I'd say a Child of the '80s is not a "child" of the 80s but rather a "product" of them.

I'd say a Child of the '80s could be born from 1958 to 1982.

If you were born in 1958, you'd be in your thirties in the 80's?  ???

[quote author=whis

I have no real clue of what a child of the 80s means but I was born in 1972 so I say I was a child of the 80's... Great times huh? 8)

A child of the 80s is literally just that. You are just reading into it way too much. It's pretty simple really, if you were too old to play with toys such as He-man, Transformers, Voltron or Jem etc etc etc in the 80s, then you were more than likely a child of the 70s. Someone born in 1958 would have been way too old for those toys & to be a child of the 80s. The end of childhood is when most discard or start to deny childhood fads & become emarrassed about things they loved as children, which for most begins from about 12 or 13 depending on the person. For example i remember wanting to get rid of my Transformers wall clock in my room by about 12 or 13 cause i was emarrassed about still having it at that point. I thought if i bought friends & especially girls home to my room they'd think i'm a total dork LOL. I was way too distracted by girls to still be interested in childlike things. I'm so glad i kept that clock though & it's still on my wall now. I wouldn't really count adolesence as really being childhood even though the mind & behavour can be quite childlike at times, it's a time most become interested in things other than toys & also become distracted by the opposite sex. When your a teenager you are too busy trying to proove your an adult or act like your older than you are so you tend to lose interest in childlike things. If you were a teenager by the early 80s it really doesn't count as a child of the 80s, you were really child of the 70s & a teen of the 80s.

^ I'd pretty much agree with that.

For easy purposes, I'd say a "child" is under 13 (i.e. preteens). And, on the other end of the spectrum, say you'd have to be 5 to remember things with substance.

So this could range from people born 1967-84 (13 in 1980 to 5 in 1989).


But I'd also agree with when someone's "time" being roughly age 10-25. So if you were born in 1958, you'd be 22 in 1980. No, that's not a kid or even quite a teenager anymore, but young enough to still call it "your" generation and to enjoy quite a bit of the current fashions and such.

I"m sure I qualify..grauated high school in 83, college in 87..
from mousse to spandex to little pink anklets to madonna bracelets and back.

I really need to dig out some photos..

^ Your "time" included the 80's, but I'd call you a child of the 70's more.

BTW, I think a central "child of the 80's" is someone born around 1976 or '77. They're just old enough to vageuly remember 1980, and yet still no more than about 13 in 1989, so pretty much they're "kids" the whole decade.

^ Your "time" included the 80's, but I'd call you a child of the 70's more.

BTW, I think a central "child of the 80's" is someone born around 1976 or '77. They're just old enough to vageuly remember 1980, and yet still no more than about 13 in 1989, so pretty much they're "kids" the whole decade.


I agree for the most part, but I think you're more influenced in your teens by music and movies..
i have that 70s 80s split...we never had computers in school- and as soon as we graduated, things got
(a little) better.

Great question that brings much confusion and debate. Basically, being "a child" of a particular decade or generation means that you spent most of your teenage or idea forming years within that decade. That makes them always look to you as the "wonder years" and the years you most likely identify with the most. The exceptions are people who had a very abusive or rough time during those years and may want to forget them altogether. But to get back to the original question I would say anyone born from about 1966-1976 or so. That person would have spent the majority of their teenage years in the 1980's (expect maybe the very last of the range). For me, I was lucky enough to be born in 1970 and spent all of my teenage years in that incredible decade and truly am a genuine "Child of the 80s".

I agree for the most part, but I think you're more influenced in your teens by music and movies..
i have that 70s 80s split...we never had computers in school- and as soon as we graduated, things got
(a little) better.


True that.

Apparently I must be the unusual one, LOL. I was more influenced by my childhood stuff -- born in late 1981 and I've always been as fond of the 80's as the average person born in 1968 is.

Now, what might separate me from a Brat Pack-aged person is I like quite a bit from the 90's too (they were pretty cool up through about 1997). Although I never quite was as attached to them as to the 80's.

Great topic. I think that a Child of the 80's is someone who spent at least four of their formative years somewhere within the decade. I would define formative years as being 8 to 20 years of age so if you were born from 1964 to 1978 I would consider you a Child of the 80's.  I still remember listening to Casey Kasem's American Top 40 from 1983 to 1986 on AM radio.  That was the best time for 80's music.  I was born in 1972 and would put me at 11-14 years old at that time.  Eleven years old must be a defining moment cause my nephew just turned 11 this year and he got his first stereo (or should I say Ghetto Blaster).  Instead of listening to Duran Duran and Bon Jovi he listens to System of a Down and Black Eyed Peas ..... how sad to have to listen to punk metal and hip hop .... glad I am not having to be eleven in the '00's!!!!

Great topic. I think that a Child of the 80's is someone who spent at least four of their formative years somewhere within the decade. I would define formative years as being 8 to 20 years of age so if you were born from 1964 to 1978 I would consider you a Child of the 80's.  I still remember listening to Casey Kasem's American Top 40 from 1983 to 1986 on AM radio.  That was the best time for 80's music.  I was born in 1972 and would put me at 11-14 years old at that time.   Eleven years old must be a defining moment cause my nephew just turned 11 this year and he got his first stereo (or should I say Ghetto Blaster).  Instead of listening to Duran Duran and Bon Jovi he listens to System of a Down and Black Eyed Peas ..... how sad to have to listen to punk metal and hip hop .... glad I am not having to be eleven in the '00's!!!!


Being a '00s teen sucks, we get the '90s leftovers  :(

Great topic. I think that a Child of the 80's is someone who spent at least four of their formative years somewhere within the decade. I would define formative years as being 8 to 20 years of age so if you were born from 1964 to 1978 I would consider you a Child of the 80's.  I still remember listening to Casey Kasem's American Top 40 from 1983 to 1986 on AM radio.  That was the best time for 80's music.  I was born in 1972 and would put me at 11-14 years old at that time.   Eleven years old must be a defining moment cause my nephew just turned 11 this year and he got his first stereo (or should I say Ghetto Blaster).  Instead of listening to Duran Duran and Bon Jovi he listens to System of a Down and Black Eyed Peas ..... how sad to have to listen to punk metal and hip hop .... glad I am not having to be eleven in the '00's!!!!


Casey Kasem's American Top 40 was a really great radio show.  I listened to it alot when I was younger.

Casey Kasem's American Top 40 was a really great radio show.  I listened to it alot when I was younger.


So did I!

Casey Kasem's American Top 40 was a really great radio show.  I listened to it alot when I was younger.


I used to faithfully listen to the syndicated reruns of 80's shows on Sunday mornings. They did this a few years back, but sadly they've reverted to current stuff again (with the occasional flashback, of course).

P.S. This man is the Dick Clark of radio, and I mean that in a good way. 8)

I you are from NY/NJ area, you will remember U68- the greatest tv channel ever...then inthe evening, Uncle Floyd.
u68 showed commercial free music video from 81 to about 85 (correct me if I"m wrong) and then some comedy.
GREAT

Hey, I was born in '76 and I definitely consider myself a child of the '80s.
It's not solely about age in my opinion though. There were plenty of people in my graduating class who gravitated more towards 90's culture once they hit high school. While I was definitely not oblivious to 90's culture, I never forsaked my 80's faves in favor of 90's ones.

The funniest thing is that ten years later, all the kids who laughed at me in high school for still digging 80's culture were lined up at stores like Hot Topic to buy things like Transformers t-shirts and Atari stickers. Hypocrites and imbeciles.

I think the range between 1963-1982 is a decent range of 80's children. It's still really hard to class anyone in that group, though. I was born in 1982 so I spent about 7 years and 7 months in the 80's, to be exact, and they made a big impact on me. Yet, if I had been a teenager during that time, I would have remembered things a lot more clearly and would not be confused with certain details unless I was reminded or saw pictures to remember. Other than that, I would consider probably anyone born up to 1985 also as a child of the 80's as their first coherent memories probably stemmed from the 80's, but they wouldn't be all that clear as maybe someone who was born the year I was.

I think the range between 1963-1982 is a decent range of 80's children. It's still really hard to class anyone in that group, though. I was born in 1982 so I spent about 7 years and 7 months in the 80's, to be exact, and they made a big impact on me. Yet, if I had been a teenager during that time, I would have remembered things a lot more clearly and would not be confused with certain details unless I was reminded or saw pictures to remember. Other than that, I would consider probably anyone born up to 1985 also as a child of the 80's as their first coherent memories probably stemmed from the 80's, but they wouldn't be all that clear as maybe someone who was born the year I was.


I spent many coherent years in the 1970s being born in 1970. But I do not consider myself a "Child Of The 70s". I was only a small child during that period and therefore could not really participate to any active extent in the Pop Culture beyond my Elementary years. My identity as well as ideology was much greater defined in my teenage years and that would be the 80s. And also most sub-generations are decade limited (besides 90s and 00s for some odd reason. They have blended) to 10 years and are pretty well defined when you step back and look at the culture. I do appreciate people feeling fondly of my decade and connecting with it in some way or another (the 80s) but that is not enough to be considered a "Child Of The 80s" unfortunately.

I spent many coherent years in the 1970s being born in 1970. But I do not consider myself a "Child Of The 70s". I was only a small child during that period and therefore could not really participate to any active extent in the Pop Culture beyond my Elementary years. My identity as well as ideology was much greater defined in my teenage years and that would be the 80s. And also most sub-generations are decade limited (besides 90s and 00s for some odd reason. They have blended) to 10 years and are pretty well defined when you step back and look at the culture. I do appreciate people feeling fondly of my decade and connecting with it in some way or another (the 80s) but that is not enough to be considered a "Child Of The 80s" unfortunately.


Well, even though the 80's was "your" decade - I can stake one claim - I was BORN in the 80's, so technically, it's MY decade, too.. lol  :D  ;D

(just kidding on that.. lol)

I spent many coherent years in the 1970s being born in 1970. But I do not consider myself a "Child Of The 70s". I was only a small child during that period and therefore could not really participate to any active extent in the Pop Culture beyond my Elementary years. My identity as well as ideology was much greater defined in my teenage years and that would be the 80s. And also most sub-generations are decade limited (besides 90s and 00s for some odd reason. They have blended) to 10 years and are pretty well defined when you step back and look at the culture. I do appreciate people feeling fondly of my decade and connecting with it in some way or another (the 80s) but that is not enough to be considered a "Child Of The 80s" unfortunately.


On a more serious note, to me, between 1982-1994 I felt most like a "child", after that time I steered away clear from playing with dolls and most things associated with child's play. To me, that was my childhood, and as the title of this thread says "child" of the 80's" is what they're asking for - not teenager of the 80's. If that was the case, then yes, I would say you're very much right that you aren't really a product of the 70's as far as your coming of age, but you were definetely a "child" of the 70's in every sense of the word.

On a more serious note, to me, between 1982-1994 I felt most like a "child", after that time I steered away clear from playing with dolls and most things associated with child's play. To me, that was my childhood, and as the title of this thread says "child" of the 80's" is what they're asking for - not teenager of the 80's. If that was the case, then yes, I would say you're very much right that you aren't really a product of the 70's as far as your coming of age, but you were definetely a "child" of the 70's in every sense of the word.


Teenagers are most definitely children and I think the difference is what you consider as a definition of the phrase "Child of so & so". It's a figure of speech and doesn't neccessarily notate a literal definition of "child" (although it most certainly does if you consider teenagers). With your idea on the subject than someone born in 1966 would still be considered a "Child Of the 60s"!!! Would you seriously consider most middle aged (in their 50s now mostly) "Flower Power Children" of the late 1960s being only 4 years old in the decade they were supposed "children" of? Or even a child of the age of 10 back then??!! Not quite. That is quite obsurd. No, I will never, nor ever will considered myself a "Child of the 70s". I was simply too young to particpate in most of the Pop Culture of the decade, even if I loved every aspect of it (which, FYI, I did not). Anyway, I am so sorry to be the one to tell you this, but with your age and birth year in mind, you are most certainly a "Child Of The 90s" and not many would disagree. But I am very glad you feel a connection to my decade and are so intent on associating with it. I'd like to see more 90s kids do the same. Maybe that horrible decade's (90s) Pop Culture would finally meet it's ultimate demise as I have been hoping for quite some time. Ciao.

Teenagers are most definitely children and I think the difference is what you consider as a definition of the phrase "Child of so & so". It's a figure of speech and doesn't neccessarily notate a literal definition of "child" (although it most certainly does if you consider teenagers). With your idea on the subject than someone born in 1966 would still be considered a "Child Of the 60s"!!! Would you seriously consider most middle aged (in their 50s now mostly) "Flower Power Children" of the late 1960s being only 4 years old in the decade they were supposed "children" of? Or even a child of the age of 10 back then??!! Not quite. That is quite obsurd. No, I will never, nor ever will considered myself a "Child of the 70s". I was simply too young to particpate in most of the Pop Culture of the decade, even if I loved every aspect of it (which, FYI, I did not). Anyway, I am so sorry to be the one to tell you this, but with your age and birth year in mind, you are most certainly a "Child Of The 90s" and not many would disagree. But I am very glad you feel a connection to my decade and are so intent on associating with it. I'd like to see more 90s kids do the same. Maybe that horrible decade's (90s) Pop Culture would finally meet it's ultimate demise as I have been hoping for quite some time. Ciao.


I can concede to some points you made. But, let me just comment on a few things without getting too deep and before we close the case on this:

1) Teenagers are teenagers. Children are children. Yeah, we'll always be "children" maybe in our mindset if we want to think that way, but a teenager is far different from being a child. Teenagers are driving, getting jobs, going through puberty, more self aware of themselves, hormones are flying, etc. Children are playing with toys, riding their bikes, playing ring around the posey, hopscotch - unaware of most things that a teenager would be fully aware of. They think with two totally different minds.

2) I agree that being a child of "so and so" is a figure of speech, and if that's what you meant, then I apologize.

3) I didn't quite say that someone who was born in that decade was literally the child of that decade - like someone who represented the sign of the times such as the hippies, flower children, etc. It can take on two different meanings, most definetely, but I'm not going to deny one for the other. If I was born in that decade and spent 10 years of my life in it, then I most definetely was a product of that decade as were you.

4) Don't be sorry about anything. I'm not oblivious to the fact that I lived a good portion of my teenage years in the 90's. I'm not denying that one bit. BUT, I also spent a good portion of my childhood in the 80's - it's a fact - not a fabrication. The 80's, I will claim as part MY decade and the 90's - and who knows, the 2000's may just be the coming of age era for me, unfortunately.

I can concede to some points you made. But, let me just comment on a few things without getting too deep and before we close the case on this:

1) Teenagers are teenagers. Children are children. Yeah, we'll always be "children" maybe in our mindset if we want to think that way, but a teenager is far different from being a child. Teenagers are driving, getting jobs, going through puberty, more self aware of themselves, hormones are flying, etc. Children are playing with toys, riding their bikes, playing ring around the posey, hopscotch - unaware of most things that a teenager would be fully aware of. They think with two totally different minds.

2) I agree that being a child of "so and so" is a figure of speech, and if that's what you meant, then I apologize.

3) I didn't quite say that someone who was born in that decade was literally the child of that decade - like someone who represented the sign of the times such as the hippies, flower children, etc. It can take on two different meanings, most definetely, but I'm not going to deny one for the other. If I was born in that decade and spent 10 years of my life in it, then I most definetely was a product of that decade as were you.

4) Don't be sorry about anything. I'm not oblivious to the fact that I lived a good portion of my teenage years in the 90's. I'm not denying that one bit. BUT, I also spent a good portion of my childhood in the 80's - it's a fact - not a fabrication. The 80's, I will claim as part MY decade and the 90's - and who knows, the 2000's may just be the coming of age era for me, unfortunately.



Yeah, that's basically what I was trying to say too (in slightly better words, though). :)

We probably could sit here and nitpick this for hours, but I will also contend you can't lump, say a 5 year old in with a 16 year old and call both a "child" (you're probably thinking of child in the lawful sense. In the literal sense, it's like age 3-12).

Someone born in 1970 was a child of the 70's, like it or not, LOL.

I was born in 1981 and I have many strong memories centered in the 80's (yeah I was a kid, but so what -- that doesn't mean I don't remember it or wasn't strongly imprinted by it! I actually did somewhat "participate" in the pop culture - I listened to tons of the music, played video games, and recall many things going on locally where we lived).

Therefore I think it's BS to say a 1971-er can't feel that way about the 70's, or a 1991-er can't feel that way about the 90's.

I like the 90's for many things too, and they made an impression on me, but not quite the "comfy/home" feeling the 80's did.

Yeah, that's basically what I was trying to say too (in slightly better words, though). :)

We probably could sit here and nitpick this for hours, but I will also contend you can't lump, say a 5 year old in with a 16 year old and call both a "child" (you're probably thinking of child in the lawful sense. In the literal sense, it's like age 3-12).

Someone born in 1970 was a child of the 70's, like it or not, LOL.

I was born in 1981 and I have many strong memories centered in the 80's (yeah I was a kid, but so what -- that doesn't mean I don't remember it or wasn't strongly imprinted by it! I actually did somewhat "participate" in the pop culture - I listened to tons of the music, played video games, and recall many things going on locally where we lived).

Therefore I think it's BS to say a 1971-er can't feel that way about the 70's, or a 1991-er can't feel that way about the 90's.

I like the 90's for many things too, and they made an impression on me, but not quite the "comfy/home" feeling the 80's did.


I agree, totally. I mean - I don't know what the hang up is about being born in the 70's and not wanting to embrace that that was a very cool time to live, as far as pop culture goes. I honestly wished more to have had my childhood centered then than rather the 80's, at least I could have seen a much broader picture of the remarkable changes between the 70's, 80's, and 90's - but hey, I liked the 80's, too, and I'm proud to have been born in them and lived a decent amount of time in them.

I agree about the 90's, too. I mean, the 90's could have been worse, but at least it wasn't a copy cat to another decade like the 2000's have become to the 90's. Even if a lot of 90's crap have hungover into the 2000's, at least we can say we experienced it firsthand, lol.

^ As cliched as its beginning to sound (in a good way!) from me, I agree. :)

I have a feeling more and more, that people who were around "Brat Pack" age (born, say 1969-72) don't want anything to do with the 70's. So even if they're old enough to remember stuff from their honest to God childhood, they probably were so embarrased by it as teenagers that they pretend their memories don't start until Thriller or Pac Man.

BTW I've also always felt like a part of me belonged to the 60's and 70's too. I never really considered that as truly "before my time" even if it was before I was born. The 70's always were cool enough in my book - not that I'm much of a partier or anything, but it seemed like a very "fun"/laid back time to be in.

Another really cool time I wish I'd been around for was the early 60's before the Beatles exploded. For whatever reason, I've always been super fascinated by it. We're talking roughly the 1959-63 era, where it was still basically a continuation of the 50's - quiet and conservative, totally unaware of the revolution looming on the horizon.

With JFK around, it still had the 50's innocence to it (the 50's ended when he was killed, I think). :(

Hawaii and Alaska became states in 1959, so there's some cool history in it too.

I notice that both of you are considerably younger than me. I think you will find that your definition of a "child" as well as your enitre outlook on the world as a whole will change when you are in your thirties. And also when you have teenagers as children (they are, 3-12 are small children and 12-18 are big children. Sorry if you don't agree with that fact but someday you will) such as I do. Then they appear more like children to you as well as when you look back on those years of your life you may not seem as "grown up" as you would have liked to think you were at the time. Just wait and see for yourself. If we have this conversation again next decade, I think you both may start tending to agree with me more.

But being a "Child" of a particular decade simply means "coming of age" in that decade and that denotes entirely ones "teenage" years. I would certainly hope no one "came of age" during their formative elementary years (5-12) or would consider themselves to have done so. That would be quite tragic, IMO.

It depends on who you ask.  It seems to be a personal prefrence.  People that graduated high school in 1983 think of themselves as "children of the 80s".  Then people around my age that graduated high school around 1993 also think of ourselves as "children of the 80s".  Most people my age would rarely want to call ourselves "children of the 90s", even though we also were 90s kids.  Then you have people who graduated high school around 2000 that seem themselve as "children of the 80s".  Some people take it as a literal definition, while others see it as the teenage and early 20s time, then others take it mean the general "young" time of adult life (relatively speaking) that lasts up to the age of 35, or maybey even late 30s.  i.e., influencing thought. Which is why I suppose that someone born in 1958 would call themselves "children of the 80s".  Truthfully though those younger Baby Boomers born in the 1950s were actually the people that created the 80s, not the people born in 1970 that were only 13 in 1983. 

I don't know where I stand on this issue, as everyone seems to have a case.  I do know that I prefer to call myself a child of the 80s over being a child of the 90s.  I really liked the 90s a lot, great memories, and I've never been a 90s hater.  But it just wasn't the 80s and that's the problem the 90s and early 00s seem to always have with people...it wasn't the 80s.   

It depends on who you ask.  It seems to be a personal prefrence.  People that graduated high school in 1983 think of themselves as "children of the 80s".  Then people around my age that graduated high school around 1993 also think of ourselves as "children of the 80s".  Most people my age would rarely want to call ourselves "children of the 90s", even though we also were 90s kids.  Then you have people who graduated high school around 2000 that seem themselve as "children of the 80s".  Some people take it as a literal definition, while others see it as the teenage and early 20s time, then others take it mean the general "young" time of adult life (relatively speaking) that lasts up to the age of 35, or maybey even late 30s.  i.e., influencing thought.

I don't know where I stand on this issue, as everyone seems to have a case.  I do know that I prefer to call myself a child of the 80s over being a child of the 90s.  I really liked the 90s a lot, great memories, but it just wasn't the 80s and that's the problem the 90s and early 00s seem to always have with people...it wasn't the 80s. 


If you graduated in 1993 then you most certainly are a "Child Of The 80s". As that would place almost all of your "coming of age" years in the 1980s (or early 90s which still was 80s era Pop culture for the most part. IE: 90-91) and more than likely your birth year within the range of 1974-75 or so.

^And that's why I prefer the 80s!  And yup, I was born in 1975.

:)

I my opinion being a child of the 80's can be a person that rememebers the 80's and are very fond of those 80's moments whether as a child, teen, or adult.  Even though I was born in 1983, I feel like a child of the 80's , because during the latter part of the  80's I was old enough to rememeber wanting a lot of the toys that were popular at the time, and starting kindergarten, having my first crush (that I remember), wearing my acid wash jeans and so on.

I my opinion being a child of the 80's can be a person that rememebers the 80's and are very fond of those 80's moments whether as a child, teen, or adult.  Even though I was born in 1983, I feel like a child of the 80's , because during the latter part of the  80's I was old enough to rememeber wanting a lot of the toys that were popular at the time, and starting kindergarten, having my first crush (that I remember), wearing my acid wash jeans and so on.


I understand this point of view, and even honor it, but I don't really think it is the definition in the acurate or pure form of "Child Of ....". Otherwise then we could pick and choose what decade we feel we most associate with and even change throughout our lives and call ourselves a "Child of whatever the decade of the era we want to be in". So someone could possibly like Old West memoribilia and even Old West culture and say "I think I fit into that generation most. Say 1860's, so that makes me a Child of the 1860s". Sounds kind of silly then, huh?

You have to have definitions and draw the line somewhere and I think that's been well stated here already.

Me at five years old crying my eyes out that we had to go someplace early on Saturday so that meant I would miss an episode of the cartoons I liked best.  But i remember getting where we were going and their children were unaware that the Smurfs were on at 8:30 I think it was, because they were apt to sleep late.

I notice that both of you are considerably younger than me. I think you will find that your definition of a "child" as well as your enitre outlook on the world as a whole will change when you are in your thirties. And also when you have teenagers as children (they are, 3-12 are small children and 12-18 are big children. Sorry if you don't agree with that fact but someday you will) such as I do. Then they appear more like children to you as well as when you look back on those years of your life you may not seem as "grown up" as you would have liked to think you were at the time. Just wait and see for yourself. If we have this conversation again next decade, I think you both may start tending to agree with me more.

But being a "Child" of a particular decade simply means "coming of age" in that decade and that denotes entirely ones "teenage" years. I would certainly hope no one "came of age" during their formative elementary years (5-12) or would consider themselves to have done so. That would be quite tragic, IMO.


I can grasp your point now. I think our only argument here was defining a "child" in it's literal term as compared to "child" as a figure of speech, as you said.

Every year it seems my outlook is changing. This seems to only come with reflection with one's past and coming to terms with certain things. You can only get wiser as you grow older and I am somewhat prepared for it and actually looking forward to whatever wisdom I continue to gain in the future.

Everyone has their own experiences, though, and sometimes all the convincing you try to do won't really change one's memory.

I can grasp your point now. I think our only argument here was defining a "child" in it's literal term as compared to "child" as a figure of speech, as you said.

Every year it seems my outlook is changing. This seems to only come with reflection with one's past and coming to terms with certain things. You can only get wiser as you grow older and I am somewhat prepared for it and actually looking forward to whatever wisdom I continue to gain in the future.

Everyone has their own experiences, though, and sometimes all the convincing you try to do won't really change one's memory.


True. And I think while wisdom can be gained through learning, I think most gain it by experience. And you sound very intelligent, so since wisdom usually follows intelligence at younger ages in people with high IQs (I have seen exceptions, though believe me. LOL), I suspect that you will most certainly have a cupious amount of it in the near coming years. I would look forward to it if I were you also.

True. And I think while wisdom can be gained through learning, I think most gain it by experience. And you sound very intelligent, so since wisdom usually follows intelligence at younger ages in people with high IQs (I have seen exceptions, though believe me. LOL), I suspect that you will most certainly have a cupious amount of it in the near coming years. I would look forward to it if I were you also.


Yeah, I think it goes with learning from experiences and then the application of it in daily doses or maybe monthly doses, lol. I appreciate and am open to a lot of opinions and maybe that's why I enjoy talking to people on here because many seem to follow similiar thinking patterns as me. I value your wisdom on these topics just as much as anyone elses. You can learn a lot from your elders :0)

One strange note, a friend of mine who was born in 1983, just sent me an e-mail titled "Children of the 90's" Totally appropriate for what we've been discussing. I started reading it and EVERYTHING came to memory. It was the strangest feeling. I started realising a bit how you felt about the topic and it came across more clearer to me.

Looks like I slept through a good part of the discussion. Time to get caught up, LOL. :)

I can say for sure, if, when I was 14 in 1995 and 1996 you had told me I was a "child of the 90's" or of the present, I would've been a bit defensive (i.e. "well, I like some things from right now, but I feel stronger about what happened in 1984 than 1996!").

Honestly, I was just thinking though -- another reason I probably always considered myself to really be a part of the 80's, is because I never truly thought of someone born around 1970 as that much older than me. They were like my big sisters/brothers at the time. Oh sure, they were older, and doing stuff that was still miles away for me (i.e. dating, driving cars), but I still liked many of the things they were into, and I tended to like talking with older people more than other kids.

Perfect example: my first concert was in 1988 when my dad took me to see Springsteen. So yeah, even though I was a 6 year old kid, just barely starting school, I didn't feel that removed from a 16 year old, or a 22 year old that would've also been doing something like that with his buddies.

But, let me also turn it around a bit the other direction. We'll take someone born in, oh say 1960. And we'll also assume this person grew up extremely sheltered -- say, in a series of foster homes -- and not too aware of the "cool" stuff going on when they were in their childhood (literal childhood!), and even during their teen years, weren't really allowed to experience too much. Therefore, maybe their first true taste of pop culture or life experience was as a 20 something in the 80's.

I wouldn't be surprised if someone like that claimed themselves as a child of the 80's, just as those on the younger end, like me, are fighting to be viewed as the same.

Even for a less extreme example, what about someone born in 1955 or 1960 (hell, even earlier if you want) who just happened to be really youthful and wanted to be associated with the 80's? These things happens more often than you'd think. ;)

P.S. As a parallel, I do feel attached to the 90's too. Just in a different way. The 80's "made" who I am and what I liked. The 90's expanded it. I came of age then. The 2000's are my very late teen/young adult years. In a personal respect, they feel like an extension of the 90's - sure, I still like some things here and there, they just don't have the impact on me they did in 1987 or in 1992.

Personally, I don't believe you necessarily have to have experienced the '80s firsthand to be a "child" of the '80s.  The same criteria apply to any other time period.  If you demonstrate the trends and ideals of a decade, then a part of that decade resides within you, i.e. you were born from its ideals.  A child of the '80s is one who constantly listens to '80s music, uses the slang of that decade in their everyday conversations, and believes in the '80s more than any other decade. 

I notice that both of you are considerably younger than me. I think you will find that your definition of a "child" as well as your enitre outlook on the world as a whole will change when you are in your thirties. And also when you have teenagers as children (they are, 3-12 are small children and 12-18 are big children. Sorry if you don't agree with that fact but someday you will) such as I do. Then they appear more like children to you as well as when you look back on those years of your life you may not seem as "grown up" as you would have liked to think you were at the time. Just wait and see for yourself. If we have this conversation again next decade, I think you both may start tending to agree with me more.

But being a "Child" of a particular decade simply means "coming of age" in that decade and that denotes entirely ones "teenage" years. I would certainly hope no one "came of age" during their formative elementary years (5-12) or would consider themselves to have done so. That would be quite tragic, IMO.


Okay, I'll give you that. :)

But I think the difference is between making it a personal viewpoint of a particular person, and having it be definition. I get the feeling you're talking about it like it's definition, as opposed to personal opinion.

In other words, ask an 80 year old. To them, someone who's 45 would be a "kid". Of course, it's not literal, though. So on that level, I can understand being 35 and thinking of someone who's 15, or even 19 as a "kid".

I know sometimes things blend together the further away you get from a particular place, but I will always remember differences between stuff like that. Hell, at my current age, on the surface ages 8 and 11 seem more "samey" now, but if I stop and think about it for a second, it comes back to me pretty quick, how much older I felt at 11 with many things. No matter how old I get or what changes in me, I'll remember that.

I think my opinion of what is a child of the 80's had maybe been misunderstood by some people. What I really meant was a child of the 80's can be someone that was very fond of the 80's when there any age, that just has a particular attraction and a lot of things in common with the 80's in today's life. And I didn't type this before, it can also mean a person that may not remember the 80's or born after the 80's that just feel like they have a lot in common for the 1980's. I hope that did it.

Personally, I don't believe you necessarily have to have experienced the '80s firsthand to be a "child" of the '80s.  The same criteria apply to any other time period.  If you demonstrate the trends and ideals of a decade, then a part of that decade resides within you, i.e. you were born from its ideals.  A child of the '80s is one who constantly listens to '80s music, uses the slang of that decade in their everyday conversations, and believes in the '80s more than any other decade. 


Agreed. I'm as big a fan as possible of the "Brat Pack-ers", so this isn't a criticism.

However, I'm now more and more feeling like someone who was born around 1969 or 1970 will tend to be very protective of the 80's, the same way old-school Metallica fans tend to be protective of heavy metal, and didn't want it having a mainstream audience.

A mentality of: if you weren't old enough to remember who shot J.R. or to be watching the premiere of "Thriller", you're just a whippersnapper and not a child of the 80's, end of story.

Although I obviously disagree, I do kinda understand where they're coming from. Hell, I got alot of stick around the mid 90's if I talked about the 80's, from people as much as three years older than me.

However....

I think the best midpoint are those born around 1976 or 1977. That's a prime "child of the 80s" to me. They're old enough, especially towards the late 80's, to have really experienced the pop culture of the time. They're also decent fans of 90's alternative rock and Seinfeld, but old enough to have alot in common with Brat Pack-ers too, so they'll never criticize something from the early 80's.

I'm more like that. I guess I'm a younger version of a typical 1977-person.

It depends on who you ask.  It seems to be a personal prefrence.  People that graduated high school in 1983 think of themselves as "children of the 80s".  Then people around my age that graduated high school around 1993 also think of ourselves as "children of the 80s".  Most people my age would rarely want to call ourselves "children of the 90s", even though we also were 90s kids.  Then you have people who graduated high school around 2000 that seem themselve as "children of the 80s".  Some people take it as a literal definition, while others see it as the teenage and early 20s time, then others take it mean the general "young" time of adult life (relatively speaking) that lasts up to the age of 35, or maybey even late 30s.  i.e., influencing thought. Which is why I suppose that someone born in 1958 would call themselves "children of the 80s".  Truthfully though those younger Baby Boomers born in the 1950s were actually the people that created the 80s, not the people born in 1970 that were only 13 in 1983. 

I don't know where I stand on this issue, as everyone seems to have a case.  I do know that I prefer to call myself a child of the 80s over being a child of the 90s.  I really liked the 90s a lot, great memories, and I've never been a 90s hater.  But it just wasn't the 80s and that's the problem the 90s and early 00s seem to always have with people...it wasn't the 80s.   


I was a 90s teen b/c I started them in high school and ended them graduating from high school, working, and raising a child. Definite child of the 80s.

Okay, I'll give you that. :)

But I think the difference is between making it a personal viewpoint of a particular person, and having it be definition. I get the feeling you're talking about it like it's definition, as opposed to personal opinion.




Actually it appears to be what you are doing. Trying to take a figure of speech and make it fit to a certain mold so that it suites your purpose and that you fit into it. I am not trying to be rude in any way, but it is quite clear to me that is what you are doing. You want to be considered a "Child of the 80s" so bad that you will make it fit a very broad range and that is matter of opinion. On the other hand, I am trying to explain it with a more clear cut definition and am not trying to make it fit any mold. Maybe because no one can argue that I am a "Child" of that decade and took part in it in every way.

You wanna hear something funny?  I remember many years ago this woman that was 10 years older then me told me I was too young to have experienced the 80s!!!  Sounds absolutely f**king nuts right?  But I remember talking 80s with her (she was born in 1965 and me in 1975), and she told me that I was just a kid in the 1980s and too young to have truly lived in it. 

Again, it sounds totally nuts, and I am sure that some kid born in 1988 is like "huh?  how can some dude that is so damn old to have born way back in '75 not have experienced the 1980s!?"  I remember being seriously taken aback with this chick, then later I thought about it and realized what she was telling me.  I was in grade school/intermediate up till 1987, (middle school after that) therefore I was just a kid.  I think we were talking about something from around 1984 or something when she was 19, and hit on her that I was just a 9 year old boy at that time.  So she blew me off as being too young to have experienced the 80s, well experienced it the way she did anyways. 

Ofcourse I don't totally buy what she has to say, but I understood her point of being too young, especially in that first half of the 80s.  I am always weak on certain things from the early 80s, but it reminded me it was only a little over a decade ago that people my age were still the kids and a lot of people older then me thought we were too young to know anything before 1986 very well.  Now we are easily accepted as 80s people, and it's nearly a joke to think of us as not having lived in the 80s.     

^ Good point. Like I've priorly said, I do think the 80's (especially the first half) had definite "wide" appeal. So it wasn't just 15 and 20 year olds digging malls or music videos or Pac Man. Everyone from little kids to people in their 40's seemed to have liked at least a few things from, say 1983.

But no matter what era, I guess it's always those around 15-24 and up to 30 even, who truly were a part of it. So I can see someone of that age during a particular time feeling a then-9 year old wouldn't have known anything (not that I agree, but I can understand their perspective).

I've had times where I'll hear a kid say they don't remember or can only barely remember something from, say 1996 or '97. Oddly I don't feel compelled to tell them how much I experienced it or anything. Oh sure, it kinda makes me feel old since I remember it 100% perfectly, but it never truly bothered me.

BTW I do apologize if I've come off a little belligerently in here. Let me rephrase it briefly -- I think you're defined by the first era you enjoy, no matter how old you were. :)

P.S. I do consider myself to be a child of the 1990-94 90's. I do like things from 1998, but I never felt like I was a "child" of the era - it didn't define me (my tastes were already set by then).

I suppose a point of my post was to say that I think that after a few more years, when you see kids born in 1995 as adult sized 16 year olds driving around in cars,...I think then people born in 1981 will be seen as a bit more credible folks that experienced the 80s.  Right now the membership rules are too tight, sorry but for now it's like a private country club.  But I am convinced everything will loosen.  I think a 54 or 55 year old man today that was born in 1951 is a fairly credible witness to the 1950s.  Sure they would not know a lot of the key details, but I think they can be seen has some experience of that time.   

What will happen to 1981ers is unlikely to become as bluntly obvious as to what happened to with people my age, (just because of 8 versus 14 in 1989) but I do firmly believe that with the passage of time a person like Marty that was born in 1981 will be seen as having "been there" enough.  I just had to add that as absolutley kooky as it sounds now, there WERE people older then me that honestly thought 1975ers were too young to have experienced a great deal of the 80s. 

And one day, when kids born in 1997 are the teens or adults, if someone born in 1981 tells them they were around for the 80s, they would be unlikely to argue with them about it.  They're attitude would most likely be "sure dude, if you say so".  People born in 1980, '81 and '82 would by no means have the personal experience of the 1980s the way someone born in 1970 or really anyone born before 1978 would, but they seem to  grasp the essence, atmosphere and overall feel of the 80s far far better then the guys born deeper in the 80s.   

It all depends on the person. Everybody is different on when they developed their tastes. Really the range could go all the way from like 1965-1982 or something, some within that range would consider themselves "children of the '90s" or "children of the '70s". The core of the '80s people seems to be those born in the early '70s, they pretty much all consider themselves a child of the '80s.

The core of the '80s people seems to be those born in the early '70s, they pretty much all consider themselves a child of the '80s.


Right you are.

And to all the people who may not fit within that range but would like to be considered 80s children, what is so wrong with your decade that you want to reject and align with the 80s? Didn't most of the "90s Children" hate the 80s and look to the 80s with humour and scorn? Where do you think the term "Hair Metal" came from? It certainly did not exist back in the 80s and was invented in the 90s as a way of ridiculing the 80s Pop Metal bands. What is so wrong with your decade anyway if you indeed "came of age" in the 90s? It is all relative and even though I didn't care for the 90s at all (being a bona fide 80s Child) I really don't fault the people ftom that decade for liking what they grew up with. Just as most Children of the 70s hated most of the 80s trends, that doesn't mean that my decade of the 80s was any better than theirs. It's just the decade I grew up in and therefore identify the most with. The only thing I don't like is when another generations trends get "forced" on a newer one at the cost of the one before. Such as what happened in the 90s with all of the 70s fashions and styles being shoved down the throats of the youth and the "dissing" of the 80s things.

Just enjoy the 80s for what they were and stop trying to make yourself more of a part of it then you may have been. It's OK to be from another sub-generation (or "Child of") and like and be into trends and fads of another. I persoanlly like some 50s things but would never call myself a "Child of the 50s". I just appreciate it for what it was and that's that.

I was born in 71 and concider myself a child of the 80's because most of my enjoyable memories were of the 80's and i will say it of the late 70's.  I think it's great because I was old enough to remember some stuff of the 70's like disco, Stretch Armstrong, The dukes of Hazzard to name a few.  I was a preteen in the early 80's and became a teen in the min-80's.  I don't see how you couldn't be a child of the 80's.  My husband was born in 67 and he conciders being a child of the 80's.  I don't think "child" really referrers to as just being a little kid in the 80's.  I believe it's a term that represents Generation X which was born from probibly mid-60's to early 80's I'm guessing.  If you wree born say 85 I would maybe grant you being apart of the 80's but you would have remember more things in the 90's and would've related with that deckade not the 80's.  Most of the Xers that I know can relate to both the 70's and the 80's. ;)

I was born in 71 and concider myself a child of the 80's because most of my enjoyable memories were of the 80's and i will say it of the late 70's.  I think it's great because I was old enough to remember some stuff of the 70's like disco, Stretch Armstrong, The dukes of Hazzard to name a few.  I was a preteen in the early 80's and became a teen in the min-80's.  I don't see how you couldn't be a child of the 80's.  My husband was born in 67 and he conciders being a child of the 80's.  I don't think "child" really referrers to as just being a little kid in the 80's. 


That is exactly what I am trying to say also. You have a good understanding of it and I agree with what I quoted from you.

I suppose a point of my post was to say that I think that after a few more years, when you see kids born in 1995 as adult sized 16 year olds driving around in cars,...I think then people born in 1981 will be seen as a bit more credible folks that experienced the 80s.  Right now the membership rules are too tight, sorry but for now it's like a private country club.  But I am convinced everything will loosen.  I think a 54 or 55 year old man today that was born in 1951 is a fairly credible witness to the 1950s.  Sure they would not know a lot of the key details, but I think they can be seen has some experience of that time.   

What will happen to 1981ers is unlikely to become as bluntly obvious as to what happened to with people my age, (just because of 8 versus 14 in 1989) but I do firmly believe that with the passage of time a person like Marty that was born in 1981 will be seen as having "been there" enough.  I just had to add that as absolutley kooky as it sounds now, there WERE people older then me that honestly thought 1975ers were too young to have experienced a great deal of the 80s. 

And one day, when kids born in 1997 are the teens or adults, if someone born in 1981 tells them they were around for the 80s, they would be unlikely to argue with them about it.  They're attitude would most likely be "sure dude, if you say so".  People born in 1980, '81 and '82 would by no means have the personal experience of the 1980s the way someone born in 1970 or really anyone born before 1978 would, but they seem to  grasp the essence, atmosphere and overall feel of the 80s far far better then the guys born deeper in the 80s.   


Thank you, Chris & Marty - You both articulated your thoughts on this very well. I'm glad, Chris, that you squeezed in 1982 as part of the range you'd consider as someone who could at least get the essence of the 80's in under their skin. I could even stretch it to 1983, but again, it could be a stretch.

I have always thought and pondered the idea of what it will be like to talk to my children about the era's I lived in. I have often wondered that I will almost pity them because they have missed SO much! Yet, so much is yet to come, so I guess I shouldn't feel too bad. It will probably feel like an episode of "Futurama."

I for one, try to not act as if I REALLY lived the 80's. I know there were A LOT of things I missed or didn't pay attention to, but the things I do remember, I remember fondly. I mean - I have distinct memories listening to certain songs - like listening to Dire Strait's "Walk of Life" on the radio on our way to the Waterslides in 1986 or watching TV before we had 500+ channels or even 40 channels or even 25 channels! Listening to records! Listening to 8-tracks! (Yikes!)

So, yes, I may have not totally lived the 80's like a yuppie, punk or coming of age teenager/twentysomething, but it was the decade that made my first impressions on life and introduced to me what the big wide world was going to be like.

Ofcourse I freely admit that I am totally wishy-washy on this issue, never firmly taking a side and sticking with it.  I guess it's because I see both sides of the argument. 

On the one hand, yes I do feel the outrage of my fellow Gen-X '70s born compadres when I've gone to a message board and the conversation goes to one of the great 80s classic films like Back to the Future, The Karate Kid or Goonies (and several others) and invariably I've read comments from people born in 1986 about how these films were made for them and them only.  Something to the nature of, "for those of us born from 1983 to 1990, Back to the Future really meant something, and we don't think others would understand" is often said.  I've read stuff like that so many times and it's like hey WTF, what about those of us that actually remember 1985?  That stuff wasn't ours too?  When something like that is said, see that's when people who were old enough to read more then just storybooks in the 80s will get pissed off.  And being born in 1975 I am closer in age to BCRichrocker who was born in 1970, so I totally understand that.

But then I understand that many people born in the early 80s could genuienly remember quite a bit of 80s stuff, and I do believe that yes many people born in the early 80s do have a good or even excellent grasp of the atmosphere of those times, even though you can't remember everything.  Plus I remember when someone 10 years older then me told me I was too young to really know a lot of the 80s.  It sounds nuts today, but it really did happen.  It also hit me that we are still talking about you people born in 1982 like you guys are still 15 or something, when now many of you are going to be as mature as 24 year old adults with your own receding hair lines.  That's almost too old for the traditional college age range (18-25)!!  So yeah, call me John Kerry on this topic.

;)     

On the one hand, yes I do feel the outrage of my fellow Gen-X '70s born compadres when I've gone to a message board and the conversation goes to one of the great 80s classic films like Back to the Future, The Karate Kid or Goonies (and several others) and invariably I've read comments from people born in 1986 about how these films were made for them and them only.  Something to the nature of, "for those of us born from 1983 to 1990, Back to the Future really meant something, and we don't think others would understand" is often said.


That is absolutely absurd and I can't believe some people would be stupid enough to even think that. I am sorry for being blunt, but there are no other words for it. That's like someone born in the mid 60s saying that all of the Beatles or Rolling Stones songs written in that era were for them and not for the teens or people that could actually remember the time. Some people are so ignorant.

So yeah, call me John Kerry on this topic.

;)     


I voted for Kerry, so I've no problem with that. :)

I mostly agree, and your last paragraph got to me thinking about something else about myself.

On one hand, I am (and -- according to teachers, my parents and other "adults" -- have always been) mature for my age when it comes to looking at the world, expressing myself, or just being fairly responsible. I mean, I think I'm a pretty cool guy and all, but I'm not too much of a "partier" and haven't been in too much trouble with anything before.

This is the area I relate to people ten, twenty or more years older than me (hell, it's maybe also why I've always had a thing for older women -- never felt any kind of "peer pressure" so it's easier to be myself around 'em). :D

Yet, on the other hand, my mindset/personality is probably more 16-20 or 21 (if not younger, at times). Even though I'm fairly well spoken and intelligent, I think, feel and act pretty "casual" for lack of a better word. When I hear people my age talking about being married with three kids, having a high level office job, or just being really "adultlike", I think WTF? Aren't I still WAY too young for this!!??

That stuff just feels completely foreign to me still.


Point being, I think that "split" with levels of my own personality is alot like the split with individual people in how they perceive a given time, or whatever else. There's always gonna be people born in 1983 who will say the 80's is "old" and before their time, with no interest in it. And there's bound to be people born in 1989 who will attach themselves to something from that time period. You totally just never know.

Ofcourse I freely admit that I am totally wishy-washy on this issue, never firmly taking a side and sticking with it.  I guess it's because I see both sides of the argument. 

On the one hand, yes I do feel the outrage of my fellow Gen-X '70s born compadres when I've gone to a message board and the conversation goes to one of the great 80s classic films like Back to the Future, The Karate Kid or Goonies (and several others) and invariably I've read comments from people born in 1986 about how these films were made for them and them only.  Something to the nature of, "for those of us born from 1983 to 1990, Back to the Future really meant something, and we don't think others would understand" is often said.  I've read stuff like that so many times and it's like hey WTF, what about those of us that actually remember 1985?  That stuff wasn't ours too?  When something like that is said, see that's when people who were old enough to read more then just storybooks in the 80s will get pissed off.  And being born in 1975 I am closer in age to BCRichrocker who was born in 1970, so I totally understand that.

But then I understand that many people born in the early 80s could genuienly remember quite a bit of 80s stuff, and I do believe that yes many people born in the early 80s do have a good or even excellent grasp of the atmosphere of those times, even though you can't remember everything.  Plus I remember when someone 10 years older then me told me I was too young to really know a lot of the 80s.  It sounds nuts today, but it really did happen.  It also hit me that we are still talking about you people born in 1982 like you guys are still 15 or something, when now many of you are going to be as mature as 24 year old adults with your own receding hair lines.  That's almost too old for the traditional college age range (18-25)!!  So yeah, call me John Kerry on this topic.

;)     


Those born in the early '80s do remember the late '80s, and maybe even a little of the mid '80s. The term "child of the '80s" in this context doesn't just mean you were a child in the '80s, what a really means is that the '80s are the time that you really grew up in and shaped your ideas. But is the '80s really their era? It's like some kid born in 2002 saying 10 years from now the '00s was his era, I would be like, he was 3 back in 2005 what does he know. It's hard to say what the true cutoff is for the '80s , but generally it's probably those born mid-late '70s as being the last.

Again, folks born in the 70's and I'd include early 80's would be considered to be children of the 80's.  My daughter was born in 92 but she really is a child of the 00's.  She's 13 now and her ideas are being formed now in this area.  Yes she remembers the late 90's and became more aware of herself then and I was introduced to groups like the Back Street Boys or Nsync.  Now it's Gwen Stefoni and the like.  I'm happy to say however that she's now discovering the groups that we listened to, like Journey.  I believe just as in the 80's the retro 60's emerged, so now the retro 80's are emerging in this generation.  I've probably gone of the beaten path, sorry.  What I'm saying that it's all relative. 

^ I'd say the 50's revival was going on for most of the 80's, up till about 1986. The 60's didn't really come back until the late 80's. I think it's closer to 25 years for stuff to revive itself. The 80's retro revival does seem to be "in the wings" so to speak, but I see it reaching its peak closer to 2008-13 perhaps.

Once absolutely all traces of the "1999ish" culture vanish.

Anyway, I know we could nitpick the original issue forever, but in short - do you think it depends on the individual person or is it purely biological? Surely, someone who's ideas develop at the age of five (more like myself) are gonna be different than someone who's biggest influence on their tastes and world views happen at thirteen or fourteen. Right?

^ I'd say the 50's revival was going on for most of the 80's, up till about 1986. The 60's didn't really come back until the late 80's. I think it's closer to 25 years for stuff to revive itself. The 80's retro revival does seem to be "in the wings" so to speak, but I see it reaching its peak closer to 2008-13 perhaps.

Once absolutely all traces of the "1999ish" culture vanish.

Anyway, I know we could nitpick the original issue forever, but in short - do you think it depends on the individual person or is it purely biological? Surely, someone who's ideas develop at the age of five (more like myself) are gonna be different than someone who's biggest influence on their tastes and world views happen at thirteen or fourteen. Right?


I am not trying to be rude or anything so please don't take it that way, but I really think we have exhausted this subject as far as we can go with it. There seems to be pretty much two different ongoing "camps" of thought as to what they define a "Child of the 80s" (or any era for that matter) as, and I don't really know how much more we can go with articulating those ideas to figure out what is the "true" definition.

I am not trying to be rude or anything so please don't take it that way, but I really think we have exhausted this subject as far as we can go with it. There seems to be pretty much two different ongoing "camps" of thought as to what they define a "Child of the 80s" (or any era for that matter) as, and I don't really know how much more we can go with articulating those ideas to figure out what is the "true" definition.


No wait, there's more - lol  :D

Ofcourse I freely admit that I am totally wishy-washy on this issue, never firmly taking a side and sticking with it.  I guess it's because I see both sides of the argument. 

On the one hand, yes I do feel the outrage of my fellow Gen-X '70s born compadres when I've gone to a message board and the conversation goes to one of the great 80s classic films like Back to the Future, The Karate Kid or Goonies (and several others) and invariably I've read comments from people born in 1986 about how these films were made for them and them only.  Something to the nature of, "for those of us born from 1983 to 1990, Back to the Future really meant something, and we don't think others would understand" is often said.  I've read stuff like that so many times and it's like hey WTF, what about those of us that actually remember 1985?  That stuff wasn't ours too?  When something like that is said, see that's when people who were old enough to read more then just storybooks in the 80s will get pissed off.  And being born in 1975 I am closer in age to BCRichrocker who was born in 1970, so I totally understand that.

But then I understand that many people born in the early 80s could genuienly remember quite a bit of 80s stuff, and I do believe that yes many people born in the early 80s do have a good or even excellent grasp of the atmosphere of those times, even though you can't remember everything.  Plus I remember when someone 10 years older then me told me I was too young to really know a lot of the 80s.  It sounds nuts today, but it really did happen.  It also hit me that we are still talking about you people born in 1982 like you guys are still 15 or something, when now many of you are going to be as mature as 24 year old adults with your own receding hair lines.  That's almost too old for the traditional college age range (18-25)!!  So yeah, call me John Kerry on this topic.

;)     


I so feel you on this, Chris!!! Yet it amazes me that despite being one year older, do you identify with me at all? It would be odd if you didn't.

Marty, I do think that age can play a part.  Even five years difference in age can be leaps in terms of what is being expierenced.  My husband is four years older than I am and he remembers some things that were hazy to me.  Even though four years isn't much it can be that way when your young. TO EVERYONE, All I know is that in all generations, thier area shaped them.  As for those of us on the spectrum of 30 or older, I have suddenly realized that we are the ones that are now in the mangagement positions, we are the ones that are begining to see the change of hands in all areanas in life.  I believe we also have the longest Peter Pan syndrome of any generation before us.  I think that is because we were the first generation to see so much technelogical change in such a short span of time.  We had video games, and saw the computer be introduced into homes and get smaller, microwaves, cell phones (large I might add), boomboxes, cable t.v., MTV, VCR's and so forth.  Those same folks creating the games today are creating them like they imagined as kids, stuff they wished they could've played with back then.  I read somewhere that 35 seems to be the magic number when it clicks that we are adults.  There I go running off again. oops.  :D