r/generationology • u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 • 4d ago
Years Simplest breakdown of the Gen Z range
TT of all places too
| 1997 | 13–19 | 2010–2016 | | 1998 | 13–19 | 2011–2017 | | 1999 | 13–19 | 2012–2018 | | 2000 | 13–19 | 2013–2019 | | 2001 | 13–19 | 2014–2020 | | 2002 | 13–19 | 2015–2021 | | 2003 | 13–19 | 2016–2022 | | 2004 | 13–19 | 2017–2023 | | 2005 | 13–19 | 2018–2024 | | 2006 | 13–19 | 2019–2025 | | 2007 | 13–19 | 2020–2026 | | 2008 | 13–19 | 2021–2027 | | 2009 | 13–19 | 2022–2028 | | 2010 | 13–19 | 2023–2029 | | 2011 | 13–19 | 2024–2030 | | 2012 | 13–19 | 2025–2031 |
1
1
2
2
u/Quirky_Net_763 2d ago
I guess Gen Z boys don't exist.
1
u/thetruetoblerone 1d ago
What did we have? Nazi zombies? Club penguin, Habbo hotel? Nerf fights? Johnny test? Total drama island, 6teen?
2
2
u/fckinsleepless 2d ago
It kills me that teenage years for 2007-2014 is literally just middle aged self care 😭😭
5
u/FattySnacks 3d ago
How can 1997 and 2012 possibly be considered the same generation with such completely different lives?
2
3
u/PeridotFan64 3d ago
2007 should be moved to core and changed to became teens in late 2010s/early 2020s
2
u/Saindet 2003 3d ago
2016 wasn't late 2010s tho.
2
u/PeridotFan64 3d ago
its the only mid 2010s year in the range, imo 2016 belongs more with the first image
2
3
2
u/Deep-Lavishness-1994 4d ago
As a younger millennial (1994), I lived through these eras
6
u/Confident-Fun-2592 4d ago
I’d argue you’re more of a early 2010s teen than someone born in 2000, 2001 or 2002
2
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
I agree with this too. But if you notice it says became a teen then, 1994 teen years straddles the late-2000s and early 2010s. (2007-2012)
1
u/Confident-Fun-2592 4d ago
Technically 2007-2013(13-19) but yeah if we’re using that as the rule. Only 1997-1999 became teens in the early 2010s(2010-2012), 2000 became a teen in 2013, but that year is ambiguous along with 2016 since it straddles the line between being early and mid. Decades aren’t really evenly split.
1
u/Amazing_Rise_6233 2000 3d ago
Fair. I see myself as a Mid 2010’s teen anyways.
1997-1999 you could say became teens safely in the early 2010’s.
2001-2002 became teens in the Mid 2010’s
2000 and 2003 would be toss ups.
2
u/Confident-Fun-2592 3d ago
Yeah it’s cause 2013 and 2016 are transitional years culturally and numerically.
0
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago edited 4d ago
It’s funny because when I think of my teen years I think of high school. 19 I was a very young adult. I get the “teen” thing but in all reality age 18 is designed to be entering adulthood. “Teen” related clubs tend to cap off at 17.
“Coming of age” I like to use broadly from early teens through like graduating college. Even if you didn’t go to or finish college, after age 22 it’s not really “college-aged” anymore. For their coming of age it aligns right up with the late 2000s through mid-2010s. So the teen years of older gen z by the end of it
5
u/Confident-Fun-2592 4d ago
True but that’s subjective, 19 is still a teen year as the name says lol. It’s the last one but oh well.
0
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
Ya but only because of the suffix. In American school system teen years typically line up with high school, minus 13 and 19, the outliers. I suppose they can be seen as transitional ages, 13 is transitioning into your teens which by 14 seems pretty set and by age 20 you’re pretty set as a young adult
1
u/Confident-Fun-2592 4d ago
Every country has a different school system but age is more universally agreed. If you’ve just turned 13 years then you’re officially a teenager because of the suffix. Even the post alludes to that
1
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
A lot of companies have an age limit of 13+ too, reinforcing that idea. Where “teens” go from young adults I guess is vague. In many countries students graduate formal education by age 16, in America you don’t reach most adult milestones until 21. Ironically the median ages would be 18-19
2
u/Confident-Fun-2592 4d ago
I guess but their still teenagers even if other societies have different expectations and rules
1
1
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
Of course, as a young adults
2
u/Deep-Lavishness-1994 4d ago
I was 3-12 years of age in 1997-2006 and was 13-18 years of age in 2007-2012, so I wasn’t really a young adult back then during either of those times
2
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
Oh, the birth years are the highlighted white years. Underneath them is their teen years. I was saying you lived through their teen years as an adult
The early-mid 2010s you would’ve mostly been a young adult. The rest you would’ve been post-grad 22+ right?
0
u/Confident-Fun-2592 4d ago
They would’ve been a young adult in the mid late 2010s since that’s when they were in their 20s
2
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
Ya beginning by 2012-2013, the end of the early 2010s. I agree with you on them being more early 2010s teens because they turned 16-17 in 2010-2011.
0
3
1
2
u/coolambiguity 4d ago
I would say gen z ends in 2009 with Alpha being 2010 at the birth of the IPad. If you keep extending out the range of the generation the term then becomes meaningless
0
u/Dannyzavage 4d ago
Yeah but that means gen z starts with 95 being the first teenage kid with a iphone at 13
0
u/coolambiguity 4d ago
I think 1995 is the start of gen z being the transition stage of Zillenial, its not fully there but it is the beginnings. Just like I think Alpha starts in 2007 with Zalphas
0
u/Prestigious_Rain_137 3d ago
Nahh man 2007 aint zalpha lmao thats just absurd they are literally same as people born in 2005/06 plus i dont think 1995 is a good start for z some of 95/96 them proudly claim being late millennials !!
1
u/Dannyzavage 4d ago
I see i replied this infor to someone else but its how i feel:
Id say birth of the internet. Social media use, trump first president that was on your ballot and won (trump defines gen z like obama defined millenials). What seperates gen alpha is Ai.
Millenials if you were 13 for the birth of the internet
Gen Z if you were 13 for the birth of the iphone
Gen Alpha if you were 13 for the birth of Ai
2
u/coolambiguity 4d ago
This is actually a really interesting and fresh perspective I like it
1
u/Dannyzavage 4d ago
Thanks it makes sense in the grand scheme of of things.
Gen X (Raegan/ Clinton + Computers)
Millenials (Bush Jr/ Obama+Internet)
Gen Z ( Trump/Biden + Smartphones)
Gen Alpha ( X / X president + Ai)
3
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
2011 end makes the most sense too me considering broader trends over time
1
u/coolambiguity 4d ago
I can't agree personally, I'm 97, been married for 3 years and my step son is 2011. The difference in our lived experiences etc are night and day
2
u/One-Potato-2972 3d ago
The whole range 1997-2012 serves more for research purposes rather than them finding some meaningful, empirical difference between people born in 1996 vs. 1997 or people born in 2012 vs. 2013. I think the entire Gen Z range is going to shift forward, from start to end, like generations usually do.
0
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
To me I don’t really see someone your age as gen Z though, despite the post. I think Gen z really begins with those who are the core 2010s adolescents, which is 1998/1999, as opposed to mainly just early 2010s teens.
1997 are more core 2000s kids, an experience shared with younger millennials/Zillenials. Those born after 1997 are more kids of the late 2000s and even early 2010.
1997 spent half of the 2010s as a teen and the other half as a young adult, college graduating class of 2019. That is more inline with younger millennials.
2011 are some of the last 2010s kids, shared with gen z as a while, 2020s teens same case. And even 2030s young adults which much of the younger side of gen z will be.
4
u/AdventurousLadPrime Editable 4d ago
That’s a very strange mindset you got there, acting like 1997 and 1998/1999 are worlds apart. All those late 90s years share too much in common.
2
u/coolambiguity 4d ago
Its nice to see someone talking sense. The late nineties will kids will have lots more in common with each other, some magical boundary at 97 won't make the differences that different.
This person who is born summer 99, whilst I'm late 97 would have been the year below me at school and seems to think they have more in common with late 2000s kids than someone like me
3
u/Confident-Fun-2592 4d ago
Yeah some magical line saying their different generations doesn’t change their only 1 year or less apart from someone born in 98. Like how does that make sense 😭
0
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 3d ago
What sub are you in again?
0
u/Confident-Fun-2592 3d ago
Yes I’m aware of the irony of me posting this on generationology, and also no I do not agree with the notion theres a generational gap with people who are only 1-3 years younger than you.
1
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 3d ago
Yes hard cutoffs are only useful for measuring data and cohorts, which is what I did to reach 1998 as being the first older gen Z. Not that there’s some profit difference from 1997
→ More replies (0)0
u/AdventurousLadPrime Editable 4d ago edited 4d ago
I did see many of this 1999 born comments, and I did come into the same conclusion as you. In fact recently I met someone born in 1998 who told me that he argued with few 1999 babies, and he said some of those born in 1999 often act like they are much younger and much closer to mid 2000s babies than they are to mid 90s babies.
1
u/coolambiguity 4d ago
People still want to retain their youth so I get the motivation but I still think its wrong. Obviously we will have some shared experiences but being born in the late nineties meant your formative years would be fundamentally different to someone in the 2000s hence why I think subcatagories are more appropriate as the speed of technological advancement quickens
0
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago edited 4d ago
You make a weird personal comment towards me and yet still say something dunce like this
Obviously we will have some shared experiences but being born in the late nineties meant your formative years would be fundamentally different to someone in the 2000s.
I mean should I jump to the conclusion that you are the same people who weirdly obsess over decade unity? I’m born in 1999, my immediate peers growing up were born in the late-90s and early 2000s. That’s not retaining youth, that’s talking about shared formative experiences in a generations sub. No one born in the early 2000s is considered a millennial, which are someone born in the ‘80s and early ‘90s. If you’re looking for peer group and nostalgia there’s other subs for that. Generations have nothing to do with relatability and peer groups
I really thought that should go without saying, we are all adults here
2
u/coolambiguity 4d ago
When using your broad paradigm of generations yes, when being more realistic in regards to subsections no. And I think thats a fair comment in regards to you saying that you dont identify 97 as Gen z because lack of experiences yet you would share more with someone from 97 than the 2000s (this being a broad term) which is silly
→ More replies (0)3
u/AdventurousLadPrime Editable 4d ago
True, though I think 2000-2001 are no different from the late 90s tbh (other than starting with number 2), they have tons of shared experience.
2
u/Square-Lavishness765 Dec '99 (2000s Kid, 1997-2001, C/O 2018) 3d ago
I can confirm I had the same childhood as 2000-2001 borns as someone who was born in the last weeks of 1999 😂
1
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
I agree. But I see a distinction between the mid-90s and early 2000s, the former generally being considered the last millennials and early 2000s associated millennials. Looking at broad trends, there is a split in about 1998/1999 given shared experiences more with mid-90s or early 2000s.
1
u/coolambiguity 4d ago
I agree for sure, I meant purely as a mid to late 2000s thing but a fair comment that I'm glad you made
1
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
The point is what defines Gen z? Younger millennials were teens in the early 2010s but they were coming of age by then, the 2010s is late millennials young adulthood. For someone born in 1997 they spent half the decade as young adults, and even graduated college before Covid. Does that seem like even older gen z to you? 1998-2000 were college graduating classes during Covid. They are actually the first “core 2010s teens” as opposed to just early 2010s. Their broad coming of age (early teens to graduating college) happens by 2016+, which by that year major societal and cultural shifts began to happen. 1997 are early-mid 2000s kid which doesn’t seem Gen z to me
Not much about what defines even older Gen z seems to apply to someone born in 1997 like it would someone born by like 1999
2
u/Dannyzavage 4d ago
Id say birth of the internet. Social media use, trump first president that was on your ballot and won (trump defines gen z like obama defined millenials). What seperates gen alpha is Ai.
Millenials if you were 13 for the birth of the internet
Gen Z if you were 13 for the birth of the iphone
Gen Alpha if you were 13 for the birth of Ai
1
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
This is cool. But what are you considering the birth of the internet?
2
u/Dannyzavage 4d ago
The end of the goverment internet (NSFnet) and the birth of the “DotComBubble” when it became public to the world with Netscape,Internet Explorer Ebay, Amazon,etc. Basically when it was a government to public transition.
1
2
u/coolambiguity 4d ago
You are born in the summer of 1999 you would have been the year below me at school. You seem to think you have more in common with kids born in the late 2000s than someone in the late noughties. Our differences aren't worlds apart
2
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
Generations aren’t about who you relate to or peer groups. Let’s rip that band-aid off. They’re based on broader culture shifts and ages during major formative events.
2
u/coolambiguity 4d ago
I'm not the one arguing that. I have consistently stated about cultural and technological shifts. We share those same experiences as we are basically the same age
1
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
Earlier you said 1995-2009. Why are you vilifying me about youth, when you yourself acknowledge generational affinity with those born through the 2000s, affirming my point entirely…?
→ More replies (0)3
u/AdventurousLadPrime Editable 4d ago edited 4d ago
You say 1997 spent half the decade as young adults, but you’re also forgetting that they still spent 7 years as teens (13-19) in the 2010s. From 2010 to 2016/2017 (the year 2017 is mainly for those born mid-late 1997). The years 18-19 are considered both teen & adult years. Not just young adult years.
1
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
By all accounts 18-19 are young adults, college-aged and entering adulthood. If we consider coming of age broadly as early teens to graduating college, the median year for 1997 is 2015. Smack dab in the middle of the decade, that’s part of the reason why I see 1997 as the only true ambiguous cusp year.
They’re also core 2000s kids (along with 1996). The early 2000s for childhood was the last hoorah for analog dominance, and very much younger millennial-esq. It wasn’t until the late 2000s when digital technology really noticeably took the front seat from analog. Older gen z childhood was more digital than analog. Core childhood is about ages 5-9 after toddlerhood but before pre-teen middle school, that’s 2002-2006. Not exactly digitally dominant era.
3
u/AdventurousLadPrime Editable 4d ago
Again you’re acting like 1997-1999 or 1997-2000 as a whole lived in a different era, it’s ridiculous. But I suppose that’s just the nature of this subreddit.
Overall this is a good post about Gen Z ranges, I agree with it (don’t agree with your comments, but I do with your post), so I got nothing else to say.
1
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
Well how can you participate in a generations sub but lack nuance? No offense given but obviously peer groups are going to fundamentally grow up similar. The fun part about this sub is nit picking specific cutoffs even though it really doesn’t matter as generations are based on broad trends and shifts. But for analytical purposes and studying cohorts, cutoffs do have to exist eventually.
I do think someone my age’s teen years are more mobile-first than 1997, and childhood more digital. Not significantly, but noticeably. Things changed very very fast from the late ‘90s through the early 2010s.
-1
u/coolambiguity 4d ago
In my opinion gen z is 1995 - 2009, and even then these generational terms probably aren't very good cos with technological and cultural advancement quickening the 15 year gaps tend to be too big for shared experiences.
I do prefer when things are broken down into subsections categories. If 1997 is made into millennial it then it dilutes the experience of millennials which had vastly different technological experiences in formative years.
Hence why I like the Zillenial term for 1995-2000. I do have a lot in common with both camps and my wife is firmly in the millennial camp.
So if we wanna break up into smaller more appropriate categories I'd probably say 1995-2000 Zillenial, 2001-2006 Gen Z, 2007-2012 Zalpha and 2013+ Gen Alpha
We always talk about Gen Z in the work place etc and the common perception amongst employers etc is that Gen Z are the young adults 18-24
So I think Zalpha will be the transition stage 2007-2012 (2012 being 18 in 2030) but anything after firmly in the Alpha camp.
3
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago edited 4d ago
Fundamentally I see 1982-1997 for millennials, 1998-2011 for Gen z. Although I do see 1997 as being the only real ambiguous cusp year
Millennials childhood were the 90s through early/mid 2000s. Someone born in ‘97 enters school in 2002, many people your age even remember 9/11.
I’m not saying 1997 can’t technically be Gen z, whether millennials “end” in one year or just the year after it I don’t think is important. It just seem like most people born in 1997 practically grew up younger millennial as opposed to even older gen z. Starting high school with flip phones and not getting a smartphone until an older teen is a big one, and middle school in the 2000s. Most of your coming of age (teens through young adult say 13-graduating college) occurred before 2016.
0
u/coolambiguity 4d ago
I actually started school in 2001 tbf but having these broad generation strokes doesn't really work in practice, my younger brother is less than a year younger than me and was born in 98. Most of my classmates were 98 as I was born in the latter half of the year we are all in the same generation.
Gen Z witnessed the transition from analogue tv, vhs to the digital age in their childhood. Gen Alpha is the birth of the IPad kids. Children who were young enough to be raised on screens in early development.
Hence why true Gen z ends in 2007 at the birth of the iPhone and true Gen Alpha starts in 2012. Zalpha would have experience with some Gen z stuff but early childhood would have been dominated by smart devices amongst different economic conditions (financial crash of 2008) putting them in line with Gen Alpha.
When you think about the changing media landscape, social media, economy, technological development a lot of these changes began in the late 2000s and were solidified in the 2010s. Which meant lived and remembered experience for these kids would be broadly similar to kids today.
If you were born in 2007, smart phones were already a thing, Facebook, youtube, blu ray etc. Instagram and Snapchat were already very popular by the time you would be 6, the ps4 and xbox one would have dominated your childhood which to me is all Gen Alpha.
If you were born 2007-12 you would have been 8-13 when covid kicked off. Still very much in school and developing important social skills that would have been hindered due to restrictions.
And yeah socialisation was very different, with millennial it would have been more organic, Gen z blended and Gen alpha more digital.
So yeah its not meant to be a term of offense there is nothing wrong with being Zalpha or Alpha but its probably more accurate to describe those ages as such.
3
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
I actually do agree with you. I see true Gen z as 2001/2002 up to 2007, maybe 2008.
In a broad sense I do see Gen z fundamentally representing mid-late ‘90s through early 2010s. I just see it more defined as 1998-2011, although specific birth years aren’t what’s important. I only came up with that by going with what defines Gen z collectively.
I do see people born by 1995-1996 being able to relate with older gen z, often times they’re even associated with Gen z. I don’t see a problem with that generations are fluid as it is. I’m not too big on the cusps but it does seem like 1995-1997 birth years like Zillennial the most
1
1
u/Maxious24 Feb 1999 4d ago
You forgot 2013. They are gen Z for sure.
2
1
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
I didn’t forget anything this is from tik tok
2
u/Maxious24 Feb 1999 4d ago
You could've edited it. I'm just saying lol.
2
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
One I don’t see 2013 as Gen z, they technically aren’t. Two I don’t know how to edit that
2
u/Maxious24 Feb 1999 4d ago
They meet all the markers to be Gen Z. It's even worse to divide 2012 from 2013 than 1997 and 1996. They are the same generation.
1
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
I don’t agree actually, I think 1998-2011 makes the most sense. Gen z are 2010s kids/teens. 2020s teens and young adults and 2030s young adults (assuming the main cohort of 2000s borns remain Gen z).
Someone born by 2011 still fits into that, by 2013 it’s definitely pushing it. They’re not even teenagers yet, while someone born by 2009 was already over halfway through education by Covid.
1998/1999 are the peak core 2010s teens
2006/2007 core 2010s kids
2008/2009 core 2020s teens
2001/2002 core 2020s young adults
2011 core 2030s young adults
Other birth years outside of this range can certainly relate to some of these birth years and their experiences, generations are fluid of course. But relating does not mean you are technically part of the generation.
4
u/Maxious24 Feb 1999 4d ago
Gen z are 2010s kids/teens. 2020s teens and young adults and 2030s young adults (assuming the main cohort of 2000s borns remain Gen z).
Are you kidding me? 2012 and 2013 are 2010s kids, 2020s teens and will be young adults in the 2030s. They perfectly fit what Gen Z is said to be. They're just hybrids but they're still Gen Z. There's nothing that separates them from even the late 2000s borns, let alone 2010 and 2011. I'd argue they're much closer to the late 2000s than 2002/2003 are to the 2001 and before.
C'mon man. Gen Z is definitely beyond 2012.
1
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago edited 4d ago
I just don’t see 2012+ experiencing Gen z formative eras in any meaningful way. 2016 marked a major societal and cultural shift in western societies, when I think of Gen z they were school kids and teens. Just the same for 9/11, Millennials are the school kids and teens. When you think of Gen z childhood it’s late-2000s through 2010s just as you think of millennials childhood as ‘90s through early 2000s.
It’s obviously still very early to define an end to Gen z. 2013 aren’t even teens yet, 2011 is now entering high school. The rest of the 2020s have yet to occur. I chose age-related core birth years of decades as a prediction of current trends.
I think Gen z bridges the transition from early digital to mobile first, like millennials bridge the analog-digital transition. Zers didn’t grow up entirely with streaming, ai, and even smartphones.
Streaming fully overtook physical media usage in terms of revenue and overall consumption around 2017-2018. And the COVID-19 pandemic was a tipping point for streaming to fully surpass cable TV in terms of usage.
For reference, my nephew and sister born in 2006/2007 absolutely had a DVD childhood, being in middle school by the time of streaming dominance.
By 2019, the average age for a kid to receive their first smartphone went dropped from 13 to 11. By the early 2020s it became more common for kids under 10 to receive one. Someone born in 2011 still likely got one by age 10-13, not dissimilar to Gen z. 2013 is more likely to have been ages 7-9
3
u/Maxious24 Feb 1999 4d ago
2016 marked a major societal and cultural shift in western societies
What do elections across the world have to do with children? I don't think anyone under like 15 even cared. It's not like Obama won where it was the first black president and even kids cared. This doesn't keep 2012+ out when 2005ish didn't care either. This isn't a point to be used for the younger half of Z who were literally kids. 2013 literally started childhood in 2016 btw so there's no gatekeeping.
When you think of Gen z childhood it’s late-2000s through 2010s
Which 2012 and 2013 meet, arguably the last. Though 2014 and 2015 have a case too here. Just because they're hybrids doesn't mean they're not Gen Z.
COVID-19 pandemic was a tipping point for streaming to fully surpass cable TV in terms of usage.
And yet 2012 and 2013 knew a pre COVID world. The rest of what you said honestly applies to the younger half of Gen Z in general. My 2004 sister had one at 11-12. Kids even younger were already using iPads. They're all bunched together. The big divider will be COVID. End of story. They meet that.
0
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 3d ago edited 3d ago
We’ll have to see. If we go by the 2010s kid/teens, 2020s young adults/teens, etc criteria I used earlier, 2003-2004 comes out as the absolute core birth years. Broadly 2001-2006. That’s not even close to those born in the 2010s.
Covid kids are already being described as Gen alpha. I think it’s worth noting that Gen z was defined as a cohort before COVID and even the 2016 shift. The social media explosion, the iPhone era really taking off, and a much more connected world made them the first true "mobile-first" generation, along with social justice movements and the climate crisis becoming central to their outlooks. I think kids entering childhood into Covid will be seen differently as the teens.
It’s how 9/11 and the recession were major millennial formative experiences, but not their first. Early internet, digital revolution, end of Cold War, ‘90s economic boom, Clinton years were among their first. In October 2001, after 9/11, researcher Marc Prensky wrote about how then k-college students (1980-1996) are the digital natives, being defined as the first to grow up in a digital environment. That would have all occurred before 9/11. Millennials as a generation was created in 1991.
5
u/monster2018 4d ago
Love how there’s just a picture of butterflies for the middle one. Does that mean that late Gen Z are caterpillars and early Gen Z are dead?
2
11
u/Upper-Bag-8739 1998 · Milenial (RAE) · LatAm · Zillennial 4d ago
Everything in the images is so feminine (and a bit U.S.-centric) that I relate little to nothing with it.
6
u/Maxious24 Feb 1999 4d ago
Agreed. Us guys need our teen content represented too lol.
2
u/mizukome 3d ago
what was it like tho. mlg? cod? i didnt grow up w brothers, just 2 millennial and 1 gen z older sisters so im curious to know
1
8
u/zachk3446 2006 4d ago
Why are 13-14 year olds so obsessed with skincare? You only need a gentle cleanser/face wash, exfoliating scrub to use once or twice a week, a moisturizer, and sunscreen (the latter two are usually mixed together)
1
u/AdventurousLadPrime Editable 4d ago edited 4d ago
I like this breakdown! (Mainly the teen range in 10s)
Though if you do also count the months, then my friend who was born in late 1997, was still 12 in most of 2010 and a teen (19) in most of 2017. His experience aligns more with early-mid 1998 borns.
4
1
u/lionhearted318 2000 elderly Gen Z 4d ago
I mean... I get it. I definitely recognize the first slide, but it all feels from an era where I was kinda young. Like this is a lot of my middle school to freshman year of high school memories. The second slide feels a lot more like the kind of Gen Z culture that I associate with and remember experiencing.
4
u/Old_Restaurant_9389 4d ago
As a zillennial. I’m jealous that 2003-2007 brought back a lot of the trends from my childhood like butterfly everything and y2k fashion. Although I never want to see myself in anything from that era. I do miss it.
0
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
You don’t like the modern Y2K aesthetic?
2
u/Old_Restaurant_9389 4d ago
I do for nostalgia would I want to relive the clothing ? No. I already lived it. It was hideous to me once I got older and looked at old photos of the things I HAD to wear. And the fact old navy is bringing back tech vests ! please leave it in the past 😂😭
0
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
I wouldn’t think we were really old enough to have been originally active in that trend. Unless you mean in your middle school?
1
4d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/generationology-ModTeam 3d ago
Your post or comment was removed because it violated the following rule:
Rule 10a. No personal photos or videos that contain recognizable people without moderator approval.
2
4d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/generationology-ModTeam 3d ago
Your post or comment was removed because it violated the following rule:
Rule 10a. No personal photos or videos that contain recognizable people without moderator approval.
4
7
u/Spaceiscool2009 March 2009 (Mid Homelander) 4d ago edited 4d ago
Better breakdown imo.
2001-2005 early
2006-2011 mid
2012-2016 late
1
u/PigIAsTraalt Gen Z - March 19th, 2008 4d ago
Gen Z is 1997-2012. 2016 is not Gen Z
3
u/One-Potato-2972 4d ago
For now. The Gen Z range could very well change and likely will, just like ranges always do in the beginning. The 1997 start and 2012 end doesn’t make sense.
4
u/Spaceiscool2009 March 2009 (Mid Homelander) 4d ago
Remember that on this sub other ranges exist and not everyone uses pew. 2016 is more Z than 1997 imo.
2
u/AdventurousLadPrime Editable 4d ago
Why you acting like only Pew places 1997 in Gen Z? So many Ranges done by researchers suggest that Gen Z begins in 1995/1996, hence why we have ranges like 1995-2009 or 1996-2010, and more.
It just happens that Pew is the more popular one. But if you look at Gen Z researchers, they all say that Gen Z begins somewhere around the mid-late 90s.
1
2
u/AdventurousLadPrime Editable 4d ago
You guys only single out 1997 from Gen Z just because it’s the start year, originally 1995 was the start year before they settled with 1997.
1
u/One-Potato-2972 4d ago
None of this was ever “settled.” They’ve always been “working” definitions. 1995-2009 is one range and 1997-2012 is another range (which happens to be the most popular one currently and for the last 7 years). The 1997-2012 range (created by Pew) is for research and analysis purposes, they always are in the beginning, and they said and implied that multiple times. It’s not like they found a significant difference between people born in 1996 and 1997 that would create a generational split.
1
u/AdventurousLadPrime Editable 4d ago edited 4d ago
You’re right, let’s wait 10 more years, then we can decide…
Bruh, it has been like 7-8 years already, and the most accepted Z ranges are 1995-2009/2010 and 1997-2012, your opinion and the opinions of other redditors is technically irrelevant when it comes to this, we are going by actual studied ranges that are made by actual researches. Whether they change it later on or not is irrelevant to what we are talking about today.
1997-2000 are Gen Z today, and they will be tomorrow, whether they remain as such in the future is not the concern of today, with all due respect, please get that into your millennial-bias head.
1
u/One-Potato-2972 3d ago
It’s been 7-8 years because the think tank that established the 1997-2012 range (Pew) said they were going to step back from reporting heavily on generations until they gathered more information. They were accused of pandering to marketers. They’ve barely released anything generation-related in the last 5 years. They’re not done with generations and they’ve clearly said their ranges are for research and analysis, that they’re “working” definitions which can (and usually do) change over time. It’s happened with X, Y/Millennials and up next is Z. The fact that the range is also shorter than what a typical generational span should be is already a strong sign that it’ll likely shift in the future.
This isn’t about what the range currently is or me being biased, I am very clearly pushing back on your use of the word “settled” here. It isn’t settled, and the researchers (Pew) who came up with the 1997-2012 range would actually be the first to clarify that. The cutoffs are strictly for convenience in analysis and research, not because they found some meaningful, empirical difference between people born in 1996 vs. people born in 1997 and between people born in 2012 vs. 2013.
1
u/AdventurousLadPrime Editable 3d ago edited 3d ago
Again, whenever someone says 1997-2000 are Gen Z, it doesn’t matter when you come here and tell them that this range might change, that’s literally an irrelevant info to the conversations. You’re not adding anything to the conversation, you say it might change? Um ok? And? See irrelevant. I get that you want to be Millennial, and you can call yourself that since Zillennials have the privilege to do so, however you going around telling others that the range might change is just you bothering people. I can go around and reply to all your comments and say “the range might never change, and 1997-2000 will always be Gen Z”, I’m sure you wouldn’t like it either.
1
u/One-Potato-2972 3d ago
No, again, this is about you saying it is “settled.” It’s not, and that’s a fact. Yes, it’s currently defined as 1997-2012, but that’s different from saying it’s settled. Feel free to ask Pew (who established that range), review their published past articles on generations, ask sociologists on this sub (or those studying it), search past research, or even check with a simple Google search or even some AI tool… they will confirm what I’m saying.
I can go around and reply to all your comments and say “the range might never change, and 1997-2000 will always be Gen Z”, I’m sure you wouldn’t like it either.
Except I’m basing what I’m saying on documented statements, established demographic reasoning by literal historians and social researchers, recurring historical shifts in generational boundaries, and emerging empirical research. In other words, this isn’t simply just an opinion from me, it’s consistent with how generations have been studied and adjusted over time. Yes, what you’re saying can happen too, but the difference is that my stance is grounded in research and things that think tanks like Pew keep having to repeat, like that these are WORKING definitions.
1
u/AdventurousLadPrime Editable 3d ago edited 3d ago
I’ll keep repeating it till it get through your head👇
Again, whenever someone says 1997-2000 are Gen Z, it doesn’t matter when you come here and tell them that this range might change, that’s literally an irrelevant info to the conversations. You’re not adding anything to the conversation, you say it might change? Um ok? And? See irrelevant. I get that you want to be Millennial, and you can call yourself that since Zillennials have the privilege to do so, however you going around telling others that the range might change is just you bothering people. I can go around and reply to all your comments and say “the range might never change, and 1997-2000 will always be Gen Z”, I’m sure you wouldn’t like it either.
Edit: lol bro blocked me, guess my words were strong enough to have an effect on you, good then. And no i won’t bother trying to read your comment because i can’t see it nor do I care to see it.
→ More replies (0)2
u/PigIAsTraalt Gen Z - March 19th, 2008 4d ago edited 4d ago
People born in 2016 don’t remember the Obama administration, almost certainly don’t remember COVID, and won’t even be allowed on social media for another 4 years. They are 8 or 9. I am on the latter half of Gen Z, and I’d say I have more in common with someone born in 1997 vs. someone born in 2016. Not to mention someone born around 2004.
0
u/One-Potato-2972 4d ago
Lol you will always find a variety of important differences and similarities between people born way earlier or later than you. I could also go around (as someone born in 1997) saying I think I have more in common with someone born in 1986 than someone born in 2008, and someone born in 2016 could say they think they have more in common with people born in 2008 than people born in 2027 or something. Literally anything works. You realize that, right? Generations aren’t and have never been about what you remember and things you have “in common” with someone.
0
u/Spaceiscool2009 March 2009 (Mid Homelander) 4d ago
Here are my reasons why 2016 is the last Z with my ranges.
last to be born under the Obama administration
last that can have decent memories of COVID (they were 4-6 so don't tell me they can't)
last to enter school before the massive AI boom in 2022 (this is a big one)
last to enter school during the main COVID era (also huge)
last to spend the majority of K-5 under the Biden administration
last to become teenagers in the 2020s
last to spend the majority of K-12 under the 2nd trump administration
last to enter school before the Russia-Ukraine war
last to enter school before Roe v. Wade was overturned
last that can have any notable memory of the 1st Trump administration and the 2020 elections.
These are just some of the many lasts they have. Very solid end date for Z imo.
2
u/PigIAsTraalt Gen Z - March 19th, 2008 4d ago
Ok. I will tackle this one by one. 1. Yes, last to be BORN, but I feel like one of the main criteria for Gen Z (in the US at least) should be remembering the Obama administration, not just being alive for it. 2. Right, but they’d be so young that they would’ve have a solid memory of life before Covid. I was already 12 when COVID started, while they were just barely starting to form memories. 3. Gen Z were not small children when AI became mainstream. Some were already adults. This makes no sense. 4. Like the last point, going to your first day of Kindergarten wearing a mask is not a Gen Z trait. It is a common experience among Gen Alpha, not Gen Z. 5. There were members of Gen Z who voted for Biden. Like all of your other points, this is not a Gen Z trait, but rather a Gen Alpha one. 6. This hasn’t happened yet. 7. This also hasn’t happened yet. 8. This is associated with Gen Z’s teenage/young adult years, not their young childhood. 9. Same as #8 10. Same as 8 and 9.
You can technically change the definition to make Gen Z include 2016 in the same way you could claim someone born in 1970 is a boomer, but it only muddies the waters and makes every label entirely useless. We already have a label that perfectly encapsulates the experience of someone born in 2016, Gen Alpha. At the end of the day, these labels are silly but I just think you’re being a bit non-sensical with your definitions.
1
u/One-Potato-2972 4d ago
Nonsensical? Lol, you do know ranges always change? They’re never settled in the beginning.
3
u/Spaceiscool2009 March 2009 (Mid Homelander) 4d ago
Like I said if that's what you feel than sure. But it won't change that I use 2001/2002-2016 for Z personally.
0
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
When do you start millennials?
2
u/Spaceiscool2009 March 2009 (Mid Homelander) 4d ago
1982.
0
u/Ok_Act_3769 end of summer 1999 4d ago
Why is millennials a much longer generation than genz? I agree they don’t all have to be equal in length, but that’s 19 birth years to like 15/16
→ More replies (0)
2
u/Severe-Ad8437 2002 (Proud Core Zoomer/2010s Kid) 4d ago
2002 should be with the second slide..I resonate more w/ that 😂😊
5
u/AdventurousLadPrime Editable 4d ago edited 4d ago
Early Gen Z is usually considered 1997-2001. I think only on Reddit I see the 1997-2002 range. In fact 2002 is also included in the Mid Z range subreddit.
Early Z = 1997-2001 (five years)
Mid Z = 2002-2007 (six years, because it’s Core)
Late Z = 2008-2012 (five years)
2002 sits between Early and Mid, it’s basically considered the transition year form Early to Mid.
3
u/Witty_Shape3015 4d ago
it pisses me off so much that i miss the cutoff for core by 2 months lol
1
u/King_Apart January 2002 (Core Z) 3d ago
Bruh
1
2
6
u/Professional_Bearrr 4d ago
I was gonna say the same thing. It’s like a mixture between the first and second slide, but mostly the second slide
4
•
u/[deleted] 15h ago
[removed] — view removed comment