No Boomer Generation president (kind of sarcasm)

[-misanthroptimist]

79. Were it up to me, and it's not...

...I would group generations differently. Bear in mind two things: 1) I have no authority in this field; and 2) any discussion of generations is a discussion of generalities of a given group -plenty of exceptions will exist.

That said, I would get rid of the Boomer designation entirely since there are so many differences between early and late Boomers. I would designate a generation between 1930 and 1955. (I don't have a name for them.) This generation has little to know memory of the Depression and/or WWII, or at the least didn't participate in either due to their age. They grew up watching and hearing about how tough thins were, their elder siblings or parents getting medals and defeating authoritarianism, and getting the moniker "The Greatest Generation". This, based on my observation, affected that group greatly. They felt underestimated and compelled to make their mark in the world and upset long standing traditions. Many of those traditions did indeed badly need changing, of course. But they didn't stop there. They were on a mission to prove their worth and changed everything -including themselves several times. The same people that defined the Sexual Revolution also voted for Reagan in huge numbers just a few years later. The same people that protested Viet Nam approved almost every subsequent military action.

My own observation is that there is a marked difference between Boomers born before 1955 and those born later. The latter group truly is closer to Gen X. I belong to that group and find I have more in common with Gen X than I do Boomers. So do most of the people I've met born after 1955. Again, though, this is a generality and exceptions abound. Worse still, it's based on my own experience and may not represent the world at large. Either way, it's not terribly important who belongs to what generation.