Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Linda is Watching
I just checked, and it appears that Susan Boyle was born in 1961. That makes her a Baby Boomer. The commonly accepted years for the Baby Boom are 1946-64.

Of course I find this whole "generation" thing terribly overrated, and "generations" seem to be getting shorter all the time.

3 posted on 04/21/2009 11:48:31 AM PDT by Charles Henrickson (b. 1953)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Charles Henrickson

Really, who made up this Generation Jones, sh**?


8 posted on 04/21/2009 12:35:54 PM PDT by Clock King
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Charles Henrickson

Nice article, Alie James. I was drawn to it because you wrote about Generation Jones, but once I read it, I went to your blog and enjoyed also the other things you write about.

As far as Boyle’s generational identity, Alie James is correct...born in ‘61, Boyle is part of Generation Jones—born 1954-1965, between the Boomers and Generation X. Google Generation Jones, and you’ll see it’s gotten a ton of media attention, and many top commentators from many top publications and networks (Washington Post, Time magazine, NBC, Newsweek, ABC, FNC, etc.) now specifically use this term.

It is important to distinguish between the post-WWII demographic boom in births vs. the cultural generations born during that era. Generations are a function of the common formative experiences of its members, not the fertility rates of its parents. Many experts now believe it breaks down this way:

DEMOGRAPHIC boom in babies: 1946-1964
Baby Boom GENERATION: 1942-1953
Generation Jones: 1954-1965
Generation X: 1966-1978


14 posted on 04/21/2009 1:43:23 PM PDT by politico 2006
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson