Thereβs something weird about generational discourse
Back in 2021, I scrolled upon a comedic skit on my FYP on TikTok, well, more accurately, a user dueting their vitriolic reaction to the skit. I forget the exact scenario of the skit, but the creator had a particular comedic style with exaggerated gestures and facial expressions, and overall wouldβve been a video that, had a stumbled upon it more organically, wouldβve shrugged it off as content was geared towards a younger audience, and moved on. However, it was the duet that kept me from scrolling; One of a guy in his late-teens or early 20sβ with a hyperbolic expression of disgust contorted upon his face which gradually transformed to the impression of a seizure eyes rolled back and melting off of bedβas the juvenile skit reached it most obnoxious conclusion.
It was quite the performance, but nothing out of the ordinary; people post thousands of silly things on TikTok nearly every hour of the day. but it was caption that perked my curiosity, which simply read βmillennial humorβ, primarily because I was trying to comprehend what exactly was even βmillennialβ about the original post, I opened up the comment only to find mostly users the same age as the dueter agreeing with him, or confessing they liked the original video or creator and what millennial that could be found in the comments were as confused as I was, futilely attempting to assure that people in thier age group donβt particularly find this funny, to the dismissiveness of younger replies. Digging further, I discovered video being dueted wasnβt even performing their own skitβIt was a lip-sync of a Gen Z creator's original audio, with physical comedy equally matching the older imitator. Yet somehow, the comedic style persisted in being classified as βmillennial humor.β As I saw more duets like this, more-often-than-not from the absolutely microscopic sample pool of the same recurring half-dozen creators that conveniently fit their narrative, a theory began circulating in the comments: Millennial humor is inspired by Jim Carrey.
This take baffled me. Jim Carrey, born in 1962, was at his comedic peak in the MTV-era of the '90s, his style more reflective of Gen X sensibilities, rising to prominence before many millennials were even a zygote! What also struck me was how this logic wasnβt applied to similar figures from Carreyβs eraβfigures who, Iβd argue, had an even greater influence on Millennials (and Gen Z, for that matter). Take Stephen Hillenburg, for instance. Born in 1961, his creation SpongeBob SquarePants is a defining cultural touchstone for Millennials, and yet neither he nor SpongeBob are commonly cited as an inspiration for βmillennial humor.β The inconsistencies don't stop there. If we followed this logic, Jack Blackβwhose career spans from School of Rock (2003) and Nacho Libre (2006) to more recent performances like Bowser in The Super Mario Bros. Movie (2023) and Steve in Minecraft (2025)βshould be considered a Gen Z or Gen Alpha humor icon. But, of course, no one makes that claim.
There is also the broader issue with this logic: of prioritizing media intended for a demographic over media actually created by the said demographic. It makes zero sense to cast Jim Carrey, a boomer/GenX cusper, as the poser boy for millennial humor over actual millennial comedians such as Bo Burnham. This pattern extends beyond comedy. 90s and y2k cartoons are considered βmillennialβ for being aimed at their age demographic at the given time, while actual millennials in the field such as Pendleton Ward (Adventure Time) and Rebecca Sugar (Steven Universe) are not considered as such. 2010s Folk Revival is painted as βMillennial Musicβ while genres as Vaporwave pioneered by millennial artists such as Blank Banshee, or pop icons such as Taylor Swift, Lady Gaga, Charli XCX, or Kendrick Lamar, are not perceived in this way. Again, the focus is placed on who consumed the content and rather than who created it.
In all of my points and examples above, an insidious pattern emergesβthat those who present Jim Carrey or Mumford and Sons as βmillennialβ over more age-qualified or culturally impactful ones do so, intentionally or not, to serve a revisionist narrative: Bo Burnham, Rebecca Sugar, Pendleton Ward, Lady Gaga, Taylor Swift, or Kendrick Lamar, all these artist simply CANNOT POSSIBLY be βmillennialβ because the intention of the discourse is to develop a certain connotation surrounding the generational label, successful and culturally-relevant artist such as those listed above contradicts that rhetoric.
By redefining "millennial" based on whatβs deemed cringe or outdated rather than an objective look at the creators within that generation, this revisionist framing erases their authentic cultural identity, reducing it to that of a stereotype. Meanwhile, conveniently excluded artists who have genuinely shaped or defined not only millennial humor, art, animation, and musicβbut the tastes of generational successors who still to enjoy their works, creation, and content, as they remain culturally relevantβdismisses their continued collective influence and contributions as a generational cohort.
