Generations: The Real Differences Between Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, Boomers, and Silents—and What They Mean for America's Future

by Jean M. Twenge

Gen Z has grown accustomed to leaders speaking out even on hot-button political issues and making strong statements about systemic racism. Gen Z’ers can barely remember a time before the country was so sharply divided politically. Everything is political, and politics has become about morals and values, not just candidates and debates. There is a new feeling that it’s us versus them, and you must take a stand one way or another. They have seen this new outspoken model at their universities, and have begun to expect it from businesses as well—both as consumers and as employees.

5. Mental health. With depression on the rise among young people, companies will have to up their game when it comes to mental health. Young employees will want to know: What coverage is available for mental health in your health care plans? Do you treat mental health on par with physical health when it comes to time off?

6. The flattening. “Good morning, Mike,” says Jose as he walks into the office. Pop quiz: Who is Jose talking to, his boss or his employee?

Individualism has flattened the authority structure everywhere, with distinctions between managers and employees fading. Relationships are less formal and more casual. Managers work together with employees as a team, rather than ordering around underlings. The days when managers could tell employees to do something and they would just do it are long gone.

7. The future is nonbinary. “You should be able to wear whatever you want, whenever you want,” says clothing designer Pierre Davis, the founder of the brand No Sesso (which means “no gender/sex” in Italian). No Sesso aims to design clothing that is sexy instead of unisex, that people can wear regardless of their gender identity.

Stating pronouns will become standard practice in businesses. As Gen Z becomes the bulk of new hires, they will request (and possibly demand) it. If everyone states their pronouns, Gen Z’ers argue, then it’s less awkward for trans or nonbinary people to state their pronouns. Pronoun-stating is becoming common for email signatures and names on Zoom calls and may soon become common in verbal conversations as well.

Millennial Birth Rates. As recently as 2008, the total fertility rate in the U.S. was 2.1—meaning each woman was likely to have 2 children, enough to replace the population. That rate slipped below replacement levels in 2009 and kept falling. By 2020, the total fertility rate was 1.64, the lowest ever recorded (see Figure 5.32 in the Millennial chapter). When the birth rate is below replacement, the country tilts toward having more older people than younger ones.

If Millennials aren’t having kids, it seems pretty unlikely that Gen Z will turn that around.

All three of the major causes of generational change point toward birth rates either continuing to decline or stabilizing at low rates. Technology makes birth control possible, so having children becomes a choice. Individualism deemphasizes family and tradition, which leads to fewer people choosing to have children. The slow-life strategy means people wait to have children and have fewer of them. These three forces are also behind the declines in sexual activity among both single and married people, and less sexual activity usually means lower fertility.

If we set these advantages aside and assume we want to increase birth rates, how could that be accomplished? Some experts have focused on child tax credits and subsidized childcare. Although Millennials have done well economically, their economic success is based almost exclusively on Millennial women earning more. That creates a squeeze when heterosexual couples are ready to have children, suggesting that making childcare more affordable might increase the birth rate. Still, in-depth analyses by economists have concluded that financial considerations are not the primary reason for the decline in the birth rate, casting doubt on strategies that primarily target cost. More

Having children is often an indicator of how we perceive the world. Any cultural change that moves the focus away from the short-term enjoyment of the individual to the long-term enjoyment of family and community could increase the birth rate. In addition, interventions that decrease negativity online, encourage in-person social interactions, or bolster access to mental health care could have the secondary effect of increasing the birth rate. It is likely not a coincidence that the birth rate declined at the same time that depression and dissatisfaction soared. If we can bring mental health back, we might also bring the birth rate back.

The political gap between those born before and after 1985 will intensify until the mid-2020s—not because of age but because of generational differences. Even as they age beyond 40, more Millennials and Gen Z’ers will lean Democrat than Gen X’ers did at that age. Combined with the demographic shift in these younger generations toward more racial and ethnic diversity, which also tilts younger generations more toward Democrats, more of the U.S. population will identify as Democrats with each passing year.

The social issue that most divides young Republicans and Democrats is race. Young White Democrats are actually slightly more likely than young Blacks (of both parties) to say that Black people face a considerable amount of discrimination, but only a minority of young White Republicans agree—instead, 6 out of 10 disagree (see Figure 8.7). In contrast, young White Republicans are more than three times as likely as young White Democrats to say that White people face a considerable amount of discrimination—3 out of 10 think so, vs. 1 out of 10 young White Democrats.

today’s young Republicans see a larger role for government than previous generations of Republicans did. More than 4 out of 10 Millennial and Gen Z Republicans agree “I favor a larger government with more services,” much higher than among Boomer and Silent Republicans (see Figure 8.9).

example, people who live in rural vs. urban areas increasingly hold different political beliefs. Living in the country or a small town vs. a big city once mattered little for political ideology, but since 2010 there has been a widening gap (see Figure 8.10). Republicans were once the country club party; they are now the country party.

This may be one of the few issues Democrats and Republicans can agree on: Social media needs more regulation. The health of our democracy—and of our children—may depend on it.

In the past, some observers argued that younger generations would come back to religion once they had children. This argument died on the vine with Millennials, who stayed less religious than previous generations even as they began their families. Given Millennials’ lack of change with age, the decline in religion may be a permanent trend. Teens and young adults are starting their adult lives less religious and are likely to stay that way.

Humans have an innate desire to believe in something larger than themselves and to seek meaning in their lives. If religion stops filling this role, something else will step in to fill it. In the U.S., the individualistic ethos of equality and self-determination has filled this role to an extent; for many modern citizens, their belief in equality across race, gender, sexual orientation, and transgender status is just as deeply held as religious belief. In general, groups based on political beliefs may be taking the place of religious groups. With political belief splintering around education, state, and rural vs. urban locations, Americans are increasingly surrounded by people with similar political beliefs. Political views become sorted into moral tribes, with each side disliking or even hating the other. For many the world is sorted into us and them, believers and heretics. World history suggests that transferring religious beliefs into politics will not end well. The

With the birth rate declining, baby products and children’s toys will be a shrinking market. Some play places, children’s hospitals, and other organizations serving this market will shutter. As the 2020s go on, the number of tweens and teens will decline steadily, lowering demand for products and services used by adolescents. Middle school and high school enrollment will shrink, followed by college enrollment. Industries that rely on a young workforce will have a more difficult time hiring workers by the 2030s.

That data clearly shows that attitudes, personality traits, behaviors, education, and the speed of life have all changed tremendously over these six generations. The childhood of the Polars in the 2020s bears little resemblance to the Silents’ childhood in the 1940s and 1950s, the Gen Z adolescence is difficult to understand for raised-tough Gen X’ers, and the Millennial young adulthood is very different from the Boomers’ experiences at those ages.

generations differ because technology has radically changed daily life and culture, both directly and via technology’s daughters individualism and a slower life. Gen Z doesn’t believe that gender is fluid because they were born after 9/11; they believe gender is fluid because that is the next step for an increasingly individualistic and online culture. Millennials aren’t marrying later because they were young during the Great Recession; they are marrying later because adult development has slowed as technology created the triple trends of more protected children, more years of education to prepare for information-age jobs, and medical advances enabling longer life spans. Gen Z isn’t depressed because of the economy; they’re depressed because smartphones and social media created an atmosphere of constant competition and severed them from in-person human interaction.

Silents harnessed individualistic thinking when they fought for the abolition of racial segregation and overturned laws that discriminated based on gender. Boomers wielded it when they protested the Vietnam War draft and challenged traditional rules about what women could and couldn’t do. Gen X’ers put their own twist on individualism by valuing self-confidence and harboring distrust. Millennials elevated positive self-views to new heights and supported LGB people’s individual rights to be who they are and love who they love. Gen Z makes the individualistic argument that everyone can choose their gender—and that there are more than two. All cultural systems have trade-offs, and individualism has brought Americans a culture with unprecedented freedom, diverse voices, and a belief that people can be who they want to be. However, it has also created more distrust of others, and a fragmented social fabric. Leaving social rules behind to favor the individual brings both freedom and chaos, both liberation and disconnection.

The slow-life strategy has grown with each generation, delaying traditional milestones at every stage of the life cycle. Children are safer but less independent; teens are less likely to drink alcohol, drive, or work; young adults postpone marriage, children, and careers; the middle-aged feel and act younger; and seniors work and travel at older ages than ever. The slow life grew from a whisper for Boomers, who married young but had children a little later, to a shout for Millennials, who graduated from college in record numbers and delayed marriage and children longer...

Like individualism, the slow-life strategy has trade-offs, especially during adolescence: more protection and physical safety, but less exploration and independence. In prime-age adulthood, it leads to delayed partnership and parenthood, creating more uncertainty in young adulthood but more mature spouses and parents. In older adulthood, longer and healthier lives are the upside; the downside is a larger generation gap between political leaders and the young, and a striking delay in the ascendance of the next generation into leadership (cue Gen X eyeing Boomers). With technological progress continuing to march forward, the slow life is likely here to stay.

From longer lifespans to labor-saving devices to virtual meetings eliminating commutes, technology has saved modern citizens countless hours. Yet we often choose to spend that extra time consuming the products of technology. We have taken technology’s priceless gift of time and used it to watch funny videos and lust after other people’s lives—diverting, but not always enlightening or beneficial.

Boomers and Gen X’ers have no reference point for growing up with the internet and social media, and Gen Z has no reference point for growing up without it, leaving Millennials to explain both viewpoints to their elders and juniors.

Technology has given us instant communication, unrivaled convenience, and the most precious prize of all: longer lives with less drudgery. At the same time, technology has isolated us from each other, sowed political division, fueled income inequality, spread pervasive pessimism, widened generation gaps, stolen our attention, and is the primary culprit for a mental health crisis among teens and young adults. This is the challenge for all six generations in the decades to come: to find a way for technology to bring us together instead of driving us apart.

Instead of debating which generation is to blame, we can realize that the generations influence each other as they all navigate cultural change. Demystifying generational differences, as this book attempts, may also reduce intergenerational conflict. The more we understand the perspective of different generations, the easier it is to see we’re all in this together.