• MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 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
      2
      ·
      11 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
        ·
        11 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
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yeah the whole thing is just opinion and nothing official. 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.