• orioler25@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    117
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Jfc how are people still talking about generations?

    Exasperation, not a genuine question ^

    • Rothe@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      80
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Because it is an effective distraction from the actual problem which is class war.

      Billionaires and their followers are the problem, not people of a certain age, gender, skin colour etc. etc.

    • lauha@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      2 months ago

      Well, corporations created generational division to blame what corporations were doing.

      Corporations created anti-union sentiment for obvious reasons.

    • felixwhynot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Before the Internet it was a bigger deal bc culture was different but yeah basically just a distraction

      People like to have identities tho and like for this person maybe being GenX means something. Like distrust of systems

      • Rooster326@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        It is exactly the opposite because the Internet is and mostly has been a way to connect with like minded individuals. Generations are a new concept to divide us. They are less than a century old.

        Before generations we had time periods that united us. We all knew what it meant to live through the 90s, the 80s, fuckin disco. It was commonality with your fellow man. Despite absolutely everyone knowing someone wearing skinny jeans in the early aughts - now it’s a “stupid Millennial” trend.

        https://worldhistory.medium.com/where-did-generations-come-from-e2fb73931a88

    • ramble81@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      There will always be the need to have some societal construct for the grouping of people. People in the same generation were generally subjected to similar living conditions at similar points of their life so it makes it a valid grouping.

      If not generations, then what? There is also sexual orientations, political beliefs, race… the list goes on.

      Realistically you can’t have 8 billion plus classifications for every distinct person, so at some point there needs to be a generally agreed upon roll up.

      • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        If not generations, then what?

        Income, average household size, cost-of-living, religious preference, level of education, geography… lots of ways to slice up that poll data once you correlate each polling place with other data. The key here is that it’s possibly more valid to correlate with information that is closer to the election date than birthdays that were decades ago.

      • orioler25@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Oh yeah, you think everyone born in the late 1940s had similar enough lived experiences to universalise them? That’s incredible that there’s so little variation despite drastically different socioeconomic positionalities, almost like you’d have to dismiss certain experiences that inevitably deviate from that imagined norm to allow it to exist. Of course, there’s only so many ways to account for everyone, so we will have to accept these dominant constructions of human experience as something inevitable as well.

        I wonder if there’s a word for that.

        • ramble81@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          You completely missed my point. Generation is a valid grouping even if you don’t like it. Yes there are others that may work, some may be better, some may not. But it is still a unifying thread. Take Xellenials (micro-generation between X and Millenial), it’s described as an “analog childhood and digital adulthood” that is somewhat that pretty much everyone in that generation was subject to, so yeah it was a “similar enough lived [sic] experience to universalize them”.

          • BeardededSquidward@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            I don’t think it’s similar living conditions but more of significant world events in their lives. With say Boomers you have Vietnam, Civil Rights, and Reagan as examples that shaped their world views. Not all are shaped the same way but it affected them. Like with Millennials, we have the proliferation of the internet, 2001, and 2008. These have seriously affected how we think and act to differing degrees in the USA.

          • orioler25@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Lmao, “microgeneration.” You don’t even believe in what you’re saying, it’s just the language you’ve been given.

            Fucking so wild how many men responded to this without ever considering that their experiences are not universal.

      • orioler25@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        I got like three dudes genuinely trying to explain it (with wrong answers) within a few minutes. So, seemed necessary so as to not suffer the mansplaining.

        • pixeltree@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          That wasn’t sarcastic, or not directed negatively at you anyway. Love to see clarification, hate that it’s needed

    • Rhoeri@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Because ideologies are a team sport now. And people need to feel like they’re part of something- regardless of its relevance.