• MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    The first millenials were born in 1981, so yes, they were definitely teenagers by that point.

    • Altima NEO@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      Isn’t it 82? Whole reason they’re called millennials is because they graduated high school in the “new millennium”. 81 would have graduated in 99.

      • wjrii@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        There’s rarely a strict cutoff for this sort of thing. If you’re on the edges, it’s sort of “whichever feels right”. I am only a year older than my wife, and we were both born in the late 70s, but I had a brother 7 years older than me and she was her parents’ first. Based on the TikToks she sends me, she identifies as a millennial. I am much more in tune with the Gen X zeitgeist.

        • Altima NEO@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Yeah the whole thing is just opinion and nothing official. Even Wikipedia 's definitions are based off others opinions. However to me, millennial makes sense as 82 and on being the first graduating classes of new millennium. I remember in elementary school they’d make such a huge deal about being the class of 2000.

          I’ve also seen another group cut into the early 80s as the Oregon Trail generation, as a way to for people who don’t associate well with Gen x or millennials.