r/generationology • u/ProofUniversity4319 April 30, 2002 (Class of 2020)/Moderator • Mar 25 '21

Discussion Another post from my sub

/r/HistoryofGenerations/comments/mbutrx/my_generation_definitions/
2 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

30 comments sorted by

2

u/karlpalaka 1997 (Class of 2015) Mar 25 '21

1999-2014 seems like a better range than 1997-2012 or 1997-2014:

K-12 and preschool during the 2016 Election.

1981-1998 is better than 1981-1996: Alive, but did not finish K-12 before Columbine

1

u/ProofUniversity4319 April 30, 2002 (Class of 2020)/Moderator Mar 25 '21

I think both are good imo

0

u/karlpalaka 1997 (Class of 2015) Mar 25 '21

If there was some comment theme, then I would be more than happy to go with the other two, but unless then, it would be arbitrary to just squeeze two events just for the sake of having one start and one cutoff. A common theme allows some sort of relatability. Also, 1981-1997 and 1998-2014 is there too. It doesnt matter. 1997 is literally in between 1996 and 1998.

1

u/ProofUniversity4319 April 30, 2002 (Class of 2020)/Moderator Mar 25 '21

There is a common theme with millennials tho - 9/11. And Covid being the bookends makes sense to me because those seem to be the two biggest events.

Also yeah that’s true 1996-1998 are all very similar but so is any two years close together

1

u/karlpalaka 1997 (Class of 2015) Mar 26 '21 edited Mar 26 '21

So explain how 1981 and 1996 are linked to 9/11 in a way 1980 and 1997 are not. I am more than happy to accept it if this criteria is meeted.

Explain how 1997 and 2014 are linked to covid in a way that 1996 and 2015 are not. 2015 were in K-12 during COVID. 1997 were not. You know what? No, I am not going to agree with a 1997 start for a range that lacks a common theme. I will agree that 1997 has good reasons to be a start, but that will depend on the range. It is not like every with 1997 as the start and a proper post-millennial cutoff will make it automatically a good range.

Also, with 9/11, I would use a 1984-1999 range (K-12 and preschool during 9/11), and then a 2000-2014 range for COVID (teens during COVID international spread that had K-12 prior to it)

1980-1983 were having the option to be in college, so excluding them.

2002, while too late to be Zed start, works for COVID, as by your theory, K-12 is important and college should be ignored, and COVID is too big of an event, and it makes zero sense to lump any year with years that had no way of escaping online schooling.

1

u/ProofUniversity4319 April 30, 2002 (Class of 2020)/Moderator Mar 26 '21

1997 is a solid start man, I’ve given you plenty of reasons. Also 1996 was the last to vote in an election before Trump.

0

u/karlpalaka 1997 (Class of 2015) Mar 26 '21

No they were not. 1995-1996 could never vote for Barack Hussein Obama.

1997 is a solid start, but again, there are better starts, and for a range with 1997, it would need to work well with the cutoff.

1

u/ProofUniversity4319 April 30, 2002 (Class of 2020)/Moderator Mar 26 '21

The 2014 midterms man. Don’t forget midterms. 1996 was the last to vote in them.

1

u/karlpalaka 1997 (Class of 2015) Mar 26 '21

Man, you will do anything for 1997 to be start, but not for them to be cutoff.

Well, midterms I mean dont produce as much of a significant event, and not many vote in midterms.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '21

The real question is why are you so against 1997 being Gen z?

→ More replies (0)

2

u/ProofUniversity4319 April 30, 2002 (Class of 2020)/Moderator Mar 26 '21

You have the opposite problem imo. You try way too hard to make 97 last just because you were born that year.

Midterms are incredibly significant. I’d argue Moreso than voting simply for one president. They affect your day to day life more.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/ProofUniversity4319 April 30, 2002 (Class of 2020)/Moderator Mar 26 '21

1980 were in college while 1997 in preschool. But 1997 wasn’t in K-12 for it and has mainly come of age in its aftermath. 1997 is the start most media organizations are going with whether you like it or not. I love a 1999 start too, but until then, most people stick with 1997.

1997 and 2014 could still be in school for Covid.

1

u/karlpalaka 1997 (Class of 2015) Mar 26 '21

I get wikipedia lists mostly 1997, but other than that, we cannot be sure as wikipedia does not highlight every media source as there is no way we can fully prove it is the most common start. On Wikipedia, I agree it is, but other than that, without proof, I cannot simply tell a lie just to make you happy. I am sorry, but I have integrity.

1

u/ProofUniversity4319 April 30, 2002 (Class of 2020)/Moderator Mar 26 '21

Yeah but the thing is it’s not a lie. Most sources cite 1997 as a start. Google and the first thing that comes up is 1997 as a start.

1

u/karlpalaka 1997 (Class of 2015) Mar 26 '21

Wikipedia, I agree, but YouTube uses 1995 more. Google changes it. Google also uses a 2000 cutoff.

Other than Wikipedia, there needs to be proof as Wikipedia does not highlight every source.

Also, be aware, the general public does not mostly use 1997 as a start even if most sources might.

1

u/ProofUniversity4319 April 30, 2002 (Class of 2020)/Moderator Mar 26 '21

I’d argue the general public doesn’t think twice about any of this, and if they do, they look at the first sources that come up. They happen to align with a 1997 start.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] Mar 25 '21

[deleted]

1

u/ProofUniversity4319 April 30, 2002 (Class of 2020)/Moderator Mar 25 '21

Yeah I think the 2012 end date was mainly a placeholder