# "No True Scotsman" Fallacy - You're not a Millennial if you don't remember 9/11



## 408610

Bro, you are biased towards Late 1996 born babies and Late 1990s born babies period. 2004 is a very changeful year because of web 2.0. How about 1997 and 1998 born babies. You said we can't relate to people who were born in 1995 and 1996 born babies. What are you talking about? So you said I am different from them. I am a Malaysian Chinese was born on 8th December 1997 in Brunei. And I am staying in Brunei right now. I am 3 years and 9 months and 3 days old(not 2 days old) when it happened. So you say I have little to no memories of web 1.0. What about the late 1980s and early 1990s born babies? Did they experience web 2.0 as a teen? And you shift me to Early Z. Come on I remember Yahoo and Web 1.0. Hey, you say I am Early Gen Z without any Millennials' qualities. Okay, but you can't deny those who were born in early mid-1996 would protect Late 1996 born babies period. When Pew defined Millennials, they would define using birth years(means all the 1996 born babies) instead of Mid or Late born babies period. Millennials are people who were born from 1st January 1981-31st December 1996 according to Pew.


----------



## Michael69

andrewyu2005 said:


> Bro you are biased towards Late 1996 born babies and Late 1990s born babies period. 2004 is a very changeful year. How about 1997 and 1998 born babies. You said we can't relate to people who were born in 1995 and 1996 born babies.Why are you highlighting Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 transition. So you said I am different from them. I am a Malaysian Chinese was born on 8th December 1997 in Brunei.And I am staying in Brunei right now. I am 3 years and 9 months and 3 days old(not 2 days old) when it happened. So you say I have little to no memories of web 1.0. What about the late 1980s and Early 1990s born babies? Did they experience web 2.0 as a teen.And you shift me to Early Z. Come on I remember Yahoo and Web 1.0.Hey you say I am Early Gen Z without any Millennials' qualities. Okay but you can't deny those who were born in early mid 1996 would protect Late 1996 born babies period.When Pew defined Millennials,they would define using birthyears instead of Mid or Late born babies.


Well late 80s babies were 15-17 years old when Web 1.0 transitioned to Web 2.0,so yes I would say experienced Web 1.0 as teens. As for early 90s babies,they were 11-14 during transition,so I say experience as pre teens/early teens.The reason why I highlight the Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 transition so much becasue remembering a time before Web 2.0 is probably the second most important thing to being a millennial, with remembering 9/11 being the most important thing to be a millennial.Internet changed a lot with Web 2.0. The release of YouTube was a prime example of that change. Also,atleast in America anyway, people born in early/mid 1996 see themselves as quite different than people in late 1996,and rightly so, since people in early/mid 1996 were apart of the class for 2014,while those born in late 1996 were apart of the class of 2015.


----------



## 408610

I already told you how many times that you cant define it by classes because no one defines it by classes.


----------



## Willtip98

andrewyu2005 said:


> Yes, I was a kid when it happened. I do not think that I remembered it. I used to end it on 31st December 1998. I still believe that Millennials are people who were born from 1981-1998. They would be 2-old grandma age. At the moment according to Pew or Media, they are still using 1981-1996 span for Millennials. That is right.They are mostly 5-20 years old.During 9/11,they were 4-20 years old according to pew when they defined Millennials


Interestingly, Pew had it ending at 1998 about 5 years ago, then it got changed to 1997 (Very random place to put it), then to 1996. They can't seem to make their minds up...



andrewyu2005 said:


> Yes, I was a kid when it happened. I do not think that I remembered it.


 Maybe it's because you lived in a tiny island nation at the time, far away from where the event took place. A 4-year old in the United States has a better chance of remembering it (Especially if they lived in/near NY or DC at the time) than someone that age who lived overseas.


----------



## Willtip98

Michael69 said:


> Well late 80s babies were 15-17 years old when Web 1.0 transitioned to Web 2.0,so yes I would say experienced Web 1.0 as teens. As for early 90s babies,they were 11-14 during transition,so I say experience as pre teens/early teens.The reason why I highlight the Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 transition so much becasue remembering a time before Web 2.0 is probably the second most important thing to being a millennial, with remembering 9/11 being the most important thing to be a millennial.Internet changed a lot with Web 2.0. The release of YouTube was a prime example of that change. Also,atleast in America anyway, people born in early/mid 1996 see themselves as quite different than people in late 1996,and rightly so, since people in early/mid 1996 were apart of the class for 2014,while those born in late 1996 were apart of the class of 2015.







Either say something a bit nicer or don't say anything at all.


----------



## 408610

Willtip98 said:


> Interestingly, Pew had it ending at 1998 about 5 years ago, then it got changed to 1997 (Very random place to put it), then to 1996. They can't seem to make their minds up...
> 
> Maybe it's because you lived in a tiny island nation at the time, far away from where the event took place. A 4-year old in the United States has a better chance of remembering it (Especially if they lived in/near NY or DC at the time) than someone that age who lived overseas.


true


----------



## Scoobyscoob

Willtip98 said:


> Interestingly, Pew had it ending at 1998 about 5 years ago, then it got changed to 1997 (Very random place to put it), then to 1996. They can't seem to make their minds up...


Do you have a source for that? Because I seem to recall Pew defining the Millennial birthyears from 1981 to 1994 like how it is on this forum. So they extended the Millennial years by 2 to 1996, not moved down from 1998.


----------



## Scoobyscoob

Scoobyscoob said:


> The way the generational cohorts are arranged on PerC correspond mostly to US events and cultural phenomena. France and England don't have a similar 9/11 attack because terror attacks in England and France didn't mobile the entire country to go to war. Those terror attacks were a result of their military intervention in Syria and Iraq for England and in western Africa for France. They're all terror attacks, of which you also left out the Nice France attacks, the Christmas Day attack in Germany and I believe Belgium as well as the Belgium Airport attack, the numerous acid attacks in England, and many more I'm not remembering off the top of my head. All terrorist attacks are tragic and terrible, but 9/11 had a sequence of calamitous effects on US political discourse and culture that I believe attacks on European countries have mostly seemed avoided.
> 
> So yes, generational cohorts on PerC are American focused because based on forum membership, that's where the focus should be on. You should also probably stop being so fixated on 9/11. And yes, generations in other countries will be different in ways due to differences in domestic news and cultural events. Make sense? :wink:


Also, @Willtip98 the worldwide definition of Millennial is kids old enough to remember the first year of the new millennium, which is the year 2000. Those are kids born from 1981-1996. Although I would say 1981 to 1994 is more accurate, but for the sake of congruence, I'll say 1996.

I think your fixation on 9/11 was preventing you from seeing that being old enough to remember the year 2000 is the true definition of a Millennial.

Also some small corrections and addendums: The 2007 London England attack was provoked by English military action in Iraq and Afghanistan, not Syria while the Paris France terror attack was in reaction to French military action in western and northern Africa. So both attacks were in response to their country's military actions in foreign nations.

So that's why they're not comparable to 9/11. 9/11 was an unprovoked terrorist attack on the United States, unlike the England and France terrorist attacks which were in response to their military expeditions in foreign countries.

Edit: Although I suppose you could say that the 2005 London bombing is in England's version 9/11, because their military were in Iraq and Afghanistan because the military alliance between the US and UK. The number of deaths are still incomparable though. The scope of terrorist attack of 9/11 was still much worse.


----------



## 408610

Scoobyscoob said:


> Do you have a source for that? Because I seem to recall Pew defining the Millennial birthyears from 1981 to 1994 like how it is on this forum. So they extended the Millennial years by 2 to 1996, not moved down from 1998.


https://reason.com/2017/03/22/welcome-to-adulthood-gen-z/ https://qz.com/872159/911-the-elect...ents-in-america-as-ranked-by-each-generation/


----------



## Scoobyscoob

andrewyu2005 said:


> https://reason.com/2017/03/22/welcome-to-adulthood-gen-z/ https://qz.com/872159/911-the-elect...ents-in-america-as-ranked-by-each-generation/


Thanks.


----------



## 408610

Willtip98 said:


> Interestingly, Pew had it ending at 1998 about 5 years ago, then it got changed to 1997 (Very random place to put it), then to 1996. They can't seem to make their minds up...
> 
> Maybe it's because you lived in a tiny island nation at the time, far away from where the event took place. A 4-year old in the United States has a better chance of remembering it (Especially if they lived in/near NY or DC at the time) than someone that age who lived overseas.


OK but one of my friend who is same age as me but older than me by 1 or 2 months remember 9/11.


----------



## 408610

Scoobyscoob said:


> Thanks.


You are welcome


----------



## Willtip98

andrewyu2005 said:


> https://reason.com/2017/03/22/welcome-to-adulthood-gen-z/ https://qz.com/872159/911-the-elect...ents-in-america-as-ranked-by-each-generation/


Here are some more sources that use the 1981-1998 range:
https://millennialpolicycenter.org/about-the-center/
https://loebleadership.com/insights/2019/7/10/leading-in-a-multi-generational-workplace#_ftn1
https://medium.com/@elwoodwatson890/yes-millennials-have-issues-with-racism-4e1231e96a61
The United States House of Representatives 2016 | Center for Youth Political Participation

The middle two were published within the last 2 months, too.


----------



## Scoobyscoob

@AnneM - Starts on page 4 with the conversation with MeltedSorbet. I'll PM you the rest since I don't want to spam the forum with mentions of you.


----------



## AnneM

Scoobyscoob said:


> @AnneM - Starts on page 4 with the conversation with MeltedSorbet. I'll PM you the rest since I don't want to spam the forum with mentions of you.


You don't? Want to spam the forum? With mentions of me? Why not? :wink:


----------



## Scoobyscoob

AnneM said:


> You don't? Want to spam the forum? With mentions of me? Why not? :wink:


Spamming posts is against forum rules.  I've sent you the PM, btw.


----------



## q543frodomar

Now i'm starting to think 2000 is the first of Z.


----------



## karlpalaka

andrewyu2005 said:


> OK but one of my friend who is same age as me but older than me by 1 or 2 months remember 9/11.


You would have to be at least 20 as of the date this comment is posted to be able to remember 9/11. If your friend is at least 20, it seems believable.


----------



## karlpalaka

Willtip98 said:


> Interestingly, Pew had it ending at 1998 about 5 years ago, then it got changed to 1997 (Very random place to put it), then to 1996. They can't seem to make their minds up...
> 
> Maybe it's because you lived in a tiny island nation at the time, far away from where the event took place. A 4-year old in the United States has a better chance of remembering it (Especially if they lived in/near NY or DC at the time) than someone that age who lived overseas.


I think its sad that many videos use Pew to define millennials. I mean they had it at 1997 until last year, and now I am the first of Gen Z. I mean next year, they will change it to 1996 as the start, and then 1995 the year after. They make the dumbest reasons.


----------



## karlpalaka

Scoobyscoob said:


> Also, @Willtip98 the worldwide definition of Millennial is kids old enough to remember the first year of the new millennium, which is the year 2000. Those are kids born from 1981-1996. Although I would say 1981 to 1994 is more accurate, but for the sake of congruence, I'll say 1996.
> 
> I think your fixation on 9/11 was preventing you from seeing that being old enough to remember the year 2000 is the true definition of a Millennial.
> 
> Also some small corrections and addendums: The 2007 London England attack was provoked by English military action in Iraq and Afghanistan, not Syria while the Paris France terror attack was in reaction to French military action in western and northern Africa. So both attacks were in response to their country's military actions in foreign nations.
> 
> So that's why they're not comparable to 9/11. 9/11 was an unprovoked terrorist attack on the United States, unlike the England and France terrorist attacks which were in response to their military expeditions in foreign countries.
> 
> Edit: Although I suppose you could say that the 2005 London bombing is in England's version 9/11, because their military were in Iraq and Afghanistan because the military alliance between the US and UK. The number of deaths are still incomparable though. The scope of terrorist attack of 9/11 was still much worse.


Bro, I was born in 97, and the earliest year I remember experiencing was 1999. Just cause you cant remember anything before you were 4 doesnt mean others cant. Literally, both my parents and my older brother remember being two.


----------



## karlpalaka

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/08/generation-z-will-outnumber-millennials-by-2019/

34% of the world is Gen Z. This link considers 2000 as millennial, but its Gen Z cause 1999 is the youngest who can remember 9/11. That means 29.5% of the world is millennials. So more than 34% dont remember 9/11 happening as there are people born from 1993-1999 who also may not remember it, so over 40% of the people alive in this world dont remember 9/11. Interesting. Gen Z outnumbered millennials this year, and millennials were the largest generation in the world, until Gen Z outnumbered them, not making them the largest generation in the world. Amazing how 34% of the people alive right now are teenagers, children, and babies.


----------



## Willtip98

q543frodomar said:


> Now i'm starting to think 2000 is the first of Z.


I, CocoaPuff, Captain and karlpalaka all agree on that.


----------



## q543frodomar

Willtip98 said:


> I, CocoaPuff, Captain and karlpalaka all agree on that.


Yeah. Only thing is that karlpalaka believes that 2000 babies relate more to 2004 babies than 1999 babies which is not true.


----------



## karlpalaka

q543frodomar said:


> Willtip98 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I, CocoaPuff, Captain and karlpalaka all agree on that.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah. Only thing is that karlpalaka believes that 2000 babies relate more to 2004 babies than 1999 babies which is not true.
Click to expand...

I said it depends what factors you are using to determine how 2000s babies relate to whuch group. In some ways, they relate to 1999 and in others 2004.


----------



## q543frodomar

karlpalaka said:


> I said it depends what factors you are using to determine how 2000s babies relate to whuch group. In some ways, they relate to 1999 and in others 2004.


But they would relate more to the 1999 baby than the 2004 baby.


----------



## karlpalaka

q543frodomar said:


> karlpalaka said:
> 
> 
> 
> I said it depends what factors you are using to determine how 2000s babies relate to whuch group. In some ways, they relate to 1999 and in others 2004.
> 
> 
> 
> But they would relate more to the 1999 baby than the 2004 baby.
Click to expand...

In some cases yes. In other cases, no.


----------



## Willtip98

q543frodomar said:


> But they would relate more to the 1999 baby than the 2004 baby.


A 2000 baby can relate to both, but a '99 baby and an '04 baby would have a hard time relating to _each other._


----------



## q543frodomar

Willtip98 said:


> A 2000 baby can relate to both, but a '99 baby and an '04 baby would have a hard time relating to _each other._


The 2000 baby would also have a hard time relating to the 2004 baby, I mean the 04 baby most likely never even attended high school with the 00 baby.

I'd say a 2000er's age group is Late 1997 to Mid 2002. There isn't much of a difference with a 98 and 00 baby in the long run, and neither is the 00 baby from the 02 baby.


----------



## karlpalaka

q543frodomar said:


> Willtip98 said:
> 
> 
> 
> A 2000 baby can relate to both, but a '99 baby and an '04 baby would have a hard time relating to _each other._
> 
> 
> 
> The 2000 baby would also have a hard time relating to the 2004 baby, I mean the 04 baby most likely never even attended high school with the 00 baby.
> 
> I'd say a 2000er's age group is Late 1997 to Mid 2002. There isn't much of a difference with a 98 and 00 baby in the long run, and neither is the 00 baby from the 02 baby.
Click to expand...

It depends. Yes, 97 and 2000 went to high school together from 2014-2015, but still that would be just one year so they relate just a little, but 97 would have trouble relating with 2001 and 2002, and 98 would have trouble relating to 2002, and maybe they might only relate to 2001 during the 2015-2016 school year, but barely. It depends how you look at it. I think early 2000s are better at relating to late 90s than late 90s relating to early 2000s cause usually teenagers try to look up to those older than them, not younger.


----------



## Scoobyscoob

karlpalaka said:


> Bro, I was born in 97, and the earliest year I remember experiencing was 1999. Just cause you cant remember anything before you were 4 doesnt mean others cant. Literally, both my parents and my older brother remember being two.


Read through the thread. I specifically said the cutoff for Millennials are kids who were around 7 in the year 2000, as that's the typical age when a kid can remember and understand major events. I never said anything about my own childhood memories. What you've said is anecdotal.

The cutoff for Millennials at 1994 is fine. 1998 is just weirdly pushed forward as it's unreasonable to expect the majority of kids born in 1998 to remember anything in the year 2000 or even what happened on 9/11. Pretty much only the op and that Willtip98 guy are arguing that 1998 is Gen Y, which is just a fringe position. Plus, why do some Gen Zs want to suddenly be Millennials. Conservative old people like to talk a lot of crap about us. Guess that says something about Gen Z then.


----------



## karlpalaka

Scoobyscoob said:


> Read through the thread. I specifically said the cutoff for Millennials are kids who were around 7 in the year 2000, as that's the typical age when a kid can remember and understand major events. I never said anything about my own childhood memories. What you've said is anecdotal.
> 
> The cutoff for Millennials at 1994 is fine. 1998 is just weirdly pushed forward as it's unreasonable to expect the majority of kids born in 1998 to remember anything in the year 2000 or even what happened on 9/11. Pretty much only the op and that Willtip98 guy are arguing that 1998 is Gen Y, which is just a fringe position. Plus, why do some Gen Zs want to suddenly be Millennials. Conservative old people like to talk a lot of crap about us. Guess that says something about Gen Z then.


People who were 7 during the year 2000 were born in 1992-1993, so 1994 according to you would be Gen Z. I have a friend who is turning 21 this November, and he remembers something that happened right after his first birthday vividly. I had an 11-year old student who vividly remembered a memory he had when he was just eight months old. Yeah, I get it is kind of incredible for someone to remember experiences before the age of two, let alone vividly, but it can happen, and I believe them. I might have experiences that may have happened before my second birthday , but I cant really pinpoint them. All I can pinpoint are experiences I had in 1999 after my second birthday. 1997-1999 shouldnt be Gen Z since they are not digital natives. They can remember a time before the web (especially using it at home), mobile phones, laptops, email, and home desktops became a part of their lives.


----------



## Scoobyscoob

karlpalaka said:


> People who were 7 during the year 2000 were born in 1992-1993, so 1994 according to you would be Gen Z. I have a friend who is turning 21 this November, and he remembers something that happened right after his first birthday vividly. I had an 11-year old student who vividly remembered a memory he had when he was just eight months old. Yeah, I get it is kind of incredible for someone to remember experiences before the age of two, let alone vividly, but it can happen, and I believe them. I might have experiences that may have happened before my second birthday , but I cant really pinpoint them. All I can pinpoint are experiences I had in 1999 after my second birthday.


Applying hard cutoffs to a general concept like generational cohorts is a problem. 1994, 1995 and 1996 would be Y/Z cusp years with 1997 and on being nearly all Gen Z.



> 1997-1999 shouldnt be Gen Z since they are not digital natives. They can remember a time before the web (especially using it at home), mobile phones, laptops, email, and home desktops became a part of their lives.


The vast majority of people born in 1997-1999 had exposure to both computers and the web since childhood. If not at home then certainly in elementary school. I find this to be kind of a strange statement as I bought my first cell phone in 2001/2002 and I think that the cellular/smart phone to be the tech device that defines Z. Before cell phones I had a pager that I had on me but nearly never used. Gen X and older Y will know what a pager is, but Z will likely never have heard of or even seen one.

So outside of growing up very poor and/or in a very rural area or perhaps having technologically avoidant parents, kids born from 1997 to 1999 would've had access to both modern computers and the web.


----------



## karlpalaka

Scoobyscoob said:


> Applying hard cutoffs to a general concept like generational cohorts is a problem. 1994, 1995 and 1996 would be Y/Z cusp years with 1997 and on being nearly all Gen Z.
> 
> 
> 
> The vast majority of people born in 1997-1999 had exposure to both computers and the web since childhood. If not at home then certainly in elementary school. I find this to be kind of a strange statement as I bought my first cell phone in 2001/2002 and I think that the cellular/smart phone to be the tech device that defines Z. Before cell phones I had a pager that I had on me but nearly never used. Gen X and older Y will know what a pager is, but Z will likely never have heard of or even seen one.
> 
> So outside of growing up very poor and/or in a very rural area or perhaps having technologically avoidant parents, kids born from 1997 to 1999 would've had access to both modern computers and the web.


What year were you born in? And please 1993-1999 are cuspers. How are 1996 and 1997 different? We went to school together every year except for eighth and twelfth grade. You cant just assume 1997-1999 were born with digital technology from the start. We get that you were able to use technology at an earlier age, but more than half of the us population didnt before 2005, though in 2003, home computer use reached 50% in 2003 only. I havent used a computer until I was like 5 or 6 in 2003.


----------



## Scoobyscoob

karlpalaka said:


> What year were you born in?


I was born in the early 1980s. So I'm on the oldest end of the Millennial generation. So I have some Gen X childhood friends but culturally, I identify much more with Y than X.



> And please 1993-1999 are cuspers. How are 1996 and 1997 different? We went to school together every year except for eighth and twelfth grade. You cant just assume 1997-1999 were born with digital technology from the start. We get that you were able to use technology at an earlier age, but more than half of the us population didnt before 2005, though in 2003, home computer use reached 50% in 2003 only. I havent used a computer until I was like 5 or 6 in 2003.


I'm fine with 1994 being a hard cutoff for Gen Y, with 1995 and 1996 being cusp years. 1993-1999 being cusp years just sounds like creep in who to include where. It's fine being Z but identifying more with Y or being a younger Y and identifying more with Z. Generational cohorts aren't entirely cut and dry, and as with everything statistically derived, there will be outliers.


----------



## karlpalaka

Scoobyscoob said:


> I was born in the early 1980s. So I'm on the oldest end of the Millennial generation. So I have some Gen X childhood friends but culturally, I identify much more with Y than X.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm fine with 1994 being a hard cutoff for Gen Y, with 1995 and 1996 being cusp years. 1993-1999 being cusp years just sounds like creep in who to include where. It's fine being Z but identifying more with Y or being a younger Y and identifying more with Z. Generational cohorts aren't entirely cut and dry, and as with everything statistically derived, there will be outliers.


A person born in 1994 would better identify with me than you. You are more than 10 years older than a 1994 born while the youngest 1994 is just 2.4 years older than me. Also, you wouldnt be able to relate to a 1996 born like I would, as the youngest is not even five months older than me. I dont know what kind of beer you drank today, but I suggest you dont drink it if it gives you thoughts like this.


----------



## Scoobyscoob

karlpalaka said:


> A person born in 1994 would better identify with me than you. You are more than 10 years older than a 1994 born while the youngest 1994 is just 2.4 years older than me. Also, you wouldnt be able to relate to a 1996 born like I would, as the youngest is not even five months older than me. I dont know what kind of beer you drank today, but I suggest you dont drink it if it gives you thoughts like this.


Wow dude. Well if this post of yours is an indication of how you talk to people you've just met, then I'd say I'd not only get along with people born in 1994 better than you, but I'd also get along better with Gen Zers, Gen Xers, boomers, etc. What kind of an insulting, insolent post did you write there. 

Also, I don't drink beer and I certainly don't drink during the day. Maybe you should stop making ASSumptions about someone based on their age, you ageist.


----------



## karlpalaka

karlpalaka said:


> Scoobyscoob said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karlpalaka said:
> 
> 
> 
> A person born in 1994 would better identify with me than you. You are more than 10 years older than a 1994 born while the youngest 1994 is just 2.4 years older than me. Also, you wouldnt be able to relate to a 1996 born like I would, as the youngest is not even five months older than me. I dont know what kind of beer you drank today, but I suggest you dont drink it if it gives you thoughts like this.
> 
> 
> 
> Wow dude. Well if this post of yours is an indication of how you talk to people you've just met, then I'd say I'd not only get along with people born in 1994 better than you, but I'd also get along better with Gen Zers, Gen Xers, boomers, etc. What kind of an insulting, insolent post did you write there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, I don't drink beer and I certainly don't drink during the day. Maybe you should stop making ASSumptions about someone based on their age, you ageist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So explain how 1994-1996 would better relate to early 1980s than 1997?
Click to expand...


----------



## Scoobyscoob

karlpalaka said:


> So explain how 1994-1996 would better relate to early 1980s than 1997?


Generational cohorts all have similarly shared experiences. Which is why there's a distinction between, boomers, X, Y and Z at all. Gen Y ie: Millennials, were all old enough to remember what they did during the first year of the new millennium, 2000. Millennials, at least here in the US, are also old enough to remember what we were doing on 9/11/2001. There's a shared growing up with new technologies coming out at a rapid pace in the 1990s but not having fully grown up with the internet and social media as Z has. We're also more liberal on average than Xers and Boomers, as we didn't grow up under constant fear of nuclear war due to the Cold War. Most Millennials, again in the US, grew up being taught that diversity, other peoples' opinions and being inclusive are all positives. Especially in an increasingly interconnected world where teamwork would be required moreso than individual efforts.

So those are all era based attitudes that all Millennials should share in qualities. If you relate to someone based strictly by age, then that says more about you than about Gen Y as everything I've just mentioned was pervasive while Millennials were growing up.


----------



## karlpalaka

Scoobyscoob said:


> karlpalaka said:
> 
> 
> 
> So explain how 1994-1996 would better relate to early 1980s than 1997?
> 
> 
> 
> Generational cohorts all have similarly shared experiences. Which is why there's a distinction between, boomers, X, Y and Z at all. Gen Y ie: Millennials, were all old enough to remember what they did during the first year of the new millennium, 2000. Millennials, at least here in the US, are also old enough to remember what we were doing on 9/11/2001. There's a shared growing up with new technologies coming out at a rapid pace in the 1990s but not having fully grown up with the internet and social media as Z has.
> 
> If you relate to someone based strictly by age, then that says more about you than about Gen Y as everything I've just mentioned was pervasive while Millennials were growing up.
Click to expand...

Um, I can remember what I was doing before 9/11, and I spent almost half my childhood before home internet use became common in the states. Also, do realise no two people born in the same year will share the same experiences. I know many born 1993-1996 who dont a remember experiences from before 9/11, while the youngest who can remember life before 9/11 would be mid 99.


----------



## Scoobyscoob

karlpalaka said:


> Um, I can remember what I was doing before 9/11, and I spent almost half my childhood before home internet use became common in the states. Also, do realise no two people born in the same year will share the same experiences. I know many born 1993-1996 who dont a remember experiences from before 9/11, while the youngest who can remember life before 9/11 would be mid 99.


Yeah, I know a few people who are around my age who didn't have internet until they were off to university because they had luddite parents and I know quite a few who didn't have internet access growing up due to their parents being lower income and not understanding the use of being online. Those are exceptions, not the rule. Most Millennials had some access to the internet by the time they reached their mid teen years and those who didn't are the exception. Also, I'll include this bit again:



Scoobyscoob said:


> We're also more liberal on average than Xers and Boomers, as we didn't grow up under constant fear of nuclear war due to the Cold War. Most Millennials, again in the US, grew up being taught that diversity, other peoples' opinions and being inclusive are all positives. Especially in an increasingly interconnected world where teamwork would be required moreso than individual efforts.
> 
> So those are all era based attitudes that all Millennials should share in qualities.


Millennials mostly did not grow up during the Cold War, so also tend to be more liberal than the average Xer and Boomer. Jury's still out on Gen Z, but it seems like Gen Z are swinging the pendulum back toward being more moderate than Millennials but likely still more liberal than the average Xer and Boomer.


And yes, there are Millennials who don't know much about 9/11, because of where they grew up and/or because they never really follow the news. The average millennial will still be able to tell you anything noteworthy they had done in 2000 and in 2001. It's simply that 9/11 is a central defining event for Y, much like how the Challenger explosion and the fall of the Berlin Wall/end of the USSR were defining events for X.


----------

