We wouldn't have removed children from their parents for using them as sex objects, we would nominate the process for an award. We would give the highly sexualized child prostitute the People's Choice Award 3 times in a row for the accomplishment of pulling their clothes off for money.

Now, I realize that my posts are becoming increasingly bitter but I am truly beginning to research and understand what actually happened to my Generation only known as X and I am angry. In 1965, Brooke Shields and began pursuing an acting career before she could walk, by the time she was 12 she decided that a movie about living in a brothel with nude scenes would be a good move for her career, it wasn't much of a commercial success but at the ripe old age of 14 she really hit her groove and had not only learned to strip her body but actually do sex scenes for The Blue Lagoon. not because her 14 year old peers wanted her to see her naked, because in1980 only people over 17, people born prior to 1963 were allowed to see the movie it was Rated R.

There was a congressional inquiry into the chld porn movie in which it was said that the nude scenes were done mostly by body doubles. Now the typical defender of the Baby Boomers would blame their parents for the failure of Congress to do anything about it. You think they would have protested the marketing of their children in such a manner because they did love to protest loudly on issues that were important to them. (No, you never saw the Don't Pimp my daughter Riots). Quite the contrary, recognizing the artistic merits of The Blue Lagoon they nominated it for a Golden Globe in Cinematography. Then they voted Brooke their very favorite young performer 3 times in a row following the movie's release. I am really sorry to tell you this, but the rest of us in Gen X didn't have body doubles over 18 to step in when adults of that era put their stamp of approval on thinking of children as sex objects. What else did Brooke do to earn such approval and favor with our parents prior to turning 18 in 1983? She helped to market expensive blue jeans by spitting out the line, "you want to know what comes between me and my Calvins...Nothing." Wow, that's really profound at the height of the women's movement. do you think that was her very own idea?

It is no wonder when she began to have children she had to go on psychoactive drugs. Reconciling what we knew as a Generation was right with what actually happened is mind boggling.

Have you read Generations, by Strauss and Howe?

Generation X is what is known as a Reactive Generation. The low point in social ills is reached during the generational cycle by the Reactive Generation (GenX) which receives much of the blame for the increasingly discordant behavior of the preceding Idealist Generation (Boomers) which came of age during a Spiritual Awakening. When the Reactives move into Midlife, a Secular Crisis ensues which forms the following Civic Generation (last was the GI Generation) which comes of age during it. During the Secular Crisis, the Adaptive Generation (last was the Silent Generation) is born and comes of age in the culturally strerile age that follows (think 1950's). The spiritual deadness of this period leads to another Spiritual Awakening forming another Idealist Generation.

Idealist.....................R­eactive............Civic......­...Adaptive

Spiritual Awakening.....................­...Secular Crisis........

And so the generational cycle turns.

Our current crisis with the Republican Party, controlled by the Religious Conservatives and Neo Cons, flirting with fascism and autocracy, is the ongoing Secular Crisis. The generation coming of age is the Civic Generation in formation.

And so it goes.

My attempt at a chart didn't work out. Try this one. Look at Cycle 5. Strauss and Howe refer to Generation X as Thirteenth Gen having written before Generation X name was generally accepted.

and a little depressed. i'll have to think on this some, but it's an interesting concept regardless and makes me want to go out and get the book!! I'll be really interested to see how those who have fervently studied history respond.

Historians have long noticed an ~ 80 year cycle in crisises/awakenings in US history. Strauss and Howe took some earlier thinking and developed their generational cycle theory. It's really interesting. Even more so considering we are in the one of the most dangerous periods in US history.

Adaptive Generation being born--being formed by the constrained atmosphere of the Secular Crisis and will use their "tinkering"/adaptive nature to refine the civic changes and make them usable during the period between the Crisis and the Awakening. Will lead the Awakening as they enter Midlife.

Civic Generation entering Rising Adulthood--provides the strength and enegry for the Crisis. Will reform the US social institutions in the Crisis and be subject to hubris in later life.

Reactive Generation entering Midlife--anchored in reality and provides the managers for the Crisis, a task that suits their generational type well. Will mostly withdraw from active participation in Elderhood.

Idealist Generation entering Elderhood--providing moral leadership/framing to the great issues of current concern. They don't agree so there is usually a split in the country.

The Crisis isn't guarenteed to have a good ending. It is truely a time of crisis for the country.

Wow, I'll have to read the book. The Oldest Generation I remember is my great grandmother's, it was according to the chart -a reactive one. She was born in 1893 and died in 1989.

The problem I am having is that when I read the books by my generation it only heightens the sense of frustration I have. We tend to be outraged over the same issues but in our generation we are not proposing solutions to them. It is time we begin talking about and implementing solutions that are creative because while I haven't read the book yet, the web site doesn't have an answer for what a reactive generation with nuclear warheads at their disposal will do.

Reactives in Midlife and Elderhood are very "reality based" and risk adverse. They tend to be good managers during Midlife and avoid risk when they assend to the position of moral leadership during Elderhood.

The old midlife crisis concept is keyed to the actions of Adaptives (who were entering into Midlife when the theory was first advanced). They are risk adverse during Rising Adulthood but become risk seeking during Midlife. Reactives are risk seeking during Rising Adulthood but become risk adverse during Midlife. Civics and Idealists don't go through those types of changes at all.

Each generational cycle has had US Presidents of each of the generations active during the cycle. The current cycle is the only exception...There was no member of the current "Silent" Adaptive Generation President. The Idealists took over with Clinton, followed by GW Bush, from the Civic Generations GHW Bush, preceded by Reagan. No President was born between 1925 and 1942.

Another: The Civil War cycle was broken because the Crisis (Civil War) occurred early, with indecisive Adaptives in Elderhood, moralistic Idealists in Midlife as managers and Reactives in Rising Adulthood as footsoldiers. The generation which would have become Civics were stunted and pushed into an Adaptive role. A bloody mess all around.

...in the movie "The Blue Lagoon." You appear to be a deranged individual, possibly a Scientologist, even a stalker.

Get help...

I personally think that the Generational Dynamics thing is very interesting and was enjoying spouting off. Thanks a LOT!! :)

I will have to admit that I relied on Wikipedia to fill in my memory gap on the movie. Many years ago I did rent it, but I didn't watch the whole thing because it was both boring and stupid.

Maybe it wasn't graphic enough for your tastes to actually qualify it as sex. Perhaps our first Baby Boomer president didn't have sex with Monica Lewinsky and most likely it really was all a vast right wing conspiracy, per se.

Probably we'll continue to buy into the idea that they gave us that sex is the ultimate seller even though the most popular advertising campaigns involved a Gecko, Cavemen, a Chihuahua that liked cheap tacos and a Big Fluffy Bunny with a Bass Drum.

Keep on fellating the Baby Boom as a whole, I'd prefer to examine the facts.

Keep on fellating the Baby Boom as a whole, I'd prefer to examine the facts.

As a member of the baby boom, I am completely in agreement with your suggestion that you keep fellating us (well, the male members - pun intended - and whatever is the verb form of cunnilingus for the females among us)

"as a whole"?

Neither the Boomers nor the GenXers nor any other generation should receive credit or blame "as a whole." Decisions and acts were, and are, taken, and performed, individually.

What makes a generational stereotype is the acceptance by ALL generations that that stereotype fits the generation. IOW, a generation must internalize the stereotype ITSELF in order for the stereotype to become real. By your comments, I would guess that, in fact, you HAVE internalized the stereotype and see yourself in that context.

Of course, that is just reinforcement for Strauss and Howe's theory.

BTW, in 1965 the oldest Boomer was 23 and the youngest was 5. 12 years later, the oldest Boomer was 35 and the youngest was 17. Do you really think that they made any significant decisions about Ms Shields's? (I guess it is possible that her parents were Boomers.)

Thank you for understanding you are a scholar and a gentlemen.;)

Baby Boom lasted from 1946 to 1964. To have seen the Blue Lagoon in 1980 when it was released the law required that you be born prior to 1964 making you at least 17. Brooke and people born after her would still have to wait at least two years even to be allowed in the movie theatre where it was shown.

There is no way to track exactly which group voted in the People's choice awards in 1981, 1982 or 1983 when Brooke reigned as favorite young performer but I'm pretty positive the people's choice is a marketing tracker for people ages 18-54. The Kid's Choice Awards didn't come around until later in the 1980s. In other words it wasn't Brooke or any of her peers saying this is what they wanted.

Now we can continue to buy into the idea that the Baby Boomers parents were responsible for everything bad that went on prior to their electing a president from their own generation at which point responsibility shifted to Generation X and Monica for yet again victimizing them.

We can talk about theories of cyclic generational trends for a lifetime but if we don't let our voice be heard, we will be taking the full force of responsibility for every self serving thing they did. Don't tell me it's not self serving to the extreme to sit in the blessed Oval Office as the most powerful figure in the country and get your jollies when all you offer to your partner is a cigar. That's the height of narcissism in its most base reality.

PS: I look at my post now and realize that with my youngest child being 13 I probably need to get back in the job market and stop listening to CNN all day. I have entirely too much time on my hands.