Generation Jones
Perhaps I’m coming a little late to the party, but last week I learned a term I had never heard before:
Generation Jones.
“Generation Jones” was coined in 1999 by American social commentator Jonathan Pontell. It refers to the individuals—sometimes referred to as “Late Boomers”—born between 1954 and 1965.
I am what is known as a “Joneser.”
The argument for distinguishing “Jonesers” from “Classic Boomers” (those born between 1946 and 1954) is that, even though our births were all technically part of the baby boom that started following the end of World War II, our mindsets are completely different.
In fact, in a 2009 Politico article, Pontell wrote, “Generations arise from shared formative experiences, not headcounts, and the two groups [Classic Boomers vs. Jonesers] evolved with dramatic differences.”
Numerous sources on the internet describe those differences as they relate to the newsworthy events that supposedly shaped the way each group thinks, sees the world, and makes decisions—including who they are most likely to vote for.
Therein lies the rub.
Generations of people are simply NOT monolithic. They never have been.
Not my generation. Not my parents’ generation. Not their parents’ generation. And not my children’s generation.
Former Presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton—both of whom are “Classic Boomers” were born just six weeks apart. But their political persuasions are vastly different.
Generations seem like a fine way to categorize people demographically. But psychographically? Not so much.
I would argue it’s not the larger “shared formative experiences” that influence how we think; rather, it’s the smaller ones.
How did we grow up? What were the values emphasized in our households? What role did economics, faith, friendships, community, academics, art, music, dance, sports, social action, extended family, etc. play in our daily lives?
These are the types of experiences I believe made me who I am today—more so than wars, assassinations, political scandals, energy crises, inflation, civil rights, women’s rights, gay rights, or the advent and subsequent demise of disco, all of which took place during my “formative years.”
To me, lumping people together according to when they were born is one of the most egregious contributors to the perpetuation of ageism.
It wrongly assumes that the individuals within each age group—no matter what that age group might be—think with one mind, when in fact, nothing could be farther from the truth.
According to Oxford Languages, the word “individual” means, “a single human being as distinct from a group, class, or family.”
Consequently, the very definition of the word, “individual” dictates that we treat each person based on who they are and what they believe—rather according to whichever larger group they may belong to—generations included.
Be they “Boomers” or “Jonesers” or “Xers,” it’s time we stopped relying on labels—generational or otherwise—to define our fellow human beings.
Because we’re all unique individuals—no matter when we were born.