So, basically the outlets printing these “Group X thinks this about Group Y, What do you think about that Group Y?” have been successful in generalizing and polarizing more non-extant combatant “sides.” mmmmm divisive ‘journalism’ for Homer’s soul… One doesn’t have to attack “Boomers” as some kind of disembodied other in order to call BS on an idea posited (by lazy columnists or what-have-you). Let’s just agree not to put up with these silly, historically inaccurate, unscientific, too-vague-to-be-useful labels. It’s giving the young and vulnerable sociology a bad name.
