Every generation criticizes the generation after it. We all know it. We have evidence of it dating back to antiquity. To boot, the criticism follows the same rough outline: the kids these days don’t respect their elders, tradition, or society, etc.
But the world has changed in historically unique ways over the past few generations. The rise of the Internet – and later social media – ushered in changes that surely stretch beyond those of the radio or television. The neoliberal era brought finance capital to power in a way never before seen.
In other words, our everyday experience of the world is changing. And it feels like it’s changing faster than it used to.
Anyway, that’s the thought behind much of the generational critique. But we should get to the bottom of it.
Risk Aversion
I’m a millennial who grew up in the 1980s and 1990s. And like the generations before us, we went through all the regular rites of passage. We drank, smoke, used drugs, got pregnant, and got our drivers’ licenses at historically average rates.
And – with plenty of exceptions noted – we came out better for it. At least, we learned some things at the school of hard knocks. We know that facing difficulties – in moderation – helps us grow.
Zoomers, however, haven’t done these things. They’re doing all these things at unusually low rates. They’re holding off on sex or booze until after school, if at all. Many of them wait until their 20s even to get a license.
The question is why. And, of course, whether it’s harming or helping them.
Two Views
A couple of essays in Persuasion lay out the terms of debate. On one side, we get the notion that Gen Z has been raised in a culture of excess safety by helicopter parents and steeped in a world of social media and online simulated reality that has robbed them of basic social skills.
And on the other side, we get the notion that young people are actually more conscientious and should be celebrated for not making destructive decisions. Furthermore, lack of economic security in the neoliberal era stands behind protective parenting as the actual cause. Parents worry about their children in difficult economic times.
Both sides of the debate cite the rise in mental illness among young people in the last couple of decades. But they read it in different ways. For one side, mental illness comes from social media stimulation and a lack of independence. By wrapping their Gen Z kids in a cocoon, parents set them up for a rude awakening when they hit the world.
And for the other side, mental illness comes from the very real hardships and costs the world has foisted upon them. Why wouldn’t mental health decline in an era when you can’t afford to own a home or pay your student loans? Avoiding vice is a coping mechanism that has offered some benefits in tough times.
I’ll suggest a way to bring these perspectives together.
A Synthesis?
I think there’s a bit to both sides.
On the first side, the culture of excess safety is real. Some elements – an emphasis on consent, for instance – are a positive. But parents take ‘safety’ too far by over-scheduling their child’s life and interfering in their friendships. They should leave kids to work things out together without a hovering, overinvolved parent.
And on the second side, neoliberal insecurity is real. The world tells kids to go to college and buy a home. And then the economy blocks them from doing it. Surely we need to account for these economic realities when thinking about how to explain Gen Z risk aversion.
So, Why is Gen Z Risk Averse?
The first side is right that parents and social media have acted as a serious, negative force on many Gen Z kids. There’s plenty of evidence pointing to social media as a driver of mental illness. And it happens both because it degrades social skills and also promotes social contagion and psychosomatic illness.
I recently posted about a book called The Age of Diagnosis that goes into detail on these points. But the short version is that we’re loosening the diagnostic criteria for mental illness, and many young people convince themselves that they exhibit illness. They thereby cause the symptoms to appear.
But the second side is correct to point to economic causes as a major factor. And it’s probably the major factor at play here. Neoliberalism leads to overprotective parenting. And then overprotective parenting leads to problems. Telling parents to chill out, by itself, won’t do a lot. We have to get at the underlying causes.
And why wouldn’t people desperately avoid risk if they believe risky behavior will lead to their ruination?
The first side seems to miss that part.
But the second side is too quick to endorse Gen Z risk aversion. I don’t think it’s reasonable to look at the social trends and declare it’s a good thing that Zoomers don’t drive or have sex. People need to make mistakes and figure things out on their own.
And that’s not happening as often as it used to.
Gen Z and Generations
And so, to many Gen Xers and Millennials, Gen Z comes off as cautious and downright prudish. I’m one of those Millennials. My impression of Gen Z isn’t that they’re deeply thoughtful and conscientious. Rather, I tend to see them as delaying adulthood, often deeply into their 20s.
That’s not such a great thing. But it calls for addressing the ways neoliberal capitalism pushes them toward prudishness as a reaction.
To some extent, people such as myself should chill out a bit here. ‘Generations’ are far oversold in the ways we think about and talk about the world. This is less a generational change than a gradual development brought about by economic forces.
No one waved a magic wand in, say, 1996 and changed how people raised children. Insofar as we see a break around that time, it’s because the Internet became a large-scale phenomenon around that time. And so, we should address that rather than hang our insecurities and criticism on a generation.
Is the risk aversion real? Yes. Does it mostly affect a group of people who were born during the time periods laid out as Gen Z? Yes. But are generations some kind of real explanatory force that get at why this happens? Not at all.
