Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

'Adultescents' - scolded for not taking options that aren't there

By Kate Crawford - posted Friday, 4 June 2004


It's time for a confession: I'm 31, I'm not married and while I have succumbed to temptation and bought an iPod, I don't own a house. The AustraliaScan survey by Quantum Market Research quoted in the Herald on Tuesday says that makes me an "adultescent".

Putting aside the careless violence to the English language contained in that piece of marketing jargon, there is much in the research to make the toes curl.

Perhaps it's the sting of recognition, but what is missing in the latest reports about the so-called "Me" generation is any attempt to analyse the broader economic reasons why this group is not engaging in the time-honoured traditions associated with coming of age.

Advertisement

First, let's look at the claims made about adultescents. Quantum's data says they are in their late 20s or early 30s but they think like teenagers. This means that we may live at home, and instead of making serious commitments to mortgages or families, we fritter our cash away on designer clothes, travel, phones and music gadgets.

Chillingly, we have little respect for the labour involved with fame and think that it can be achieved without much effort.

This, no doubt, is a clear sign of our disrespect for the workaday pop stars and TV personalities who used to have it really tough before reality television arrived.

According to the author of Quantum's report, David Chalke, it's about the "indulgence of me now" attitude: "They don't save because they don't aspire to settle down. They don't think in terms of a career - just a series of jobs because they get bored easily. They don't invest, because they want instant gratification."

If you listen closely, David Chalke, you can hear 1.5 million "adultescents" laughing under their breath at these condescending generalisations. Allow me to suggest another possible interpretation.

This is a generation with much less economic power than the baby boomers, and even the generation Xers.

Advertisement

We no longer have the privilege of free education, we're locked out of the housing market and we don't experience the kind of job security that was common in Australia in the late-20th century.

And if a lack of financial security wasn't enough to make us hesitant to marry, the boomers showed us just how badly traditional relationship models can go wrong. We are a generation who realise that certain doors have been closed to us, so we're rapidly moving toward the alternative exits.

But parading "adultescents" as a generation of dim-witted pleasure-seekers too busy watching Big Brother to realise that that they'll soon be disenfranchised and toothless is a well-worn story.

This is another instance of the boomer generation imposing its value system on the same young people that it has cornered economically. To add insult to injury, we are also instructed to breed copiously, no doubt to provide more willing taxpayers to fund the aged-care infrastructure required for a greying population.

This is not to say there's no truth in Quantum's data; it's the interpretation that's bogus. If you know you will graduate from university with a sizeable debt, living with your parents may seem a feasible idea. And if you read the figures from the Housing Industry Association in March, you'd know that housing affordability for first-home buyers has reached a record low.

Without the money required to buy property or the security of a "job for life", spending on travel and portable technologies seems like a sane option B.

But the question remains why the common media discourse of generationalism is so skewed. Why are the statistics about education debt, house prices, high rents and job insecurity left out of the picture, while the armchair-theories about profligate hedonists get so much airplay?

Mark Davis, in his excellent book Gangland, argues that generationalism is used to ridicule young people as an act of cultural and economic gatekeeping by those in power. Almost every one of the tactics he notes that was used to denigrate generation X is being recycled.

Instead of the "Me" generation, it's more like the "Not Them" generation; we have been lumped with a financially enforced infantilisation due to our one great mistake. We were not born baby boomers.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All

This article was first published in The Sydney Morning Herald on May 27 2004.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Kate Crawford is a lecturer in media and communications at the University of Sydney and is the author of Adult Themes: Rewriting the Rules of Adulthood (Pan Macmillan, 2006).

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Kate Crawford
Related Links
Kate Crawford's home page
Photo of Kate Crawford
Article Tools
Comment Comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy