Student GenX Essay

Molly Moloney

Group Identity, Labeling and Gen X

The first thing that pops into my mind when I think of Generation X is the omnipresent
negative descriptions of Gen X as superficial, stupid, lazy, and amoral presented throughout
the popular media (as documented by Howe and Strauss 1993; Holtz 1995; Rushkoff 1994).
How do these descriptions of our "Generation with a PR problem"(Howe an Strauss 1993:
9) impact our individual experiences and how do our experiences/interactions with these
ideas about Gen X help form social rules, roles and structures?

As someone born in 1974, I can't help but consider, when reading about Generation
X, whether or not these descriptions, evaluations, and statistics about my generation
resemble my experiences and those of my friends. In situating myself in terms of these
analyses, though, I cannot simply accept or reject this label. For even if I completely distance
myself from, for instance, the slacker ethic, the utter materialism, or political apathy
associated with Gen X, my interactions with others-- and as a result my identity-- are shaped
by the assumptions others may make about me because of my status as a member of this
cohort.

This is because, as G.H. Mead argued, our conception of self comes from our
interactions with others. My identity has not developed in a vacuum, but rather in my
interactions with others, including interactions with those who make negative assumptions
about me because of my age/generation. This is connected to what Babbie (1994) refers to
as the 'self-fulfilling prophecy' in which perceptions of social groups/categories (which are
often structurally determined) construct our interactions with individuals who inhabit these
categories. This takes 2 major aspects: (1) we tend to perceive people as conforming to our
expectations (of their roles/status), regardless of their actual behavior, and (2) people who
assume a specific status/group often do so out of affinity for the preconceptions about that
role and tailor their behavior to fit those expectations (Babbie 1994: 53). This idea can be
useful for analyzing the relationship between social structure and individual experiences for
members of Generation X. The model doesn't fit perfectly because Generational membership,
as an ascribed status, doesn't neatly fit the 2nd aspect of self-fulfilling prophecy (one cannot
choose to belong to a certain cohort simply because they identify with the characteristics
associated with it). But as Cooley's model of 'looking glass self" demonstrates, we see 'who
we are' in the reflection provided by those around us, so we may tailor our behavior to fit (or
to react against) preconceptions about our Generation. People who have certain
preconceptions about Gen X may perceive us as slackers, materialists or unintelligent
regardless of how we actually behave and we may tend to tailor our behavior so that it
conforms to what we perceive is expected/appropriate for Gen Xers. Identities and statuses,
however, are not static. As contemporary Ethnomethdologists have argued, even many
so-called 'ascribed' statuses need to be achieved in a dynamic and relational pattern that
varies depending on the specifics of the interaction; I would 'do GenX' very differently with
someone from my own cohort than I would with someone older than me, for instance.

Babbie, in discussing the ways in which role/status expectations shape our identities
and hence behaviors uses the example of a child who is told continually by teachers and peers
that she is stupid, criticized by her parents for not being as smart as her older brothers and
sisters and placed in an educational structure centered around her supposed deficits in
intelligence. This individual, treated as dumb in all her interactions with others, will see
herself as dumb and behave accordingly (Babbie 1994: 43-44). This example has rather
disturbing implications when broadened from Babbie's example of an individual to the level
of assumptions made about the worth of an entire generation in which educators, journalists,
employers and parents continually bemoan the ineptitude, lack or knowledge or work ethic
of Gen X, constantly comparing us to our (apparently better in every way) older brothers and
sisters, the boomers. The interactionists argue that we construct our sense of self from our
interactions with others and see our selves in the reflections provided by others-- for GenX
this all too often is from interactions that treat us as idiots and reflections of a generation that
is worthless, unmotivated and amoral. Just one example of this is: "As a baby-boomer, I'm
fed up with the ceaseless carping of a handful of spoiled, self-indulgent, overgrown
adolescents. Generation Xers . . . should be called the whiny generation"(Martin in Rushkoff
1994:235). Another example of this is in the many names that have been attached to our
generation: doofus generation, a generation of animals, a generation of self-centered know
nothings, etc. (Holtz 1995: 1).These assumptions about Gen X may be a major factor in
shaping people's perceptions of Gen Xers as well as our perceptions of ourselves. Is it any
wonder, after being bombarded with messages about our worthlessness and stupidity, that
Gen Xers exhibit less faith (in anything from their parents, to religion, to 'the American
dream'), less motivation, and even lower test scores? Even if we do not personally feel
stupid, in defining ourselves as 'smart' (or hard-working as opposed to a slacker, or
principled as opposed to Gen Xers supposed utter apathy) it is always in reaction against the
perception of those in our reference group-- Gen Xers. Even in reacting completely against
this, we are still implicated in this structure.

We certainly, however, cannot limit our discussion of structural impacts on Gen Xers to
the ideological level or to the ways that people perceive others/themselves. Equally relevant,
certainly, are the actual changes over time in the structure of work and the economy, the
formation (and disintegration) of families, and changes in educational structures. Examining
these social and demographic transitions allows us to see generational differences from a
more critical and precise perspective than the sound-bites offered by the popular media and
other critics of Gen X who seem to assume that generational differences in attitudes and
belief have occurred in a vacuum. It is not enough to say that Gen Xers are less skilled than
many generations previous to them-- we must also keep in mind that they (we) are entering
an economy which has an eroding manufacturing base and growing deskilling of labor--
Simon declares: "One possible reason occurs to me as to why Scholastic Aptitude test scores
have sunk to their lowest level in years: Kids today are really, really dumb . . . Why learn
about sines and cosines if the cash register is going to make the change for you"(Howe and
Strauss 1993: 25). The question might rather be: 'why learn about sines and cosines if the
only job you'll find is one involving a cash-register?-- why work hard for older generations
who will continue to think that we are 'really, really, dumb' regardless of what we do
anyhow?? We should not focus only on the reports of declining SAT scores and knowledge
levels, we also have to look at the transformation of the goals of education, public attitudes
towards education (which translate into tax dollars or lack thereof). Boomer and other
commentators consistently cite the lack of motivation in school and work of Xers, and yet in
one study 66% of black children reported not being challenged enough in school (Holtz
1995: 117). Another salient factor in analyzing shifts of education is the drop in the value of
education-- Ray and Mickleson (1993) found that often high school dropouts make more
money than those who have completed high school, that, depressing as it may seem "possibly
non-college bound students do make the connection between a high school diploma and job
opportunities and what they frequently observe fails to encourage them to be disciplined or
motivated in school or at work"(11). These examples are only a few among many that could
be cited. Another question would be: what are the connections between Gen Xers
individualism and lack of social integration and the huge amounts of individual responsibility
placed on them at a young age as demographic patterns shift and create latch-key children,
more and more children of divorced parents, and more emphasis on beginning work at a
younger age? These transformations of family structure, the economy and education have
transformed social structure but also have very personal effects on individual's quality of life,
social and political beliefs and career opportunities and personal identity.

In the above paragraphs I have discussed many of the structural changes on economy,
work and family that impact upon the individual lives of Gen Xers. It is important, however,
not to be too heavy handed in discussions of the effects of these structural and demographic
shifts (in the economy, education, family, etc.) upon the individual, lest the model become a
completely top-down one (in which structure is only seen in terms of creating individuals,
ignoring the ways in which individual experiences shape structure). Not only have these
structural and demographic changes profoundly transformed our experiences as individual
members of Gen X (in ways that differ dramatically from the individual experiences of those
of previous generations), but these structures themselves are made out of our individual
experiences and interactions. We reproduce and 'do' these structural differences through our
interactions and it is in our individual interactions that these strcutures can most saliently be
felt. These demographic shifts in family composition, educational goals/priorities, availability
of well-paying jobs, etc. structure our experiences and our responses to these constraints and
structures help replicate or transform these very structures. Not only do changes in (for
example) economic situations, such as the deskilling of labor, impact our individual lives, but
our individual level responses to these,such as a rejection of the traditional work ethic and
embracing a 'slacker attitude', themselves help to comprise and transform structures. This
requires us to understand structure and individual experiences in a continually circular
relationship.

Back to GenX Homepage