4 ms·

I think the problem here is they're taking data from a bunch of late-20s millennials. > This prolonged interim state results in a lot of pain, and some studies

I think the problem here is they're taking data from a bunch of late-20s millennials. > This prolonged interim state results in a lot of pain, and some studies suggest today’s young people are suffering more than previous generations did. These kids aren't being drafted into war service. Crime and teenage pregnancy are down, civil rights are increasing, commodities are cheap and plentiful, access to global information and communication is higher than ever, advances in medicine continue to make formerly terminal diseases become manageable or preventable. The biggest thing millennials have to stress over is their debt and their ability to secure a job, both of which are issues most people have had to deal with by their late 20s. From what I understand of the quarter-life crisis, it presents mainly in people who have been so privileged that they feel that even though they can self-sustain, they should be doing something better, like following a passion, or living in a different place. Fear of death is another factor, but it's less present than the fear of missing out. Your late 20s are basically the end of what should be a wonderful time: wasting your youth and not worrying about your body falling apart (which it will begin to shortly). If kids these days are actually in a great deal of pain, it's because our society has given then an irrational sense of entitlement and fear of not having the best of everything.

rayvd 11y ago
You win the thread.
purplelobster 11y ago
As a late 20s millennial, what if having a quarter life crisis is actually the sanest thing? Why shouldn't we have a crisis? We live on this earth for some 80 years, most of it which we have to spend commuting, in cubicles or doing other chores just for sustenance. Inevitably our body will fail us, we'll be in pain, we'll die, loved ones will die. Nothing we do really matters all that much either. I wouldn't say I'm depressed or overly concerned with these things but they're increasingly in the back of my mind. I'm just saying, maybe thinking about these things is the sane thing to do? Just because people in the past didn't have time to think about it because they were fighting for their lives, does that make it better or right?
- Domenic_S 11y ago
  The point is that compared to the struggles of previous generations, current-generation late-20s people in the First World have worries far higher on Maslow's Hierarchy [0]. Personally, I think that's a good thing -- I'm not worried about being drafted into the war like my Grandfather, for example. Inequality though brings some dissonance into play: two similarly aged people sitting side-by-side on BART may have VASTLY different worries, even though they look alike; one worries about self-actualization, the other worries about how they'll eat because the BART fare cost almost as much as their daily wage after tax. It's good that people from different backgrounds and different futures coexist and are neighbors -- we sometimes call that "diversity" -- but standing up the worries of those groups next to each other makes one group seem frivolous. "I can only afford a $700k house, so I'll never live close to Campus!" vs. Fight for 15. I think the struggle of people "further along" always seems silly to the people "below" them. Worrying about cubical life can seem silly and entitled to someone struggling to pay rent + feed kids; worrying about harvesting tax losses & capital gains rates (or whatever it is rich people worry about) seems silly and entitled to cube drones. I'm sure there are some better illustrative examples here that are less money-focused, but I'm out of time. Anyway, point being, I'm not passing judgement about anything, just trying to unpack it a bit. [0]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/60/Maslow's_Hierarchy_of_Needs.svg/2000px-Maslow's_Hierarchy_of_Needs.svg.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/60/Ma...
  - peterwwillis 11y ago
    I think there's a difference in your example, though. When a poor person grows to become a well-off person, they can still have an identity crisis as they come to terms with the culture clash of their old way of life [and friends and family] and a new environment surrounded by the well-off. They'd be more satisfied with what they have, but still depressed for other reasons. It's better to take your original example - Grandpa vs Me - as the lens for the original survey. They had way more serious problems to deal with over a long period of time. We've had a recession and fairly progressive politics that has improved the lives of many (though at the same time making life worse for non-white and low-income people). I also like to consider how biased these surveys run by "App" companies are. Consider all the people who don't have smartphones, or don't have the leisure time to fill out "happiness" surveys - like most young black Americans, who will disproportionately be more worried about getting shot by police, going to jail, making enough money to pay for food/"the poor tax"/teenage families/housing/etc. They're lucky if they make it to their late 20s. Or being classified an illegal immigrant, and therefore having absolutely no rights but still needing to make a living to support yourself and your family. So some may be unhappy, but for radically different reasons than those polled, like systemic racism, voting restrictions, lack of protection of human rights, or the oligarchy of the super-rich continuing to grow a larger lower class.

rayvd 11y ago

You win the thread.

purplelobster 11y ago

As a late 20s millennial, what if having a quarter life crisis is actually the sanest thing? Why shouldn't we have a crisis? We live on this earth for some 80 years, most of it which we have to spend commuting, in cubicles or doing other chores just for sustenance. Inevitably our body will fail us, we'll be in pain, we'll die, loved ones will die. Nothing we do really matters all that much either. I wouldn't say I'm depressed or overly concerned with these things but they're increasingly in the back of my mind. I'm just saying, maybe thinking about these things is the sane thing to do? Just because people in the past didn't have time to think about it because they were fighting for their lives, does that make it better or right?

Domenic_S 11y ago
The point is that compared to the struggles of previous generations, current-generation late-20s people in the First World have worries far higher on Maslow's Hierarchy [0]. Personally, I think that's a good thing -- I'm not worried about being drafted into the war like my Grandfather, for example. Inequality though brings some dissonance into play: two similarly aged people sitting side-by-side on BART may have VASTLY different worries, even though they look alike; one worries about self-actualization, the other worries about how they'll eat because the BART fare cost almost as much as their daily wage after tax. It's good that people from different backgrounds and different futures coexist and are neighbors -- we sometimes call that "diversity" -- but standing up the worries of those groups next to each other makes one group seem frivolous. "I can only afford a $700k house, so I'll never live close to Campus!" vs. Fight for 15. I think the struggle of people "further along" always seems silly to the people "below" them. Worrying about cubical life can seem silly and entitled to someone struggling to pay rent + feed kids; worrying about harvesting tax losses & capital gains rates (or whatever it is rich people worry about) seems silly and entitled to cube drones. I'm sure there are some better illustrative examples here that are less money-focused, but I'm out of time. Anyway, point being, I'm not passing judgement about anything, just trying to unpack it a bit. [0]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/60/Maslow's_Hierarchy_of_Needs.svg/2000px-Maslow's_Hierarchy_of_Needs.svg.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/60/Ma...
- peterwwillis 11y ago
  I think there's a difference in your example, though. When a poor person grows to become a well-off person, they can still have an identity crisis as they come to terms with the culture clash of their old way of life [and friends and family] and a new environment surrounded by the well-off. They'd be more satisfied with what they have, but still depressed for other reasons. It's better to take your original example - Grandpa vs Me - as the lens for the original survey. They had way more serious problems to deal with over a long period of time. We've had a recession and fairly progressive politics that has improved the lives of many (though at the same time making life worse for non-white and low-income people). I also like to consider how biased these surveys run by "App" companies are. Consider all the people who don't have smartphones, or don't have the leisure time to fill out "happiness" surveys - like most young black Americans, who will disproportionately be more worried about getting shot by police, going to jail, making enough money to pay for food/"the poor tax"/teenage families/housing/etc. They're lucky if they make it to their late 20s. Or being classified an illegal immigrant, and therefore having absolutely no rights but still needing to make a living to support yourself and your family. So some may be unhappy, but for radically different reasons than those polled, like systemic racism, voting restrictions, lack of protection of human rights, or the oligarchy of the super-rich continuing to grow a larger lower class.