There isn't much of a difference between 1990 pop like New Kids on the Block and Taylor Dayne and 1999 pop like NSYNC and Britney Spears in some ways. Between 1992 and 1996 there wasn't very much teen pop in the States, but there was pop R&B which is almost the same thing.

There isn't much of a difference between 1990 pop like New Kids on the Block and Taylor Dayne and 1999 pop like NSYNC and Britney Spears in some ways. Between 1992 and 1996 there wasn't very much teen pop in the States, but there was pop R&B which is almost the same thing.


I suppose so. It's sort of similar to hair metal in that it started out in the beginning of the decade, slowly built up, and peaked at the end. I was actually just thinking about how crappy in its own way 1999 was...people forget about it because of how crappy now is, but that was the absolute most vulgar/tasteless era known to man, home of the pedophiliac worship of Britney and the boy bands, and the vulgarity and sexism of nu metal.

I suppose so. It's sort of similar to hair metal in that it started out in the beginning of the decade, slowly built up, and peaked at the end. I was actually just thinking about how crappy in its own way 1999 was...people forget about it because of how crappy now is, but that was the absolute most vulgar/tasteless era known to man, home of the pedophiliac worship of Britney and the boy bands, and the vulgarity and sexism of nu metal.


I think 2006 is more tasteful than 1999. 1999 was complete sheesh, honestly.

I think 2006 is more tasteful than 1999. 1999 was complete sheesh, honestly.


I did like a few things from 1999, but they weren't "1999 things", if you know what I mean. They were artists from other parts of the '90s who were still going and happened to release albums in 1999 (Tori Amos, Beck), which were not big things at the time, or only mildly popular. 1999 was the first year that could be done without pop culturally. I only miss it a little because it was less pretentious than the mid-'00s. Do you think the pretentiousness/metrosexuality of the mid-'00s has alot to do with how completely crass c. 1999 was?

I did like a few things from 1999, but they weren't "1999 things", if you know what I mean. They were artists from other parts of the '90s who were still going and happened to release albums in 1999 (Tori Amos, Beck), which were not big things at the time, or only mildly popular. 1999 was the first year that could be done without pop culturally. I only miss it a little because it was less pretentious than the mid-'00s. Do you think the pretentiousness/metrosexuality of the mid-'00s has alot to do with how completely crass c. 1999 was?


I think so. 1999 is so crass the vulgarity dates the year and makes it look old. I like how the mid '00s have seen a return of class.

I think so. 1999 is so crass the vulgarity dates the year and makes it look old. I like how the mid '00s have seen a return of class.


I think by 1999 is when the "down to earth" qualities of the first 2/3 of the '90s, even up to 1998, got somehow twisted into being tasteless. 1999-2001 as a whole was quite crass and immature, everything then was made for immature seventh graders. It's just a shame it went in the other direction towards being pretentious and "hipster" as part of the '90s backlash.

I think by 1999 is when the "down to earth" qualities of the first 2/3 of the '90s, even up to 1998, got somehow twisted into being tasteless. 1999-2001 as a whole was quite crass and immature, everything then was made for immature seventh graders. It's just a shame it went in the other direction towards being pretentious and "hipster" as part of the '90s backlash.


From a family video from 2001: "Limp Bizkit rule!"  ;D That sums up the feeling of the very late '90s/very early '00s.

From a family video from 2001: "Limp Bizkit rule!"  ;D That sums up the feeling of the very late '90s/very early '00s.


Everything then was so junior high, which I think follows my theory that '00s culture is following the progression of 1988ers. That feeling sort of ended around 9/11. Which would you rather have, the pretentious/hipster '00s or the crass Y2K era? I think it's a tie, I don't like either...the extreme of the crassness of 1999 caused people to go further in the direction towards snootiness than ever before seen in pop culture.

Everything then was so junior high, which I think follows my theory that '00s culture is following the progression of 1988ers. That feeling sort of ended around 9/11. Which would you rather have, the pretentious/hipster '00s or the crass Y2K era? I think it's a tie, I don't like either...the extreme of the crassness of 1999 caused people to go further in the direction towards snootiness than ever before seen in pop culture.


I think they're different. The mid '00s is too pretentious, too soulless, the late '90s and early '00s were too juvenile and stupid.

I think they're different. The mid '00s is too pretentious, too soulless, the late '90s and early '00s were too juvenile and stupid.


When do you think the '90s stopped being "down to earth" and started being "crass"? I'm going to say sometime around the end of 1998. Even earlier 1998 had some stuff that wasn't like that.

When do you think the '90s stopped being "down to earth" and started being "crass"? I'm going to say sometime around the end of 1998. Even earlier 1998 had some stuff that wasn't like that.


Beginning in 1996, not completely until late 1999.

Beginning in 1996, not completely until late 1999.


A little bit of that "down to earth" feel left every year starting around 1996, yeah. Crass culture wasn't completely unavoidable until around the turn into 1999, though. Nu metal coming in big time in late 1998 really sealed it.

Everything then was so junior high, which I think follows my theory that '00s culture is following the progression of 1988ers. That feeling sort of ended around 9/11. Which would you rather have, the pretentious/hipster '00s or the crass Y2K era? I think it's a tie, I don't like either...the extreme of the crassness of 1999 caused people to go further in the direction towards snootiness than ever before seen in pop culture.



I agree. I was in Junior High at the time and it seemed like everything was custom made for pre-teens. Even some of the 'edgier' stuff like Papa Roach, Korn etc. was hugely popular when I was in the 7th and 8th grade. As far as "1999ish" stuff being juvenile and stupid, that's pretty much right that late '90s/very early '00s peroid was a very rude "in your face" era.

Everything then was so junior high, which I think follows my theory that '00s culture is following the progression of 1988ers. That feeling sort of ended around 9/11. Which would you rather have, the pretentious/hipster '00s or the crass Y2K era? I think it's a tie, I don't like either...the extreme of the crassness of 1999 caused people to go further in the direction towards snootiness than ever before seen in pop culture.

Yeah, I'd say that "Junior High pop culture" air started to pick up around Summer '98, but I distinctly remember knowing it was a new era when Ricky Martin got huge around May or June of '99. I felt it was noticeably removed even from Fall '98. Even the parts of pop culture or music that I did like from 1999, I was slightly embarrased to admit. I felt much "too old" for it, ironically I felt more too old for 1999 pop culture then than I do for 2006 pop culture now.

Some of it was just so silly/crappy, it couldn't really be taken seriously, like Limp Bizkit. ;D

Yeah, I'd say that "Junior High pop culture" air started to pick up around Summer '98, but I distinctly remember knowing it was a new era when Ricky Martin got huge around May or June of '99. I felt it was noticeably removed even from Fall '98. Even the parts of pop culture or music that I did like from 1999, I was slightly embarrased to admit. I felt much "too old" for it, ironically I felt more too old for 1999 pop culture then than I do for 2006 pop culture now.

Some of it was just so silly/crappy, it couldn't really be taken seriously, like Limp Bizkit. ;D


Yeah the pop culture in 99 was very much targeted to the young teen/pre teen, whereas the mid 2000s pop culture is probably more targeted to people mid-teens to early 20s.

BTW, as for the original question, I'd say yes, sort of.

The "leftover '80s" boy band/teen pop (NKOTB, Debbie Gibson, Bobby Brown, Taylor Dayne and maybe Richard Marx, although actually the latter two are a bit more varied) was around 1990-mid 1991, and the "1999ish" teen pop didn't get big until mid '97.

From late 1991 to early 1997 (i.e. the post New Kids, pre Spice Girls), it was more in the form of Boyz II Men, All 4 One, etc. You know how around 2001, alot of the boy bands shifted to a more rap/hip hop sound to try and update themselves? I actually think that's what happened to the c. 1990 boy band sound in the mid '90s - they just did more R&B/soul type music.

Yeah, I'd say that "Junior High pop culture" air started to pick up around Summer '98, but I distinctly remember knowing it was a new era when Ricky Martin got huge around May or June of '99. I felt it was noticeably removed even from Fall '98. Even the parts of pop culture or music that I did like from 1999, I was slightly embarrased to admit. I felt much "too old" for it, ironically I felt more too old for 1999 pop culture then than I do for 2006 pop culture now.

Some of it was just so silly/crappy, it couldn't really be taken seriously, like Limp Bizkit. ;D


I think most of it was targeted at people who were like a couple of years older than me to born about 1985...people in my grade were still too young to care about Limp Bizkit to be cool at their height in 2000. There were certain things from 1999 that I did like ("No Scrubs", for example), but overall, I thought it was a little stupid even then. I would say culture 1999-2001 was targeted at people between the ages of about 9-15 as opposed to 14-22, which it is now, as Brian said.

Yeah, I agree...it shifted to being R&B/soul type "heartthrob" music like Boyz II Men and All 4 One in the core '90s...

I think most of it was targeted at people who were like a couple of years older than me to born about 1985...people in my grade were still too young to care about Limp Bizkit to be cool at their height in 2000. There were certain things from 1999 that I did like ("No Scrubs", for example), but overall, I thought it was a little stupid even then. I would say culture 1999-2001 was targeted at people between the ages of about 9-15 as opposed to 14-22, which it is now, as Brian said.

Yeah, I agree...it shifted to being R&B/soul type "heartthrob" music like Boyz II Men and All 4 One in the core '90s...

Would you think 1999ish pop culture centered on 1985-88ers? Of course things have changed now, but at the time (when I was like 16-19/20), I sorta felt distanced from '85ers, which were the first true group of people to start making me feel old/lame/uncool - in 1999, alot of them at my school seemed to be far more like "big 1987ers" than "little 1982ers" just because of their obsession with Limp Bizkit or the chicks being crazy for boy band members, and often using the "I wasn't born/old enough" yet excuse for ripping on the '80s, for example. (Although of course, they weren't all like that). ;)

Would you think 1999ish pop culture centered on 1985-88ers? Of course things have changed now, but at the time (when I was like 16-19/20), I sorta felt distanced from '85ers, which were the first true group of people to start making me feel old/lame/uncool - in 1999, alot of them at my school seemed to be far more like "big 1987ers" than "little 1982ers" just because of their obsession with Limp Bizkit or the chicks being crazy for boy band members, and often using the "I wasn't born/old enough" yet excuse for ripping on the '80s, for example. (Although of course, they weren't all like that). ;)


The 1985ers who were in 12th grade when I was in 7th grade seemed like a mix of "big 1987ers" and "little 1982ers" in a way. Like some of the people who were into grunge and were more "artsy" or into theater and whatnot seemed more like '90s people, whereas the rest of the people struck me as "big 1987ers" and weren't all that different from the 10th graders then. As a rule, people my age and born in 1989 seem to be more "little '88ers", like we followed in their footsteps to a degree. I think you can divide Y at the smallest into 1981-1982, 1983-1985, 1986-1987, 1988-1990, 1991-1992, and 1993-1995. Yeah, 1999ish pop culture was centered on people born in 1987, roughly. Even people my age, born in late 1989-mid 1990, were a little bit young for certain aspects of it (nu metal, for example.)

Early Gen Y: Late 1981 - Mid 1985 (second half of the '90s generation, young enough to be into some Y2K culture)
Mid Gen Y: Late 1985 - Mid 1990 (peak Gen Y, remembers most of the '90s, old enough for Y2K and mid '00s culture)
Late Gen Y: Late 1990 - Mid 1995 (late Gen Y, remembers the '90s vaguely, emo/Disney Channel generation)

Yeah, 1999ish pop culture was centered on people born in 1987, roughly. Even people my age, born in late 1989-mid 1990, were a little bit young for certain aspects of it (nu metal, for example.)



Yeah, the Y2K culture was probably mostly centered on people born in 1987-1988, as I said before that stuff was huge when I was in junior high around that time. Do you agree that 1990 is probably the last year that someone could have been born in to have been old enough to get into some '1999ish' stuff? I think so since the teen pop/boyband stuff was aimed at kids as young as 9/10 I think those born in 1989/1990 are the last group that could have really gotten into it.

Yeah, the Y2K culture was probably mostly centered on people born in 1987-1988, as I said before that stuff was huge when I was in junior high around that time. Do you agree that 1990 is probably the last year that someone could have been born in to have been old enough to get into some '1999ish' stuff? I think so since the teen pop/boyband stuff was aimed at kids as young as 9/10 I think those born in 1989/1990 are the last group that could have really gotten into it.


I think either people born in 1990 or maybe 1991, even. I remember people in my grade were quite into Y2K, not the Limp Bizkit element, more the N'Sync element. But I think somebody born around 1991 could've gotten quite into it, as well.

I don't really think that emo much defines people born after 1992, I don't see many of them that into emo. Really, it moreso, in its whole scope defines people born within two years or so of 1990 on either end, along with '80s nostalgia.

I think either people born in 1990 or maybe 1991, even. I remember people in my grade were quite into Y2K, not the Limp Bizkit element, more the N'Sync element. But I think somebody born around 1991 could've gotten quite into it, as well.

I don't really think that emo much defines people born after 1992, I don't see many of them that into emo. Really, it moreso, in its whole scope defines people born within two years or so of 1990 on either end, along with '80s nostalgia.


Emo will probably attract people born in 1993-1995 as the '00s ends. I think emo centers around 1991, it probably goes from 1988-1992.

The 1985ers who were in 12th grade when I was in 7th grade seemed like a mix of "big 1987ers" and "little 1982ers" in a way. Like some of the people who were into grunge and were more "artsy" or into theater and whatnot seemed more like '90s people, whereas the rest of the people struck me as "big 1987ers" and weren't all that different from the 10th graders then. As a rule, people my age and born in 1989 seem to be more "little '88ers", like we followed in their footsteps to a degree. I think you can divide Y at the smallest into 1981-1982, 1983-1985, 1986-1987, 1988-1990, 1991-1992, and 1993-1995. Yeah, 1999ish pop culture was centered on people born in 1987, roughly. Even people my age, born in late 1989-mid 1990, were a little bit young for certain aspects of it (nu metal, for example.)

I agree. I think since pop culture was changing very fast from, say 1989-94, and again from 1997-01, it really hinges on what kind of childhood people had in determining what they're gonna like or who they'll most be like.

For instance, I've seen this tons of times. Like an '85er whose parents were more restrictive with them and hence they didn't listen to much music or see anything beyond a G-rated movie until they were 10 in 1995. They could have a totally different viewpoint on stuff than even, say a 1982er who were more observant/exposed to/liking of things when they were kids (i.e. the way I was). ;)

Likewise, a sheltered 1992er might diss the '90s today, but even a more observant 1990er (take yourself for instance :) ) again would probably feel a little "old" by comparison.

I've also frequently said I believe (in a sense), the roughly 1983-87 group are "in between" when it comes to '80s nostalgia. They tend to have that "Ewww they're so g*y, I was too young" attitude about it. 1982ers seem to be the last people who would be guaranteed to have some firsthand love of the '80s (even the ones who dissed the h*ll out of it would remember stuff when they were 7 in '89), and it's more those your age (1988-92ers or so) that have the '80s nostalgia or are more accepting of that sort of thing.

Both based on what I've seen on the Internet/message boards like this, as well as TV or what I've observed in real life.

I agree. I think since pop culture was changing very fast from, say 1989-94, and again from 1997-01, it really hinges on what kind of childhood people had in determining what they're gonna like or who they'll most be like.

For instance, I've seen this tons of times. Like an '85er whose parents were more restrictive with them and hence they didn't listen to much music or see anything beyond a G-rated movie until they were 10 in 1995. They could have a totally different viewpoint on stuff than even, say a 1982er who were more observant/exposed to/liking of things when they were kids (i.e. the way I was). ;)

Likewise, a sheltered 1992er might diss the '90s today, but even a more observant 1990er (take yourself for instance :) ) again would probably feel a little "old" by comparison.

I've also frequently said I believe (in a sense), the roughly 1983-87 group are "in between" when it comes to '80s nostalgia. They tend to have that "Ewww they're so g*y, I was too young" attitude about it. 1982ers seem to be the last people who would be guaranteed to have some firsthand love of the '80s (even the ones who dissed the h*ll out of it would remember stuff when they were 7 in '89), and it's more those your age (1988-92ers or so) that have the '80s nostalgia or are more accepting of that sort of thing.

Both based on what I've seen on the Internet/message boards like this, as well as TV or what I've observed in real life.



I totally agree :). I'll admit that I have no legitimate memories of the '80s at all and I'd imagine the majority of those born between 1986 and 1990 dont either. Most of the people around my age have '80s nostalgia because it was on the fringe of our existence and seems distant and exciting. It also feels much older to most of us than those born in 1975 or even people born in the early '80s like you Marty. Of course there are just as many people around my age that reject the '80s for the same reasons.

I think 1992ers tend to feel the same way about the '90s that you would about the '80s, that they were there and have very detailed memories of 1998 and 1999, but have a certain intrest for the early and mid '90s which they can remember very little of. 1993ers+ tend to view the '90s as retro and either really dig them or just flat out hate them.

BTW, as for the original question, I'd say yes, sort of.

The "leftover '80s" boy band/teen pop (NKOTB, Debbie Gibson, Bobby Brown, Taylor Dayne and maybe Richard Marx, although actually the latter two are a bit more varied) was around 1990-mid 1991, and the "1999ish" teen pop didn't get big until mid '97.



Deborah Gibson isn't teen pop, she was just pop, now A/C pop.  Though I consider Deborah as a pop singer/songwriter.

I'm tired of people still considering Debbie Gibson "teen pop" since her music has evolved.



Heck Alanis was teen pop too and Ashley Tisdale has jumped the band wagon, though I know she'll stick to acting once she leaves Disney...

Emo will probably attract people born in 1993-1995 as the '00s ends. I think emo centers around 1991, it probably goes from 1988-1992.


It probably has the same fan configuration as hair metal (the main fans are born around the '1 year, like I think the most hair metal fans were probably born around 1971, from what I've observed), but that the '3-'5 people will be sort of into it but never to the degree or with the same intensity, or stick with it as much, as the people who were born a little earlier. The classes of '11-'13 will be coming into emo in its waning days, probably, if it's peaking at the moment. For example, alot of people around my age and about within the range of two years older than me seem to be the primary audience for "hip emo" like Arcade Fire or the Postal Service. It's the kids born in 1991 and 1992 who really seem to looove stuff like Taking Back Sunday, though the audience for it goes back to the class of '06 or even earlier.

I definitely feel a little old compared to your average '92er, particularly somebody who was a little bit sheltered and didn't really get into pop culture at all until the period right around 9/11. They were too young for the teen pop/Eminem period around 2000 (to be really into it anyway, I can imagine most of them sort of liked it, not Eminem but the other stuff), they were too young for nu metal and too young to have even gotten into grunge and other alt hard rock like the Pumpkins around 1999-2000 when it was in its last, waning days of coolness (which alot of us did), and were too young to even really remember the mid-'90s. Part of this is since pop culture changes so fast...people my age remember Jurassic Park, The Lion King when they came out for instance, and Boyz II Men/Mariah Carey's classic days.

Yeah, the 1983-1987ers are in between as for '80s nostalgia. Some of them might be into it in a way. They were too young to have alot to do with the '80s in a sense, but have too many '90s and Y2Kish anti-'80s associations (though even Y2K was not as anti-'80s as the mid-'90s) to really love the '80s. I think '80s nostalgia centers on people born in 1990, and overall people born late 1987-mid 1992. I agree with machine_head that people born around 1992ers feel sort of split around the '90s. On one hand, alot of them diss the hell out of it, but even they have alot of memories of '98 and '99. I think people born then would be more likely to diss the Y2K era than the early-mid '90s, which alot of them seem to have an interest in since they don't remember it as well.

And as for teen pop (the topic,  ;D), I think it's really been around since like, the 1940s in one form or another at all times, though it's more and less popular at certain times. People don't admit this, but alot of the poppy MTV new wave of the c. 1984 period was sort of teen pop, not that it was a bad thing. Like Duran Duran and Wham! are new wave boy bands and Cyndi Lauper was an excellent pop-wave singer with teen pop leanings and marketing.

Hmm, I'm trying to think what music I associate with people who were born around 1982. I think of alot of people who were born around then as liking later '90s alternative rock/pop like the Wallflowers, Weezer, Ben Folds Five, Radiohead, Oasis, No Doubt, etc., Lilith Fair sort of Sarah MacLachlan music, third-wave ska, dance music, '90s R&B, some grunge, etc. But people born in 1981 and 1982 were still a little young for grunge..people born 1976-1980 seem to be the "grunge range."

I agree. I think since pop culture was changing very fast from, say 1989-94, and again from 1997-01, it really hinges on what kind of childhood people had in determining what they're gonna like or who they'll most be like.

For instance, I've seen this tons of times. Like an '85er whose parents were more restrictive with them and hence they didn't listen to much music or see anything beyond a G-rated movie until they were 10 in 1995. They could have a totally different viewpoint on stuff than even, say a 1982er who were more observant/exposed to/liking of things when they were kids (i.e. the way I was). ;)

Likewise, a sheltered 1992er might diss the '90s today, but even a more observant 1990er (take yourself for instance :) ) again would probably feel a little "old" by comparison.

I've also frequently said I believe (in a sense), the roughly 1983-87 group are "in between" when it comes to '80s nostalgia. They tend to have that "Ewww they're so g*y, I was too young" attitude about it. 1982ers seem to be the last people who would be guaranteed to have some firsthand love of the '80s (even the ones who dissed the h*ll out of it would remember stuff when they were 7 in '89), and it's more those your age (1988-92ers or so) that have the '80s nostalgia or are more accepting of that sort of thing.

Both based on what I've seen on the Internet/message boards like this, as well as TV or what I've observed in real life.


Mmm... Well, some of my closest friends were born in '82, and there is no substantial difference between them and people born in '83 (like moi). Also, I don't have that attitude about the '80s at all. In fact, I remember them - from the murky point of view of a young child, of course, but I do remember them and I appreciate those memories. :)

I think it's pretty difficult to narrow things down to the point where you can make accurate generalizations about people who are only a year apart in age. Just my 2 cents.

There were Boy Bands in the 2000s.  In Canada, we had SoulDecision :D

There were Boy Bands in the 2000s.  In Canada, we had SoulDecision :D


"Baby, you know you gooot it!
And you know I waaant it!
Don't you think it's time we went a bit further?
Ohhh, yeah!"

Ah yes. How fondly I remember. ;)

*stabs self*

Mmm... Well, some of my closest friends were born in '82, and there is no substantial difference between them and people born in '83 (like moi). Also, I don't have that attitude about the '80s at all. In fact, I remember them - from the murky point of view of a young child, of course, but I do remember them and I appreciate those memories. :)

I think it's pretty difficult to narrow things down to the point where you can make accurate generalizations about people who are only a year apart in age. Just my 2 cents.


True, true. ;)

I admit, that's a big time generalization, sorta based on the way I've seen some people in that age range perceive things in the past (then again, even those people have probably evolved in their views from when they were, say 15 in 1998).

I've very much met people born in '85 or '87 that dug retro stuff/the '80s/classic rock, you name it, so I try not to categorize anyone automatically. That's probably more just what the "stereotypical" 1983-87ers were/are like, but the bad examples always tend to overshadow the good ones.

It probably has the same fan configuration as hair metal (the main fans are born around the '1 year, like I think the most hair metal fans were probably born around 1971, from what I've observed), but that the '3-'5 people will be sort of into it but never to the degree or with the same intensity, or stick with it as much, as the people who were born a little earlier. The classes of '11-'13 will be coming into emo in its waning days, probably, if it's peaking at the moment. For example, alot of people around my age and about within the range of two years older than me seem to be the primary audience for "hip emo" like Arcade Fire or the Postal Service. It's the kids born in 1991 and 1992 who really seem to looove stuff like Taking Back Sunday, though the audience for it goes back to the class of '06 or even earlier.

I definitely feel a little old compared to your average '92er, particularly somebody who was a little bit sheltered and didn't really get into pop culture at all until the period right around 9/11. They were too young for the teen pop/Eminem period around 2000 (to be really into it anyway, I can imagine most of them sort of liked it, not Eminem but the other stuff), they were too young for nu metal and too young to have even gotten into grunge and other alt hard rock like the Pumpkins around 1999-2000 when it was in its last, waning days of coolness (which alot of us did), and were too young to even really remember the mid-'90s. Part of this is since pop culture changes so fast...people my age remember Jurassic Park, The Lion King when they came out for instance, and Boyz II Men/Mariah Carey's classic days.

Yeah, the 1983-1987ers are in between as for '80s nostalgia. Some of them might be into it in a way. They were too young to have alot to do with the '80s in a sense, but have too many '90s and Y2Kish anti-'80s associations (though even Y2K was not as anti-'80s as the mid-'90s) to really love the '80s. I think '80s nostalgia centers on people born in 1990, and overall people born late 1987-mid 1992. I agree with machine_head that people born around 1992ers feel sort of split around the '90s. On one hand, alot of them diss the hell out of it, but even they have alot of memories of '98 and '99. I think people born then would be more likely to diss the Y2K era than the early-mid '90s, which alot of them seem to have an interest in since they don't remember it as well.

And as for teen pop (the topic,  ;D), I think it's really been around since like, the 1940s in one form or another at all times, though it's more and less popular at certain times. People don't admit this, but alot of the poppy MTV new wave of the c. 1984 period was sort of teen pop, not that it was a bad thing. Like Duran Duran and Wham! are new wave boy bands and Cyndi Lauper was an excellent pop-wave singer with teen pop leanings and marketing.



First off, I agree with the correlation between emo and hair metal. The average fan into the earlier hair metal stuff(Bon Jovi, Quiet Riot, Ratt, Def Leppards early stuff etc.) would have been born in the late '60s and liked that stuff c. 1986, whereas as 1971er would have been into the late waning era(Warrant, Poison, Skid Row, Saigon Kick etc.) in about 1990 or so. With emo I think this will be considered the peak of the genre, and now the average emo fan was born in around 1988 or so. 1991ers will become the 'average' fan in about 2008 or 2009 when the genre will be in its waning days.

I fell kinda old in comparison to '92ers as well. Not really '90ers or even '91ers because they don't really seem that much different from me(for example my brother was born in '91 and he's mostly into the same stuff I am). I think that '92ers are really the first group that feels 'too young' for the '90s, in that, even '91ers can remember 1996 and 1997 whereas '92ers can only remember the relatively new school 1998 and 1999, but like I said, there still different from the average '93er who doesn't have any '90s experience at all and tends to view the '90s as 'retro'.

Btw in response to your other post, I think that most '82ers were more into the mid '90s alternative rock stuff that you mentioned, most were just a little to young to have really been into grunge c. 1993.

First off, I agree with the correlation between emo and hair metal. The average fan into the earlier hair metal stuff(Bon Jovi, Quiet Riot, Ratt, Def Leppards early stuff etc.) would have been born in the late '60s and liked that stuff c. 1986, whereas as 1971er would have been into the late waning era(Warrant, Poison, Skid Row, Saigon Kick etc.) in about 1990 or so. With emo I think this will be considered the peak of the genre, and now the average emo fan was born in around 1988 or so. 1991ers will become the 'average' fan in about 2008 or 2009 when the genre will be in its waning days.

I fell kinda old in comparison to '92ers as well. Not really '90ers or even '91ers because they don't really seem that much different from me(for example my brother was born in '91 and he's mostly into the same stuff I am). I think that '92ers are really the first group that feels 'too young' for the '90s, in that, even '91ers can remember 1996 and 1997 whereas '92ers can only remember the relatively new school 1998 and 1999, but like I said, there still different from the average '93er who doesn't have any '90s experience at all and tends to view the '90s as 'retro'.

Btw in response to your other post, I think that most '82ers were more into the mid '90s alternative rock stuff that you mentioned, most were just a little to young to have really been into grunge c. 1993.


Yeah, the average peak emo fan is born 1988-1990, probably, like your average Bright Eyes addict. But somebody born 1991-1993 or so will be into emo in the late '00s when it's in its waning days. The same thing goes for nu metal...I think of your average, dyed-in-the-wool Limp Bizkit fan as being born in 1985, but an SOAD or Linkin Park "later nu metal" fan as being born more around 1987.

For example, Claire in the show Six Feet Under, who was supposed to be born in 1983, seems sort of like a typical 1983-1985er who was more adult/artsy and was sort of a "little 1982er"...but meanwhile, there were some other characters on the show who were all into nu metal and such and seemed more like "older 1987ers." People born 1983-1985 tend to be split this way, definitely, between people who remind me of younger versions of the people born around 1982 and older and older versions of somebody born in 1986 and 1987. Yeah...somebody born in 1982 missed grunge by just a hair. Not that they couldn't have liked it/been peripherally part of the fan range, but they could not have been part of the subculture the same way somebody born in 1977 who was 16 in 1993.

True, true. ;)

I admit, that's a big time generalization, sorta based on the way I've seen some people in that age range perceive things in the past (then again, even those people have probably evolved in their views from when they were, say 15 in 1998).

I've very much met people born in '85 or '87 that dug retro stuff/the '80s/classic rock, you name it, so I try not to categorize anyone automatically. That's probably more just what the "stereotypical" 1983-87ers were/are like, but the bad examples always tend to overshadow the good ones.


These age-ranges always seem so arbitrary to me. You could just as easily say that people born between 1981-1983, 1982-1984, 1980-1985, 1984-1987, or (as you just have) 1983-1987 have some kind of overarching mentality, and then dismiss or approve of them accordingly. Generalizations about people are unavoidable if we're to have a discussion, of course, but when they're based on very specific things - such as a precise year of birth - they come across to me as fairly glib and dicey.

I think the only very meaningful difference between '82ers and '83ers - both of whom I've grown up with my whole life - is that '82ers are a year older. If you gathered a bunch of us into a room, and your life depended on guessing the years of our birth based on our appearances, personalities, tastes in music, and opinions, then I'd have to wish you loads of luck.... 'Cause you'd need it. ;)

I don't mean to sound like I'm harping on you personally, Marty... I enjoy your posts. :) This is actually a little quibble I've had with the general board before.

These age-ranges always seem so arbitrary to me. You could just as easily say that people born between 1981-1983, 1982-1984, 1980-1985, 1984-1987, or (as you just have) 1983-1987 have some kind of overarching mentality, and then dismiss or approve of them accordingly. Generalizions about people are unavoidable if we're to have a discussion, of course, but when they're based on very specific things - such as a precise year of birth - they come across to me as fairly glib and dicey.

I think the only very meaningful difference between '82ers and '83ers - both of whom I've grown up with my whole life - is that '82ers are a year older. If you gathered a bunch of us into a room, and your life depended on guessing the years of our birth based on our appearances, personalities, tastes in music, and opinions, then I'd have to wish you loads of luck.... 'Cause you'd need it. ;)

I don't mean to sound like I'm harping on you personally, Marty... I enjoy your posts. :) This is actually a little quibble I've had with the general board before.


You probably could say that, if you grouped a random number of people, for any of these age groups, you could find certain similarities applying to exactly those age ranges, on average. Though of course it doesn't apply to a majority of them, or even a large plurality, but there are similarities you can detect like that.