In a very broad sense saying 'the older generation' or that young people 'are the next generation' are perfectly acceptable to me to loosely define societal changes brought about with time.

However, if you invest too much into the idea of generational differences then we're really starting to pigeonhole people.

OK boomer.

It's a derisive quip used to mock older people for things like not being savvy with technology or having sentiment that could be seen as outdated by today's standards.

It was once famously said in New Zealand parliament by Chloe Swarbrick when a lawmaker interrupted a speech she was giving on climate change.

And that leads us to my dilemma with generational labelling.

I was born in 1985 and that planted me firmly as generation Y.

I spent my youth going through the Y2K bug, the rise of the internet and the introduction of the smart phone.

Since, the nomenclature of generation Y has disappeared, it's been replaced by the phrase Millennial - ostensibly because our developmental years came at the turn of the century.

But there is a great deal of difference between someone who spent their young adult life embracing the woeful screech of a dial-up modem to those born in 1996 and presumably had an iPhone 4 on the wishlist for their 14^th birthday.

And it gets even muddier because people even a decade younger will whip out the OK Boomer on me for tuning into music on the radio rather than a spotify playlist.

Simultaneously, people who are actually boomers will tell people my age we can't afford houses because we're lazy and enjoy too much smashed avo on toast.

I don't buy it though. I'm uniquely me, you're uniquely you.

Our ages are not a defining feature of who we are as people. So again I have to question the people who lean on stereotypes so heavily, why?

Jacob McMaster

Deputy Editor