For me, It would be the late 70s because I have a cousin who was born in 1978 and I don't see him as a parental figure and more like a peer and considering the fact that he was in high school when I was born. I even had a teacher who I think was born between 1977/78 and I see her more as a peer than as a parent (I asked her in private when did she graduate from high school and she said 1996). When I was in high school, I had a teacher aid in one my classes and I think she told us (when it was free time) that she graduated high school between 1997/98 so that makes her born  between 1978-1980. She even showed us prom photos of her and they were film developed, so I can't see her as a parent either. I would consider her more of a peer. I know I might have disagreements with this, especially how I only used 3 people as examples in which I should have used more.

Anyway back to the topic, What is the earliest/latest birth years that you see people as friends/peers and not as parental figures?

Anyone who can't remember the Kennedy assassination is out of the loop.  Kennedy was assassinated in 1963, so I would think anyone born maybe in 1956 or so.

When I was a kid (1990s), I think it was like this:

Parents: 1940-1965

Nowadays, it is a bit weird. Since I am not even 30 and are still a student, I still feel that those people over 40, especially those who look/act a bit older, are still quite distant and therefore more parental like.

So technically in 2014, the "parental like-group" can be stretched until as late as the early-mid 70s, however they definitely overlap with the "buddy-like-group" (1970-80).

As of today, peers are born between 1981 - 1990. It used to be 1991, but I have met some really immature 91ers, so I have changed my mind, sorry about that ;)

When I was a kid (1990s), I think it was like this:

Parents: 1940-1965

Nowadays, it is a bit weird. Since I am not even 30 and are still a student, I still feel that those people over 40, especially those who look/act a bit older, are still quite distant and therefore more parental like.

So technically in 2014, the "parental like-group" can be stretched until as late as the early-mid 70s, however they definitely overlap with the "buddy-like-group" (1970-80).

As of today, peers are born between 1981 - 1990. It used to be 1991, but I have met some really immature 91ers, so I have changed my mind, sorry about that ;)
That's understanding. Some people rather have mature people as peers than immature people, but I think one day it will change as people born in 1991 will be in their late 20s.

Anyone who doesn't have at least some memory of 9/11 to me would be viewed as too young to be a 'peer', which would be 97 or 98.

For me, It would be the late 70s because I have a cousin who was born in 1978 and I don't see him as a parental figure and more like a peer and considering the fact that he was in high school when I was born. I even had a teacher who I think was born between 1977/78 and I see her more as a peer than as a parent (I asked her in private when did she graduate from high school and she said 1996). When I was in high school, I had a teacher aid in one my classes and I think she told us (when it was free time) that she graduated high school between 1997/98 so that makes her born  between 1978-1980. She even showed us prom photos of her and they were film developed, so I can't see her as a parent either. I would consider her more of a peer. I know I might have disagreements with this, especially how I only used 3 people as examples in which I should have used more.

Anyway back to the topic, What is the earliest/latest birth years that you see people as friends/peers and not as parental figures?


Good thread, I've always thought about this stuff alot too. I think it depends how they act and even perhaps look, but in general I'd never think of anyone within 20 years either way as "kid/parent figures". I had early-mid 1960s born babysitters and family friends as a kid, and they seemed cool and youthful to me. And on the other side, even if a modern day 14 year old kid born in 2000 seems very young to me, I still consider them a really little cousin/sibling more than someone I could be their dad (even if I biologically could).

My own parents are 16 years apart (mom 1954, dad 1938) and I even always thought of people my mom's age as "younger adult/parents" and my dad's age as older ones, but those years inbetween, centrally 1940s born early Boomers, are like the standard parent figures to me.

Good thread, I've always thought about this stuff alot too. I think it depends how they act and even perhaps look, but in general I'd never think of anyone within 20 years either way as "kid/parent figures". I had early-mid 1960s born babysitters and family friends as a kid, and they seemed cool and youthful to me. And on the other side, even if a modern day 14 year old kid born in 2000 seems very young to me, I still consider them a really little cousin/sibling more than someone I could be their dad (even if I biologically could).

My own parents are 16 years apart (mom 1954, dad 1938) and I even always thought of people my mom's age as "younger adult/parents" and my dad's age as older ones, but those years inbetween, centrally 1940s born early Boomers, are like the standard parent figures to me.
Thats actually true. If you think about it, the 3 examples I listed are in their 30s, but they are still looking young right now (they could look like they are still in their 20s). You actually can be their dad as you were 18/19 in 2000 when they were born, but I do understand what you are saying. I think it's the same thing with 2 of my cousins. I have older cousins who were born in 1982 and when one of my younger cousins was born in 2000, my older cousins were still in high school just like you were. I think to them that my younger cousin would be more of a little sibling/cousin than them being a parent to my younger cousin.


Anyone who doesn't have at least some memory of 9/11 to me would be viewed as too young to be a 'peer', which would be 97 or 98.
It feels to me that even though they are physically 3/4 years younger than you, I understand that you are saying that they are about 10 years mentally younger than you.

My own parents are 16 years apart (mom 1954, dad 1938) and I even always thought of people my mom's age as "younger adult/parents" and my dad's age as older ones, but those years in between, centrally 1940s born early Boomers, are like the standard parent figures to me.

My Parents are a few years apart, My Mother (1945), My Father (1941)

Anyone who can't remember the Kennedy assassination is out of the loop.  Kennedy was assassinated in 1963, so I would think anyone born maybe in 1956 or so.



I guess I am out of the loop.  :\'( :\'( :\'(  I was alive when that happened, I just don't remember it.

Oh sh!t. I just dated myself again.  :-[ :-[ ;) :D :D ;D ;D ;D



Cat

Thats actually true. If you think about it, the 3 examples I listed are in their 30s, but they are still looking young right now (they could look like they are still in their 20s). You actually can be their dad as you were 18/19 in 2000 when they were born, but I do understand what you are saying. I think it's the same thing with 2 of my cousins. I have older cousins who were born in 1982 and when one of my younger cousins was born in 2000, my older cousins were still in high school just like you were. I think to them that my younger cousin would be more of a little sibling/cousin than them being a parent to my younger cousin.


Very true...I think 15-20 year age gaps are iffy like that, it can swing from a really older sibling/cousin to a young parent. Everyone's interpretation probably depends on your own family too. Like my dad was 43 when I was born, so my perception always swung older, and it used to shock me sometimes.

I clearly remember once around 1991 (when we were 9 or 10) one of my friend's dads picking him up (he was like 35 or 37 and looked youthful) and I was thinking "D*mn that guy seems so young to be your dad!"...and although he would've been a little on the younger side, its very typical, I just wasn't used to that since my dad was like 55 at the time (though he seemed young for it too).

My dad was born in 1949 and he was 37 when he got me and I was only 12.5 when he turned 50. Most of my classmates and friends had fathers still in their late 30s and early 40s (born in the early-mid 60s). That fact always seemed a bit special ;)

And even today: It was not too long ago and I talked with a former classmate. He was shocked that my father was already a 60-something-year old senior wheareas his father had just turned 50.

I was born in 1992 and have always viewed my peers as being anyone who attended school with me. Therefore, anyone born between about mid 1986 and mid 1997 would be in my peer range. Any other people would either be kids, distant adults, or parents.

Therefore, anyone born between about mid 1986 and mid 1997 would be in my peer range.


Maybe today, but not ten years ago when we actually went to school. I barely remember people at my school who were born later than 1990. And even the '90ers were the little ones back then 8)

Maybe today, but not ten years ago when we actually went to school. I barely remember people at my school who were born later than 1990. And even the '90ers were the little ones back then 8)


Yeah, not at the time, but in general as we move through life we're pretty close. Right now 22 versus 27 or 28 doesn't feel like much of a difference, especially now that I've graduated college. Bigger differences than that actually feel sizable to me. At a certain point we're all just going to be considered "old", though.

I was born in 1992 and have always viewed my peers as being anyone who attended school with me. Therefore, anyone born between about mid 1986 and mid 1997 would be in my peer range. Any other people would either be kids, distant adults, or parents.


Would you even consider 1980-85 borns as adults/parents? I'd think someone would have to be at least 15 years older to be closer to "one of the adults" than like an older sibling.

Very true...I think 15-20 year age gaps are iffy like that, it can swing from a really older sibling/cousin to a young parent. Everyone's interpretation probably depends on your own family too. Like my dad was 43 when I was born, so my perception always swung older, and it used to shock me sometimes.

I clearly remember once around 1991 (when we were 9 or 10) one of my friend's dads picking him up (he was like 35 or 37 and looked youthful) and I was thinking "D*mn that guy seems so young to be your dad!"...and although he would've been a little on the younger side, its very typical, I just wasn't used to that since my dad was like 55 at the time (though he seemed young for it too).
They sure can and you're right, it also depends on family too. For instance, both of my parents were 27 when I was born (they actually have been parents since they were 22 as my sister was born in 1988), so maybe that why I swing to both younger people and older people. I have a few friends born in 1995 and they probably aren't used to seeing young parents as their own were around 35/36 when they were born and right now (I've seen them in person and photos of them) they are all in their mid-late 50s. As a result, you are definitely correct as it does depend on how old your family was when you were born and how old they are now.

I have a cousin and two co-workers who are 31. I've just turned 23 and I see these 31-year-olds as peers. There's a pair of twins I used to go to church with who are 19 and I also see them as peers.

Another co-worker is probably about 38 and I see him as more of a 'parent'. I think I'd consider people born in 1997 to be 'children'.

When I was a kid (1990s), I think it was like this:

Parents: 1940-1965

Nowadays, it is a bit weird. Since I am not even 30 and are still a student, I still feel that those people over 40, especially those who look/act a bit older, are still quite distant and therefore more parental like.

So technically in 2014, the "parental like-group" can be stretched until as late as the early-mid 70s, however they definitely overlap with the "buddy-like-group" (1970-80).

As of today, peers are born between 1981 - 1990. It used to be 1991, but I have met some really immature 91ers, so I have changed my mind, sorry about that ;)


I'm only a year younger than you, so I'd say that my parameters on the "parent/peer" scale were pretty close to your's growing up, except for one caveat: my mother was only eighteen when I was born (she was born in early 1969). That always skewed things for me as a kid, since I often viewed her friends (most of whom were born in the early '70s) as more "parental" figures. Oddly, one of my mom's closet friends when I was in junior high was a co-worker of her's born in 1979, meaning that she was only eight years younger than me!  Obviously, that age gap seemed huge when I was twelve and she was twenty, but not so much now.

As far as who I see as my "peer group", I have no problem relating to '91ers, as my younger brother was born that year, and we have most of the same interests. I'd say that I can relate fairly well to anyone that can at least remember some of the pre-internet, cell phone, 3D gaming, and 9/11 era, so, perhaps up to 1996 or so?

I'm only a year younger than you, so I'd say that my parameters on the "parent/peer" scale were pretty close to your's growing up, except for one caveat: my mother was only eighteen when I was born (she was born in early 1969). That always skewed things for me as a kid, since I often viewed her friends (most of whom were born in the early '70s) as more "parental" figures. Oddly, one of my mom's closet friends when I was in junior high was a co-worker of her's born in 1979, meaning that she was only eight years younger than me!  Obviously, that age gap seemed huge when I was twelve and she was twenty, but not so much now.

As far as who I see as my "peer group", I have no problem relating to '91ers, as my younger brother was born that year, and we have most of the same interests. I'd say that I can relate fairly well to anyone that can at least remember some of the pre-internet, cell phone, 3D gaming, and 9/11 era, so, perhaps up to 1996 or so?


That's indeed an interesting perspective. I am one year older than you and my sister is only 9 years younger than your mother. My older sister made it possible for me to relate to late 70s babies when I was younger. Since I never had a younger sibling, it was always hard for me to relate to people a lot younger than me. 1990 was pretty much the upper end even those seemed nothing but really young to me as a kid and teenager.

We have often discussed at this forum that there are "old school" 80s babies (who can relate to the 80s itself) and "rather new school" 80s babies who were only-children or only had younger siblings. Would you say that you belong to the latter?

Good thread, I've always thought about this stuff alot too. I think it depends how they act and even perhaps look, but in general I'd never think of anyone within 20 years either way as "kid/parent figures". I had early-mid 1960s born babysitters and family friends as a kid, and they seemed cool and youthful to me. And on the other side, even if a modern day 14 year old kid born in 2000 seems very young to me, I still consider them a really little cousin/sibling more than someone I could be their dad (even if I biologically could).

My own parents are 16 years apart (mom 1954, dad 1938) and I even always thought of people my mom's age as "younger adult/parents" and my dad's age as older ones, but those years inbetween, centrally 1940s born early Boomers, are like the standard parent figures to me.

Leeway on individual personalities always comes into play with this. Generally I'd say Someone still in high school now I can't think of as a peer. A 1994 born at the very youngest. At the oldest I'd say a person who graduated high school in the mid to late 90's. In school it was different. Age groups stuck closely together. One year off is one year off, as there were plenty of 1986 borns in my grade. A couple grades apart however felt like too much. At the time it is because everyone is still growing up and going through different phases. My parent's were born in the late 40's and my dad is the oldest out of 5. He was out of the house by the time my aunts were still kids. Still I never saw them as young because compared to me they weren't, even when still in their 30's. In high school some teachers were in their early 20's and the girl's would have crushes on them. Even though they weren't much older than us by a great deal, it didn't feel like they were on our level because they were our teachers. Middle school aged kids seem more like younger relative types than anything too, like you said.

We have often discussed at this forum that there are "old school" 80s babies (who can relate to the 80s itself) and "rather new school" 80s babies who were only-children or only had younger siblings. Would you say that you belong to the latter?


Hmm, good question. Even though it's true I didn't have any older siblings, I suppose that I could slant more towards the "old school" side of the ledger, ironically because of my mother. She was so young when I was born that, in a way, she had almost an "older sister" type influence on me growing up, exposing me to alot of the '80s music and pop culture that she still enjoyed throughout my childhood.

Also, the circumstances of my childhood could play a factor in that as well. I grew up in a very small town, and my family didn't have much money. We didn't get a VCR until the early '90s, didn't get cable until the mid '90s, and didn't get a computer until I was nearly in high school. I'd say that my 1994 was probably more primitive than 1984 was for some more well off '80s kids.

Hmm, good question. Even though it's true I didn't have any older siblings, I suppose that I could slant more towards the "old school" side of the ledger, ironically because of my mother.


Yeah, that's what I thought aswell. She was only in her 20s in the 90s, so she was probably still following the trends of the decade. My mother did so aswell, but since she was already in her 30s, not to such an extent. My father was totally out of it, since he was in his 40s in the 90s.

We didn't get a VCR until the early '90s, didn't get cable until the mid '90s, and didn't get a computer until I was nearly in high school. I'd say that my 1994 was probably more primitive than 1984 was for some more well off '80s kids.

I can't really remember a time without cable since we got it in 1989, but we didn't have a VCR until late 1995 ;) My parents were against in for a long time and it was basically for recording stuff. I think I didn't get my first movie video until Christmas 1996.

@unconventional99: I think you had a question 2 hours ago. I just wanted to answear it, but your question is gone now  ;D

I'd say I see people born in the early 70s and before as being around the same age as my parents. Before 1950 and they start seeming a bit more like grandparents, though my grandparents were born much earlier than 1950.

Leeway on individual personalities always comes into play with this. Generally I'd say Someone still in high school now I can't think of as a peer. A 1994 born at the very youngest. At the oldest I'd say a person who graduated high school in the mid to late 90's. In school it was different. Age groups stuck closely together. One year off is one year off, as there were plenty of 1986 borns in my grade. A couple grades apart however felt like too much. At the time it is because everyone is still growing up and going through different phases. My parent's were born in the late 40's and my dad is the oldest out of 5. He was out of the house by the time my aunts were still kids. Still I never saw them as young because compared to me they weren't, even when still in their 30's. In high school some teachers were in their early 20's and the girl's would have crushes on them. Even though they weren't much older than us by a great deal, it didn't feel like they were on our level because they were our teachers. Middle school aged kids seem more like younger relative types than anything too, like you said.


That's very true...when you're a child or teenager, even like 1 or 2 years can make a difference sometimes, especially with middle/high school cliques and stuff and everything changing at breakneck speed! I never dealt with this since I don't have any siblings, so it wasn't a big deal to me, but all through school I guess 1980, 81, 82 and most 83ers felt like my "immediate peers".

I have a cousin and two co-workers who are 31. I've just turned 23 and I see these 31-year-olds as peers. There's a pair of twins I used to go to church with who are 19 and I also see them as peers.

Another co-worker is probably about 38 and I see him as more of a 'parent'. I think I'd consider people born in 1997 to be 'children'.


That's interesting. I hope I'd be more on the sibling/peer side to you...especially since (other than my retro memories) I'm a pretty youthful 33. :) Does the 38 year old guy at work act older/less cool? In my experience, that can really slant it by how certain people act or even look.

I was born in 1978.The earliest birth year that I consider people as my peers is 1970 and the latest year would be 1986.

That's very true...when you're a child or teenager, even like 1 or 2 years can make a difference sometimes, especially with middle/high school cliques and stuff and everything changing at breakneck speed! I never dealt with this since I don't have any siblings, so it wasn't a big deal to me, but all through school I guess 1980, 81, 82 and most 83ers felt like my "immediate peers".


When I was in elementary school I couldn't relate to anybody more than 1 year older/younger than me.

Playing it straight for an '85er:

WWII & Silent Generation: Grandparents
Baby Boomers: Parents
Generation X: Buddies/big kids
1980-1991 born: Peers
1992-2003 born: Little "cats"
2004-now: Children

What a fun topic  :D. I'm a 91er and when it comes to birthyears and who I see as my peer group this is how I have always looks at I

People born from 1985 and before- reasonably older

People born from 1986-1988- people more on the slightly older side to me

People born from 1989-1992/1993- My core peer and friend group. Most friends I had growing up were born around these years, although I do have some that are older than that now.

People born from 1994-1996- Little kids

People born in 1997 and onward- babies

Of course now that I am older my peer group expands. I currently have a friend who is born in 1984 and I consider him a peer being that we are both adults, although he is now in his early 30s while I will be turning 24, so there will be some differences and have a family friend born in 1987 and he is obviously closer to what I would consider a peer than my older 84er friend.

People born from 1994-1996- Little kids


Those are 19-21-year olds and you are only 24. Or is it just kindo of a "psychological" thing  ;D
Even I don't see them as little kids. Little kids are those born from 2000 on - but hey, some of them are already 15 ;)

Those are 19-21-year olds and you are only 24. Or is it just kindo of a "psychological" thing  ;D
Even I don't see them as little kids. Little kids are those born from 2000 on - but hey, some of them are already 15 ;)


I think that the older you get, the larger the threshold becomes. When I was in first grade, I considered kindergarteners "little kids." That's a 1 year age difference. I thought 6th graders were practically adults, and that High Schoolers must have been around practically forever.

At this point? People born within a few years of me are peers.

Those are 19-21-year olds and you are only 24. Or is it just kindo of a "psychological" thing  ;D
Even I don't see them as little kids. Little kids are those born from 2000 on - but hey, some of them are already 15 ;)
Well that's how I saw them growing up. Of course it all changes now that they are older and are young adults, but even now I am not hanging around 94' to 96' borns in my everyday life and have no friends born in any of those years so I don't consider that cohort to be my "core" peer group. ;D

I was born in 1992 and have always viewed my peers as being anyone who attended school with me. Therefore, anyone born between about mid 1986 and mid 1997 would be in my peer range. Any other people would either be kids, distant adults, or parents.

I know this is opinion based but I got to say this is sort of silly. I mean an 85ers and 86ers are pretty the same and in right in the same peer group, yet you connect with an 86er but not an 85er? That doesn't make much sense. It just shows drawing hard arbitrary lines is foolish.

And a 22 y/o and a 28 y/o is a gap as the late 20s are more like the 30s. Early mid 20s is a completely different stage

As a 1992-born, I suppose the earliest year for peer zone is 1973, as 20 years older is about when it starts to feel normal for somebody to be my parent. I can still be friends with someone well older than that, however, so long as I connect with them on a personal level in some way.

Ironically, the youngest aunts & uncles in my family were born in 1978 and early 1979. They are the tail end of Gen X and the last age group I consider more as parents than friends/peers. Early 80's born's are the first I consider to be more peers/friends than parents, and this applies to many of my college classes too. The youngest teachers I had in school who were born in the 80's were the most fun, entertaining classes. The only teachers I keep in contact with on Facebook were born in the 80's. So I go by the 15 year rule as well.

How I would probably view people based on birthyear:

1912-1936: Grandparents
1937-1963: Parents
1964-early 80's: Mentors, pop cultural icons, teachers (even though some are old enough to be my parent, I really view them more as a "mentor" or a "modern pop cultural icon")
1983-1987: The iffy zone between mentors and peers. Personally, I view my high school English teacher born in April 1987 as a mentor (I had him for three years in a row) for sure, but at the same time, I don't find people like Avril Lavigne (born September 1984) and Lindsay Lohan (born July 1986) as being mentors.
1988-1993: Out-of-boundary (sub-generation gap) peers
1994-1995: More "in-boundary" peers
1996: Between "in-boundary" peers and predominant peers
1997-2001: Predominant peer group
2002: Between predominant peers and in-boundary peers


But in general, my main peer group is roughly from around 1996 to 2001, maybe 2002 tops. I haven't really talked with people born after 2002 yet, so it sort of stops at 2002.

My parents had me kind of late (dad was 46 and mom was 39 when I was born) and I have a lot of cousins who were born in the 70's and 80's (Generation X, early Generation Y), so my list here may not really sound "right" for others born in 1999, especially the earlier parts of my list.

Being born in 1999...it's complicated because I'm only 18.

I don't know anyone in person that was born before 1990 that I can call a friend or peer.

Here on inthe00s...there a few born before 1990 that I could consider as a peer but then again...not really :P. I can't only relate to them between the percentages of 5% to 30% (depends on the member).

Being born in 1999...it's complicated because I'm only 18.

I don't know anyone in person that was born before 1990 that I can call a friend or peer.

Here on inthe00s...there a few born before 1990 that I could consider as a peer but then again...not really :P. I can't only relate to them between the percentages of 5% to 30% (depends on the member).


I did have a friend born in 1988 in the past, but I haven't seen her in many years (I probably don't even remember her name). I also had several friends born in the early and mid 1990's in the past.

A new friend of mine (born in January 1999) has an uncle born in around 1987 or 1988 (forgot which one).

Hmm, good question. Even though it's true I didn't have any older siblings, I suppose that I could slant more towards the "old school" side of the ledger, ironically because of my mother. She was so young when I was born that, in a way, she had almost an "older sister" type influence on me growing up, exposing me to alot of the '80s music and pop culture that she still enjoyed throughout my childhood.

Also, the circumstances of my childhood could play a factor in that as well. I grew up in a very small town, and my family didn't have much money. We didn't get a VCR until the early '90s, didn't get cable until the mid '90s, and didn't get a computer until I was nearly in high school. I'd say that my 1994 was probably more primitive than 1984 was for some more well off '80s kids.


Though it's kind of late for me to mention this, happy belated birthday.

A new friend of mine (born in January 1999) has an uncle born in around 1987 or 1988 (forgot which one).

Yeah but an uncle is not someones peer...unless you are very close in age.

Yeah but an uncle is not someones peer...unless you are very close in age.


That's why I said my list could seem odd to others of the same age.  ;D

Though it's kind of late for me to mention this, happy belated birthday.


Thanks! Honestly, I'm surprised that so many people actually remembered that I was a July baby.

By the way, the flip side of this question is interesting as well. What are the oldest people that you feel like something of a mentor towards?

The reason I ask this is because pretty much all of the kids I've met born 2000 and later tend to view me as more of an older mentor type guy than a peer. Probably because the age gap is just so large. Any kid born after that is pretty much literally young enough to be my kid, so I guess there's something of a natural paternal feeling there.

When it comes to you mid and late '90s guys, you are the youngest people that still feel like a peer to me, even if slightly distant. As long as somebody is old enough to remember Pokemon during it's peak, or playing the N64 or PS1 when they were still popular, I regard you as more a younger brother or peer than somebody that's part of a totally different generation.

Probably around the early to mid 70's for me.

I don't care what year my friends are born in as long as they're nice and don't talk sheesh.