "you damned millennials" and he'll turn red and say, "I'M NOT A F**KIN' MILLENNIAL!!!" That seems to be the one thing that annoys him, and then I'll ask him if I "triggered" him and if he needs to go to his "safe space."

My question is: He's 32 years old. Is he a damned millennial???



if it bothers him that much it means he is self aware... that means he's incapable of being a millennial  :D

So I saw my friend at work the other night and I told him that I posed this question on this website, and that the overwhelming consensus was that he is in fact a millenial, and he just said, "No, no, no, no, no. I'm Generation Y, I'm not a baby."

Later I called him a "damned millenial" anyway and he replied, "Well at least I can chew food," referring to the jaw surgery that I had back in September.

So I saw my friend at work the other night and I told him that I posed this question on this website, and that the overwhelming consensus was that he is in fact a millenial, and he just said, "No, no, no, no, no. I'm Generation Y, I'm not a baby."

Later I called him a "damned millenial" anyway and he replied, "Well at least I can chew food," referring to the jaw surgery that I had back in September.

Gen Y and millenial is the same thing.

Gen Y and millenial is the same thing.


Tell him that. ;D

Technically some definitions of Gen X, like in The Telegraph or Harvard Business School, go up to 84/85, so if your friend wants to say he's not a Millennial, he theoretically could and not be 100% wrong. :P


Generation X was influenced most by the Reaganite 80s. Someone born in 84 or 85 wouldn't be influenced enough by the Reagan years. They would only be 3-5 by the time he left office.

You're an Aussie, so why would you care about Reagan? :P

I might make a thread in the 80s section about Reagan's assassination attempt, since it's been 35 years. :o Should've made it month's ago, but it crossed my mind....  ;D

It ain't worth it. As analytic as all this is they also miss the mark to some degree.


Your kind, the new age, intense, millennial, kind. They analyze in bunches, staring, judging, pointing at the disco crowd!  >:(

Your kind, the new age, intense, millennial, kind. They analyze in bunches, staring, judging, pointing at the disco crowd!  >:(


8) It's what we do best.

8) It's what we do best.


Worship your queen bee, Hillary! Millenial!

http://www.commdiginews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/hillary-encrowned.jpg

Worship your queen bee, Hillary! Millenial!

http://www.commdiginews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/hillary-encrowned.jpg


Not even president yet and she is already a crowned queen! She deserves all my worship.  8)

Not even president yet and she is already a crowned queen! She deserves all my worship.  8)


Ugh! Shameless idol worship!  >:(  >:(

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/20/fashion/move-over-millennials-here-comes-generation-z.html?_r=0

I really despise this article.

This guy suggests that Millennials had the iPod as their first gadget? The IPOD? Those born in the early 80s more than likely had a Walkman or a Discman way before they had an iPod.

Also, this guy is trying to paint Lena Dunham from that awful Girls show as the face of Millennials? What the hell? And she's a child molestor, so I don't think any generation would want to be associated with her. :P

He also seems to be portraying Alex Dunphy as the face of Gen Z, even though most people (including Gen Zs) would ask "Who?" if you said her name to them.

I really despise this article.

This guy suggests that Millennials had the iPod as their first gadget? The IPOD? Those born in the early 80s more than likely had a Walkman or a Discman way before they had an iPod.

Also, this guy is trying to paint Lena Dunham from that awful Girls show as the face of Millennials? What the hell? And she's a child molestor, so I don't think any generation would want to be associated with her. :P

He also seems to be portraying Alex Dunphy as the face of Gen Z, even though most people (including Gen Zs) would ask "Who?" if you said her name to them.

My first tech device was this little tape recorder that came with a microphone for kids. I got it when I was 5 and I had a lot of fun with it. I didn't get an mp3 player until I was like 12. I got an IPod Nano when I was 14 I believe. Before that I used a diskman to listen to music and I was quite content with that.

Not even president yet and she is already a crowned queen! She deserves all my worship.  8)


Don't keep your hopes up! ::)

It really seems like generational definitions have totally gone out the window in recent years and "Millennial" has come to be defined not by a specific set of birth years, but rather any person that is under the age of about 35.

Case in point, I was watching a college football game on Saturday afternoon, and late in the game, after it was well in hand, the announcer started telling a story about all of the things he grew up with this that his 5-year-old son isn't aware of and then joked "Millennials just don't understand".

Now, as a 29-year-old, I'm more than old enough to have a 5-year-old son myself. This guy is effectively saying that I'm in the same generation with somebody who's young enough to be my kid! And this isn't the first time I've noticed people on TV referring to kids that young as "Millennials" either! :o
That literally needs to stop. When is the media going to understand that Millennials are not that young anymore? The term is not even synonymous with young folks. Some are actually over 35 for one and the majority are either 30 and older and/or pushing it to that age. Hell, even the younger ones of this generation are close to 25 as well!

Furthermore, his 5 year old son is not a Millennial nor is he even part of the Homeland cohort. He's actually an Alpha :o!


I really despise this article.

This guy suggests that Millennials had the iPod as their first gadget? The IPOD? Those born in the early 80s more than likely had a Walkman or a Discman way before they had an iPod.

Also, this guy is trying to paint Lena Dunham from that awful Girls show as the face of Millennials? What the hell? And she's a child molester, so I don't think any generation would want to be associated with her. :P

He also seems to be portraying Alex Dunphy as the face of Gen Z, even though most people (including Gen Zs) would ask "Who?" if you said her name to them.
I must have not seen that. The first gadget for Millennials obviously like you said would have been Walkmans (when they got older), then Discmans would be second. iPods would actually be 3rd.

Well there's child molesters in every generation, but that doesn't mean they represent the cohort as a whole. They are in the minority. but I get what you're saying. However, there are some who are the face of this generation and it's definitely not her.

They probably don't watch Modern Family enough to know who that is since that's where the character comes from.

This guy suggests that Millennials had the iPod as their first gadget? The IPOD? Those born in the early 80s more than likely had a Walkman or a Discman way before they had an iPod.


It's not like these people know what Millennials did, even as teens during the late 90s, 2000s, and/or early 2010s. I don't even think they give a crap, since it's not like they excessively study on their actions.

Also, this guy is trying to paint Lena Dunham from that awful Girls show as the face of Millennials? What the hell? And she's a child molestor, so I don't think any generation would want to be associated with her. :P

Yeah... she actually did that when she was SEVEN. She just put pebbles on her sister's vagina, just for the fact that she thought it like Charlotte's eggs from Charlotte's Web. I know it seems explicit, but it's not like she knew better.



    “Do we all have uteruses?” I asked my mother when I was seven.

    “Yes,” she told me. “We’re born with them, and with all our eggs, but they start out very small. And they aren’t ready to make babies until we’re older.” I look at my sister, now a slim, tough one-year-old, and at her tiny belly. I imagined her eggs inside her, like the sack of spider eggs in Charlotte’s Web, and her uterus, the size of a thimble.

    “Does her vagina look like mine?”

    “I guess so,” my mother said. “Just smaller.”

    One day, as I sat in our driveway in Long Island playing with blocks and buckets, my curiosity got the best of me. Grace was sitting up, babbling and smiling, and I leaned down between her legs and carefully spread open her vagina. She didn’t resist and when I saw what was inside I shrieked.

    My mother came running. “Mama, Mama! Grace has something in there!”

    My mother didn’t bother asking why I had opened Grace’s vagina. This was within the spectrum of things I did. She just got on her knees and looked for herself. It quickly became apparent that Grace had stuffed six or seven pebbles in there. My mother removed them patiently while Grace cackled, thrilled that her prank had been a success.




He also seems to be portraying Alex Dunphy as the face of Gen Z, even though most people (including Gen Zs) would ask "Who?" if you said her name to them.

Once again, it's not like they give a crap about the generations.

That literally needs to stop. When is the media going to understand that Millennials are not that young anymore? The term is not even synonymous with young folks. Some are actually over 35 for one and the majority are either 30 and older and/or pushing it to that age. Hell, even the younger ones of this generation are close to 25 as well!


None are over 35 and I consider anything under 35 young. Also, the younger ones aren't "pushing 25", the younger ones are in their late teens.

None are over 35 and I consider anything under 35 young. Also, the younger ones aren't "pushing 25", the younger ones are in their late teens.
Yes, they are. 1980 is usually considered the beginning, and they are over 35. Millennials are still young, but they aren't that young. As for the younger ones, they are pushing 25. Most sources end the generation at 1995 and that has to do with social reasons, not personal. Only some data still use 2000.

Yes, they are. 1980 is usually considered the beginning, and they are over 35. Millennials are still young, but they aren't that young. As for the younger ones, they are pushing 25. Most sources end the generation at 1995 and that has to do with social reasons, not personal. Only some data still use 2000.

It doesn't end in 1995... and it's simply untrue that "most" sources state this. It begins around 1982, not 1980.

It doesn't end in 1995... and it's simply untrue that "most" sources state this. It begins around 1982, not 1980.
Yes it does. Many sources including academic sites are using that cutoff. I've even checked .gov, .edu and .org sites. Only a handful still use 2000.

Well 1980 is around there, so it does make sense. Besides, if you asked a typical 1980 person about their experiences, he or she will tell what events impacted them and what pop culture they grew up with.

Yes it does. Many sources including academic sites are using that cutoff. I've even checked .gov, .edu and .org sites. Only a handful still use 2000.

Well 1980 is around there, so it does make sense. Besides, if you asked a typical 1980 person about their experiences, he or she will tell what events impacted them and what pop culture they grew up with.

No it doesn't... Lol having 1995 as the ending point is simply laughable. You show me these sources that say 1995 and I'll show you more with the year 2000.

I really despise this article.

This guy suggests that Millennials had the iPod as their first gadget? The IPOD? Those born in the early 80s more than likely had a Walkman or a Discman way before they had an iPod.


Yeah, that's pretty ridiculous. My first "tech" was a little portable tape player/FM radio my parents got me as a Christmas present. I got my first CD player at age 10, which I continued to use throughout high school. In fact, I didn't get my first MP3 player until late 2006, when I was already in my second year of college.

I believe in the 1980-2000 definition because that would explain why pop culture became cheesy in 1997 and why a surprising amount of 1999-borns actually remember VHS.

No it doesn't... Lol having 1995 as the ending point is simply laughable. You show me these sources that say 1995 and I'll show you more with the year 2000.
You do realize that the 1995 cutoff is social, not personal right? You still personally relate to people a year older than you.

Now there are many reasons why 1995 is the cutoff and it's not just 9/11.

And I already posted so many sources that they are still available to check out.

You do realize that the 1995 cutoff is social, not personal right? You still personally relate to people a year older than you.

Now there are many reasons why 1995 is the cutoff and it's not just 9/11.

And I already posted so many sources that they are still available to check out.

What would be your reasons for 1995 being the cutoff rather than 2000? There is very little difference between someone born in 1995 and someone born i n 1998.

What would be your reasons for 1995 being the cutoff rather than 2000? There is very little difference between someone born in 1995 and someone born i n 1998.
Well, I don't have any. The cutoff is actually 1994 with 1995 being the first. I'm going by the sources. However, what you're talking about once again is PERSONAL generations which are different from the social ones. Regardless of the latter, you personally identify with those who are 3 years older and younger than you; however, you don't associate with the older ones socially because 3 years especially when it comes to events can make a difference.

Well, I don't have any. The cutoff is actually 1994 with 1995 being the first. I'm going by the sources. However, what you're talking about once again is PERSONAL generations which are different from the social ones. Regardless of the latter, you personally identify with those who are 3 years older and younger than you; however, you don't associate with the older ones socially because 3 years especially when it comes to events can make a difference.

So you're saying because I was born January 1995 I'm not a mellennial? No, 2000 is the cutoff.  And I really don't know which sources you're talking about. Everyone thinks 2000 or 2001 is the cutoff. I've never heard anyone say a 90s born person isn't a mellennial...

Well, I don't have any. The cutoff is actually 1994 with 1995 being the first. I'm going by the sources. However, what you're talking about once again is PERSONAL generations which are different from the social ones. Regardless of the latter, you personally identify with those who are 3 years older and younger than you; however, you don't associate with the older ones socially because 3 years especially when it comes to events can make a difference.

So you think Slim asssociates with the younger ones more than the elder ones? It's the same age difference.....

So you're saying because I was born January 1995 I'm not a mellennial? No, 2000 is the cutoff.  And I really don't know which sources you're talking about. Everyone thinks 2000 or 2001 is the cutoff. I've never heard anyone say a 90s born person isn't a mellennial...
Yes, because of social reasons; however, since you're Canadian, that cutoff wouldn't apply to you since it's U.S based. You would still be considered the same generation in your own country. 


So you think Slim asssociates with the younger ones more than the elder ones? It's the same age difference.....
No, not for social reasons, but for personal ones, yeah. However, once again, it would not apply to him socially since the Millennial year cutoff is American, and not Canadian.


Technically the cutoff can be either 94 or 95, I've seen both used frequently, with 95 and 96 being used roughly equally as start dates for Gen Z.

The generation definitions usually don't hit the bullseye but they're close enough. For instance, I've seen anywhere from 80-82 being defined as the start for Millennials. None of the definitions all line up perfectly, but they're roughly within the same 1-2 year range. I've also seen 45 being used as a common start date for Boomers along with 46, and a 66 start date for Gen X alongside the also-common 65. Again, they don't align perfectly, but they'll do.


Yeah, that's what they are. Yeah, they're not set in stone; however, with the rough estimates, they DO work along with using the events, pop culture, traits etc.

Yes, because of social reasons; however, since you're Canadian, that cutoff wouldn't apply to you since it's U.S based. You would still be considered the same generation in your own country. 
No, not for social reasons, but for personal ones, yeah. However, once again, it would not apply to him socially since the Millennial year cutoff is American, and not Canadian.


I find it very hard to believe that the US boundaries for the Millennials would not apply or have any relevance in Canada, especially seeing as though the US and Canada are neighbouring countries. The US boundaries apply/have relevance here in Australia and we are located on the opposite side of the world. In all honesty, the US boundaries would have relevance in all developed countries with westernised cultures, purely because of how much of an influence American culture has on other countries.

Hell, if you even look at the comments from the Millennials themselves not just on here, but all other sites, they say the same thing as well.


What else do you expect them to say? Of course, a 25-30 year old isn't going to relate with someone born in the Mid/Late 90s, but that doesn't mean that the two do not belong in the same generation. A 70 year old and a 52 year old both belong in the same generation (Baby Boomers), so I believe it's unreasonable to be under the impression that someone born in the Mid/Late 80s cannot belong in the same generation as someone born between 1995-2000.

At the beginning of this year, two University students (a male & a female) visited my school and did a presentation in front of my year group (people born in 1999/2000). The woman was born in 1994 and the man was born in 1995. When the two were preparing for the presentation, the man happened to take a glance at the projector, which displayed a picture based on Generation Z and it had the boundary of 1995-2010. As it turned out, the man is currently studying psychology at University, so he studies generations and the characteristics/traits that make up a generation. Anyway, he commented to the woman that he believes "Generation Y ends too early" and that "Gen Y should extend to 2000". He even suggested that there are very few differences between themselves (born in 1994/95) and people born in the Late 90s and 2000. The woman (born in 1994) agreed with him and also believed that 2000 should be the final Gen Y year.

I think there is a very compelling case for 2000 to be the cut-off year for Gen Y. Everyone born between 1982-2000 were between the ages of 9-18 at some point during the 2000's, the decade when Gen Y culture was at it's peak. Also, people born in 1995 and 1996 were even in their adolescence during the 2000's, so I don't know how you can suggest to Slim95 or Eazy-EMAN1995 that they're not Millennials.

I find it very hard to believe that the US boundaries for the Millennials would not apply or have any relevance in Canada, especially seeing as though the US and Canada are neighbouring countries. The US boundaries apply/have relevance here in Australia and we are located on the opposite side of the world. In all honesty, the US boundaries would have relevance in all developed countries with westernised cultures, purely because of how much of an influence American culture has on other countries.

Well it doesn't  if 95' is really the cutoff in the U.S. Everyone calls me a mellennial here. Plus, there was no 9/11 here if that's a factor. I also think in the U.S. the cutoff is 2000, not 1995 and most people (apart from this forum) agree. Also, the U.S. doesn't have as  much influence as you are suggesting. We have our own culture here.

Well it doesn't  if 95' is really the cutoff in the U.S. Everyone calls me a mellennial here. Plus, there was no 9/11 here if that's a factor. I also think in the U.S. the cutoff is 2000, not 1995 and most people (apart from this forum) agree. Also, the U.S. doesn't have as  much influence as you are suggesting. We have our own culture here.


Isn't North American culture mixed, since both the U.S. and Canada shared each of its pop culture? Hell, if it wasn't for Justin Bieber, we wouldn't have the same 2010s culture.

Isn't North American culture mixed, since both the U.S. and Canada shared each of its pop culture? Hell, if it wasn't for Justin Bieber, we wouldn't have the same 2010s culture.

We have our own distinct culture in Canada too. Every country does.

I find it very hard to believe that the US boundaries for the Millennials would not apply or have any relevance in Canada, especially seeing as though the US and Canada are neighbouring countries. The US boundaries apply/have relevance here in Australia and we are located on the opposite side of the world. In all honesty, the US boundaries would have relevance in all developed countries with westernised cultures, purely because of how much of an influence American culture has on other countries.
Yeah, they wouldn't apply to other countries. Besides, all of them have their own culture, so the cutoff points would be different everywhere else.


What else do you expect them to say? Of course, a 25-30 year old isn't going to relate with someone born in the Mid/Late 90s, but that doesn't mean that the two do not belong in the same generation. A 70 year old and a 52 year old both belong in the same generation (Baby Boomers), so I believe it's unreasonable to be under the impression that someone born in the Mid/Late 80s cannot belong in the same generation as someone born between 1995-2000.

At the beginning of this year, two University students (a male & a female) visited my school and did a presentation in front of my year group (people born in 1999/2000). The woman was born in 1994 and the man was born in 1995. When the two were preparing for the presentation, the man happened to take a glance at the projector, which displayed a picture based on Generation Z and it had the boundary of 1995-2010. As it turned out, the man is currently studying psychology at University, so he studies generations and the characteristics/traits that make up a generation. Anyway, he commented to the woman that he believes "Generation Y ends too early" and that "Gen Y should extend to 2000". He even suggested that there are very few differences between themselves (born in 1994/95) and people born in the Late 90s and 2000. The woman (born in 1994) agreed with him and also believed that 2000 should be the final Gen Y year.

I think there is a very compelling case for 2000 to be the cut-off year for Gen Y. Everyone born between 1982-2000 were between the ages of 9-18 at some point during the 2000's, the decade when Gen Y culture was at it's peak. Also, people born in 1995 and 1996 were even in their adolescence during the 2000's, so I don't know how you can suggest to Slim95 or Eazy-EMAN1995 that they're not Millennials.


I think you misunderstood. When it comes to PERSONAL generations, yeah they are obviously in the same one; however, when it comes to SOCIAL ones, then it's different. When you look at events, they are going to have an impact on a generation as whole. That's exactly what 9/11, Columbine, Iraq  and the Great Recession did. They all had a significance on the Millennial cohort regardless of how old they were when those events took place. They shaped their viewpoint of the world, and the changes began to occur.

Once again, the U.S cutoff shouldn't apply to any country other than its own. You would still be part of the same generation in your region as those two who came into your class for a presentation. For Slim, he has own social generation since he is Canadian, so the cutoff wouldn't apply to him either.

Now for Eric, of course he is in the same cohort PERSONALLY as those one year older than him; however, not SOCIALLY because the events mentioned truly didn't have an impact on him.

If we even take a look at social media, the building blocks were already there. People his age were not using AOL or even MySpace when they were popular which were the most used among Millennials. Even someone 4 years older than him was using MySpace considering it was widely in demand when the person was in high school at the time.

You need to look at generations in social and personal terms and you will see where I'm coming from.

At the beginning of this year, two University students (a male & a female) visited my school and did a presentation in front of my year group (people born in 1999/2000). The woman was born in 1994 and the man was born in 1995. When the two were preparing for the presentation, the man happened to take a glance at the projector, which displayed a picture based on Generation Z and it had the boundary of 1995-2010. As it turned out, the man is currently studying psychology at University, so he studies generations and the characteristics/traits that make up a generation. Anyway, he commented to the woman that he believes "Generation Y ends too early" and that "Gen Y should extend to 2000". He even suggested that there are very few differences between themselves (born in 1994/95) and people born in the Late 90s and 2000. The woman (born in 1994) agreed with him and also believed that 2000 should be the final Gen Y year.

Gen Z is only being defined for the first time, so we'll have to wait about 10-15 years to see what the final definition is. Remember that Gen Y used to be 1977-1994 or something like that for a while, until 77-79/80 got folded into Gen X.

It should be noted that generations don't actually exist, so I don't think we should be tearing each other from the throat over this. :P This isn't like race or gender, people.


Yeah, they wouldn't apply to other countries. Besides, all of them have their own culture, so the cutoff points would be different everywhere else.

Once again, the U.S cutoff shouldn't apply to any country other than its own. You would still be part of the same generation in your region as those two who came into your class for a presentation. For Slim, he has own social generation since he is Canadian, so the cutoff wouldn't apply to him either.

Actually I think the U.S. definitions do apply to other countries, to an extent. But I'm not sure if they have to do with things like 9/11.

An article for The Guardian (a British newspaper), about Millennial economic woes, says the generation was born between 1980 and 1994. PricewaterhouseCoopers (a Brit company) uses a 1980-1995 definition. And McCrindle Research (an Australian company) also uses the 1980-1994 definition.

Part of me thinks they may just be using dates from U.S. researchers without modifying them accurately. For instance, every article I've read, no matter what country, pegs Boomers as 1946-1964. This strikes me as a bit odd and perhaps misleading; surely the Boom didn't span the EXACT same amount of years in every single part of the world? Wouldn't it be at least one or two years off from the U.S. definition?


I think there is a very compelling case for 2000 to be the cut-off year for Gen Y. Everyone born between 1982-2000 were between the ages of 9-18 at some point during the 2000's, the decade when Gen Y culture was at it's peak. Also, people born in 1995 and 1996 were even in their adolescence during the 2000's, so I don't know how you can suggest to Slim95 or Eazy-EMAN1995 that they're not Millennials.

As UltraGameDog said before, generations are not personal. They're social. For example: someone born on December 31, 1945 and someone born on January 1, 1946 went to the same school together, grew up with the same pop culture, etc. Yet one is considered a Silent Generation, while the other is a Baby Boomer, due to the spike in birth rates starting in '46 and ending around '64.

The birth years for Millennials in the United States stop at 1994/5 because those born later cannot process the significance of September 11, 2001.

It should be noted that generations don't actually exist.

I think the U.S. definitions do apply to other countries, to an extent. But I'm not sure if they have to do with things like 9/11.

An article for The Guardian (a British newspaper), about Millennial economic woes, says the generation was born between 1980 and 1994. PricewaterhouseCoopers (a Brit company) uses a 1980-1995 definition. And McCrindle Research (an Australian company) also uses the 1980-1994 definition.

Part of me thinks they may just be using dates from U.S. researchers without modifying them accurately. For instance, every article I've read, no matter what country, pegs Boomers as 1946-1964. This strikes me as a bit odd and perhaps misleading; surely the Boom didn't span the EXACT same amount of years in every single part of the world? Wouldn't it be at least one or two years off from the U.S. definition?
Well they do in some way. There are family, personal and social generations which all have different definitions.

Well no it wouldn't be especially since 9/11 had more of a significance on America than any other country combined.  Each region is going to have their own powerful events that had an effect on them on a larger scale. For the UK, there were some events that impacted them greatly and one that comes to mind is Princess Diana. Now Australia, I couldn't find much, but these may help.

http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/subscriber.nsf/0/FCB1A3CF0893DAE4CA25754C0013D844/$File/20700_generation.pdf

http://mccrindle.com.au/resources/The-ABC-of-XYZ_Chapter-1.pdf

http://mccrindle.com.au/resources/whitepapers/McCrindle-Research_ABC-01_Generations-Defined_Mark-McCrindle.pdf

And yeah, I find that weird. No country would even think to have the same exact cutoff years for a generation as an another one.

I'm guessing so many UK/Canada/Australia sources use US dates for Millennials, Boomers, Gen X, etc. without changing them, because the authors are lazy. :P


Or didn't do any research on actual Millennials and Gen Zers.

I'm guessing so many UK/Canada/Australia sources use US dates for Millennials, Boomers, Gen X, etc. without changing them, because the authors are lazy. :P
That's what I think too and is probably why some users here say they are part of the same generation due to the authors not changing the dates to reflect their own countries. Shoot, they even use the same name for their cohorts which makes them even more lazier. ;D ;D


Or didn't do any research on actual Millennials and Gen Zers.
That too. There is so many misconceptions about both generations that it has become a nightmare for them.

That too. There is so many misconceptions about both generations that it has become a nightmare for them.


Not to mention that either generation can't stand their misconceptions.  >:(

I really despise this article.

This guy suggests that Millennials had the iPod as their first gadget? The IPOD? Those born in the early 80s more than likely had a Walkman or a Discman way before they had an iPod.

Also, this guy is trying to paint Lena Dunham from that awful Girls show as the face of Millennials? What the hell? And she's a child molestor, so I don't think any generation would want to be associated with her. :P

He also seems to be portraying Alex Dunphy as the face of Gen Z, even though most people (including Gen Zs) would ask "Who?" if you said her name to them.

I forgot to mention this, but what the hell is "Shop Jeen"? Googling it, it seems that it's some poorly-reviewed store in NYC that like 100 people have been to.

I don't think teens most would've even *heard* of that. They could've at least named something that people of HEARD OF, like Forever 21.

This article (particularly the graph part) is rubbish!

The more someone denies being a millennial, the more millennial they are.

Now for Eric, of course he is in the same cohort PERSONALLY as those one year older than him; however, not SOCIALLY because the events mentioned truly didn't have an impact on him.


That's a bit far fetched. The events which had an impact on people born in 1994, would have had an impact on those born in 1995 as well. Of course, those events would have impacted people born in 1994 more (as they are older), however you can't suggest that someone born on the 1st January 1995 wouldn't have been as impacted by the events as someone born on the 31st December 1994.

If he's 32 he was born in 1984, or 1983. Hell yeah, he's a Millenial! Someone is in DEEP DENIAL!  ::)  ::)


To a lot of people Millennial = young adult in college or fresh out, usually liberal, can't handle criticism or failure, and from a privileged family.  The actual definition is anybody born between 1982 and the late 1990s (some say as late as 2000).

That's what I think too and is probably why some users here say they are part of the same generation due to the authors not changing the dates to reflect their own countries. Shoot, they even use the same name for their cohorts which makes them even more lazier. ;D ;D
That too. There is so many misconceptions about both generations that it has become a nightmare for them.

It gets more hairy when those from countries like Russia, Germany, Romania, China and South Africa Which each had big changes occur during the 80s and 90s get the same dates as those in countries like the Us and Canada.

The more someone denies being a millennial, the more millennial they are.


I AM NOTTTTT A MILLENIAL!!  >:(  >:(  >:(  ;D

To a lot of people Millennial = young adult in college or fresh out, usually liberal, can't handle criticism or failure, and from a privileged family.  The actual definition is anybody born between 1982 and the late 1990s (some say as late as 2000).


I have lots of Liberals I like. It's just whiny people I can't handle. It's like nails on a chalkboard.  8-P  8-P

I have lots of Liberals I like. It's just whiny people I can't handle. It's like nails on a chalkboard.  8-P  8-P

Conservatives are more whiney than liberals. Complaining about gay marriage and equality is pretty whiney to me.

Conservatives are more whiney than liberals. Complaining about gay marriage and equality is pretty whiney to me.


It's both sides. I just turn off the TV when there's too much politics.

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ7PjVdPmXrFuWggF61LllNgrdGbibJwLFhPHpANLf6tXHxkBq4

Conservatives are more whiney than liberals. Complaining about gay marriage and equality is pretty whiney to me.


I agree.  They complain about "safe spaces" at colleges for LBGTQ and minority students, yet they have their own safe spaces, "churches", where the party line is not to be questioned.

When conservatives went ape sh*t over Starbucks' red holiday cup last year proved the point to me that conservatives are just as "politically correct" as liberals, they just have a different version of what is politically correct.

I agree.  They complain about "safe spaces" at colleges for LBGTQ and minority students, yet they have their own safe spaces, "churches", where the party line is not to be questioned.

When conservatives went ape sh*t over Starbucks' red holiday cup last year proved the point to me that conservatives are just as "politically correct" as liberals, they just have a different version of what is politically correct.


Here's my safe space.

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQBwONvHmKLu50fDDkLH60xVN1z6zWVDqIx56tiIeBolUEUv0WP

That's a bit far fetched. The events which had an impact on people born in 1994, would have had an impact on those born in 1995 as well. Of course, those events would have impacted people born in 1994 more (as they are older), however you can't suggest that someone born on the 1st January 1995 wouldn't have been as impacted by the events as someone born on the 31st December 1994.
I'm not suggesting. That's going by the sources of events they were affected by. Someone who was 14 when the Great Recession hit had a harder time finding a job to support themselves and their family on the side. They were the last folks to EVER be eligible to vote for Obama. They were shaped by the 2004 election as they were the last to most likely remember it.

Shoot, even the Columbine shooting had a significance on them since they were one of the youngest in school when it took place.

Oh, and it's not just events, but also pop culture, traits, atmosphere etc.


It gets more hairy when those from countries like Russia, Germany, Romania, China and South Africa Which each had big changes occur during the 80s and 90s get the same dates as those in countries like the Us and Canada.

Yeah, I agree! That's exactly why generations have never been universal since a lot could have huge changes within each country. 

I'm not suggesting. That's going by the sources of events they were affected by. Someone who was 14 when the Great Recession hit had a harder time finding a job to support themselves and their family on the side. They were the last folks to EVER be eligible to vote for Obama. They were shaped by the 2004 election as they were the last to most likely remember it.


Well you are. You are in-directly stating that someone born on the 1st January 1995 experienced different pop culture, were not as effected by the same events, had completely different traits/characteristics, compared to someone born on the 31st December 1994. If you genuinely believe that it is the case and that the two (someone born on 31st December 1994 and someone born on the 1st January 1995) are entirely different generations, you're an idiot. They're both apart of the same social group. People born in Late 1994/Early 1995 were in the same classes, for goodness sake.

You can follow the facts and figures all you like, however you have to apply a bit of common sense as well.

Conservatives are more whiney than liberals. Complaining about gay marriage and equality is pretty whiney to me.


Both conservatives and liberals are equally whiny. They both complain about crap in America that could be fixed with compromises, since they want to reform crap that they disagree with (e.g. Obamacare).

Conservatives are more whiney than liberals. Complaining about gay marriage and equality is pretty whiney to me.


No, that's not necessarily true. It's both sides who have issues. Conservatives are being overly religious and hateful instead of loving on one another. While there are many liberals being too complacent and accusing everybody of being homophobic when that's not true. There's been too much division and hatred across our country lately.

Well you are. You are in-directly stating that someone born on the 1st January 1995 experienced different pop culture, were not as effected by the same events, had completely different traits/characteristics, compared to someone born on the 31st December 1994. If you genuinely believe that it is the case and that the two (someone born on 31st December 1994 and someone born on the 1st January 1995) are entirely different generations, you're an idiot. They're both apart of the same social group. People born in Late 1994/Early 1995 were in the same classes, for goodness sake.

You can follow the facts and figures all you like, however you have to apply a bit of common sense as well.
Haven't you heard of estimates? They don't have to be exact. That's not what I'm saying. All I'm stating from sources is that 1994/95 is the cutoff and NOT 2000 for many reasons. Go check them out. Most references don't list 2000 as the cutoff and it's not just .com sites either.

Yeah, you're talking about the C/O 2013 which most 1994 folks were NOT apart of. Once again, your age can have an effect on when an event occurs. Do people who were 12 during the recession remember it? Yes, they do; however, they weren't affected by it because they weren't worrying about finding a job at the time.

Oh, and I'm an idiot?  ;D ;D

Not even close. I never said they were two different generations. One is just the youngest of the Millennials and the other is oldest of the Homelanders. In fact, some articles have stated that the older members of the next generation DO recall a few of the events that Millennials were largely impacted by, but it was barely because they were mostly under 5 when the incidents took place.

Haven't you heard of estimates? They don't have to be exact. That's not what I'm saying. All I'm stating from sources is that 1994/95 is the cutoff and NOT 2000 for many reasons. Go check them out. Most references don't list 2000 as the cutoff and it's not just .com sites either.

Yeah, you're talking about the C/O 2013 which most 1994 folks were NOT apart of. Once again, your age can have an effect on when an event occurs. Do people who were 12 during the recession remember it? Yes, they do; however, they weren't affected by it because they weren't worrying about finding a job at the time.

Oh, and I'm an idiot?  ;D ;D

Not even close. I never said they were two different generations. One is just the youngest of the Millennials and the other is oldest of the Homelanders. In fact, some articles have stated that the older members of the next generation DO recall a few of the events that Millennials were largely impacted by, but it was barely because they were mostly under 5 when the incidents took place.


1. There's also some sources that use 96/97/98/99 as cutoffs.

2. C/O 2013 is mostly late 94/early 95 people. Late 90's/Early 00's people can still remember the recession.

3. No.

4. Again, generation spans vary.

2. C/O 2013 is mostly late 94/early 95 people. Late 90's/Early 00's people can still remember the recession.


and mid 95 people too, so he's right it's mostly 1995 born's who were part of C/O 2013.

early & mid 94 born's would have been part of C/O 2012.

I never said they were two different generations. One is just the youngest of the Millennials and the other is oldest of the Homelanders.


You said that people born in 1994 and 1995 are not separate generations, but then you state that people born in 1994 are the youngest of Millennials and 95'ers are oldest of the Homelanders. Go figure...

You said that people born in 1994 and 1995 are not separate generations, but then you state that people born in 1994 are the youngest of Millennials and 95'ers are oldest of the Homelanders. Go figure...


I have never liked "Homelander" as the name for Generation Z.  First, it's too America centric, and also, only the oldest members of that generation even remember 9/11.

Both 1994 and 1995 borns are Millennials so there's no point dividing the December 31st 1994 birth and the January 1st 1995 birth or even the January 1st 1994 births from the December 31st 1995 births.

Generation Z doesn't start until the 2000s.

1. There's also some sources that use 96/97/98/99 as cutoffs.

2. C/O 2013 is mostly late 94/early 95 people. Late 90's/Early 00's people can still remember the recession.

3. No.

4. Again, generation spans vary.


Right, but all of them are rare. The only ones I see in sources now are the 1994, 1995 and the 2000 cutoffs.

Yes, they can, but they weren't affected by it since they weren't looking for jobs at the time.

And that was question was in response of SharkFan calling me a dummy for honestly no reason. ;D


You said that people born in 1994 and 1995 are not separate generations, but then you state that people born in 1994 are the youngest of Millennials and 95'ers are oldest of the Homelanders. Go figure...
Yeah.... not separate.  If they were, then the two wouldn't be able to relate to each other socially in some ways. Like I said, some Plurals CAN recall some of the events that Millennials remember very well.


I have never liked "Homelander" as the name for Generation Z.  First, it's too America centric, and also, only the oldest members of that generation even remember 9/11.
Do you like the "Plural" term for Generation Z?


Both 1994 and 1995 borns are Millennials so there's no point dividing the December 31st 1994 birth and the January 1st 1995 birth or even the January 1st 1994 births from the December 31st 1995 births.

Generation Z doesn't start until the 2000s.
I would agree, but the general consensus (the references) states the Millennials end in 1994/95 with all of the supported evidence.