# The concept of "generations" as defining peer groups is broken **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [July 25, 2024, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-concept-of-generations-as-defining-peer-groups-is-broken/1004760 "2024-07-25T02:54:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 23
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2024, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-concept-of-generations-as-defining-peer-groups-is-broken/1004760/23 "2024-07-25T23:06:21Z")
> [@pulykamell](#): > > The differences in growing up 20 (or whatever) years apart are enough for there to be marked differences between generations and how they perceive and interact with the world. Yes, but drawing the lines is the hard part. What makes 1963 different than 1968? They’re worlds and social experiences are very similar. What makes 1977 different than 1084? Why are they in different groups? “Millennials” is a confusing term some use to refer to those becoming adults around 2000 while others for people born around 2000. The fact that we have to dream up transition groups (Generation Jones, Xennials, etc) shows the brackets are to large. --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-concept-of-generations-as-defining-peer-groups-is-broken/1004760)._