Personally, I'm squarely Gen X, and what I've found myself considering more lately is that, while I have experienced being 15, 25, 35, 45, and now 55, "the young" have only experienced being young. It's not their fault any more than it's mine to be "old" now, but it does mean that they have much less life to draw on, when approaching an idea or situation. They assert themselves because they're trying to define themselves in the broader cultural milieu, and the nasty underbelly of this is that it's largely market-driven—i.e., their attitudes and perspectives are analyzed, targeted, and amplified in order to sell shit.

In truth, what I've noticed is that there are plenty of young Millennials (yes, I also agree with others here that the boundaries are, in fact, very fuzzy) and Gen Z folks who surprise me regularly with their openness and apparent respect for my age—it happens much more frequently than I generally expect (i.e., what I've been told to expect). I do notice that true, dyed-in-the-wool, mid-Millennials seem to have a bit of an issue with my perspectives, but it's often mutual, so we're all good. Haha...

I think maybe where these generational categories are kind of useful is in navigating friction. That is, when I come across somebody who just seems to have certitudes or sensitivities that are radically different to mine, it can be kind of helpful to think about their generation—not strictly "age", I don't think—and consider the influences, both "real" and mediated, that may have shaped some of their core values. Not as leverage for some kind of attack, but as a way of trying to get past the surface friction. On the other hand, approaching someone by stamping a generational label on them is, I think, very risky. I can certainly feel intimidated around "young people" when I'm outnumbered (ha!), but these situations have also often been the most surprising and eye-opening, as noted above with many of my recent Gen Z encounters.