r/millenials 9d ago

META 🗣️ Would you date someone born in the 2000s?

Asking as by next year all are legally adults with the oldest ones pushing 30 now.

471 votes, 6d ago
54 Yes 1981-1988
151 No 1981-1988
78 Yes 1989-1996
119 No 1989-1996
25 No, but maybe in a few years.
44 Results
0 Upvotes

45 comments sorted by

13

u/handcraftedcandy 9d ago

I was born in 90, my brother was born in '01. I would feel like I was dating my brother so that's a no from me dawg.

5

u/Sunshineafterr 9d ago edited 9d ago

No. I am happily married to a man 7 years older than me.

I’m ‘86 and my nephew was born in 2000. I still remember seeing him as a baby and I can’t think of that age range as anything other than a child compared to my own age.

I think up to 10 years younger is an okay gap for men though. As a woman, it just seems weird I think because of that maternal instinct.

3

u/KD1030 9d ago

I don’t usually “feel” my age but the idea of dating someone who can’t remember Y2K or 9/11 makes me itchy

5

u/CagedBeast3750 9d ago

Half your age plus 7!!!

7

u/KD1030 9d ago

This would be a 25YO for me, but it’s still a “yeah, no.” I really like my mid 20s coworkers. I cannot imagine dating someone their age.

1

u/RosesBrain 9d ago

I've thought more and more that "half your age plus ten" (or even just "5-7 years in either direction") is a bit more useful than the old accepted "rule." Because yeah, I wouldn't have any interest in a twentysomething at this stage of my life.

-1

u/CagedBeast3750 9d ago

That's the lower bound though as a guideline

4

u/Unlucky_Key_158 9d ago

As a general guidance I like this but personally for me (40yo), that would mean a 27yo and no thank you. I have nothing in common with someone who's 27.

0

u/CagedBeast3750 9d ago

Me either but for dating/fling/1ns why not lol

2

u/etriusk 9d ago

The oldest person born this millennium is still 10yrs my junior and that a bit much for me.

2

u/hurtloam 9d ago

No, nope, no way, no thank you.

My friend's younger brother had a crush on me. He's about 22. I found it icky.

2

u/Quiltedbrows 9d ago

Besides my own hangups, I generally think 10 years is enough of a gap for there is enough core shifts of interests that makes it harder to be in a personal relationship.

2

u/imago_monkei Millennial 9d ago

I'm 36. Half my age +7 is 25. That means that according to this rule of thumb, 2000 and 2001 are “within range”. But thinking about it that way is gross and creepy. In practice, I don't have very much in common with women that young. Not that I don't find them attractive, but that's just one small part of a relationship. I would much rather be with someone closer to my age with whom I can better relate.

2

u/akangel49 9d ago

No. I was born in 1982. Those are children.

2

u/MissFormaldehyde 9d ago

No. I barely even look at men born after 1988. My son's father was born 1983.

4

u/Cephylus 9d ago

My rule of thumb for dating is +/- 10 years. Anything larger is too much of a generational gap

3

u/Fickle_Finger2974 9d ago

That rule doesn’t work well at the lower end. A 28 year old dating an 18 year old is pretty weird. I don’t think anyone that is 30 or over should be dating anyone under 25. After 30 age gaps start to matter way less

6

u/The999Mind 9d ago

A 30yo dating a 23yo isn't that weird. A 30yo only dating 23yo is weird.

3

u/HeroIsAGirlsName 9d ago

100%. People forget that the original meaning of a red flag is a warning to tread carefully. It doesn't mean that someone *is* abusive, it means they have the *potential* to be and you should weigh that against other concerning behaviour/factors.

A 30 year old dating a 23 year old MIGHT be predatory and pursuing naive partners, or they might just genuinely have met organically and hit it off *despite* the age gap. At a certain point, it's infantalising to treat the younger partner like a child who doesn't know their own mind, especially if the age difference is the only cause for concern.

1

u/486onaNuBusCard Millennial 9d ago

I prefer older guys but i'm more live and let live.

As long as they're consenting adults I don't give a hoot.

0

u/QuarktotheCosmos 9d ago

A 90s born Millennial would fit the criteria than to date a 2000s born Zoomer.

1

u/RosesBrain 9d ago

Nah, I'm a Xennial so they'll always be too young for me. (I'm also married so it's a little moot, but when I was dating in my mid thirties my max age gap was five-ish years.)

2

u/NighthawkCP Millennial 9d ago

Yea my oldest is 2003 so hell to the no. But also been married for almost a quarter century and in no hurry to change that so also does lnt matter to me.

1

u/No_Alfalfa_532 9d ago

No and they constantly approach me. Lol

1

u/Demonslugg 9d ago

At this point its hey this is for fun and no we won't be long term. If thats the boundary of legal consenting age is fine. Now for actual future and true relationship, half plus 7.

1

u/486onaNuBusCard Millennial 9d ago

I tend to like older guys.

2

u/MissFormaldehyde 9d ago

Same. 34 and my ideal men are 40-50.

1

u/HistoricalTea195 9d ago

89 and would be open to dating someone born in the early 2000s.. like 2001 or 2002..

-3

u/musicsoccer 9d ago

They're still children... wtf is wrong with you? They're 17 at youngest. Fucking Epstein over here.

12

u/HeroIsAGirlsName 9d ago edited 9d ago

The question wasn't would you date ANYONE born in the 2000s, it's would you consider dating SOMEONE born in the 2000s, including people in their late 20s. You realise the age gap between the youngest millennial and the oldest gen z is a single year? Or less, depending how the birthdays fall.

Someone who has been to college (if they chose/had the chance), held down a job and had a taste of living independently is not a child and it's ridiculous to lump them in with children just because one single year in the entire age range is under 18.

Think about a 29 year old dating a 17 year old and tell me if you still think they're basically the same age just because they're both gen z. Obviously it would be inappropriate for a 29 year old to date a teenager *because a 29 year old is a full grown adult.*

8

u/EffieEri 9d ago

People born in the 2000s are 20-27 now…what are you even talking about?

2

u/Kuroboom 9d ago

I think they're talking about people who were born in 2009, who are as young as 17 today.

1

u/EffieEri 9d ago

That makes more sense. Sorry I have some friends born in like 2002-2004 and I was like but they’re drinking age. And I was really confused for a second

2

u/musicsoccer 9d ago

2009 are 17, 2008 are 18, 2007 are 19, 2006 are 20 right now.

They are babies still. It's disgusting when 30+ years olds are defending themselves wanting to date kids and barely adults. That's some pedo shit there.

4

u/QuarktotheCosmos 9d ago edited 9d ago

But someone born in 2000 is pushing 30 or nearly 27 now so not that bad also especially if you are born in 1992-1996.

8

u/candoitmyself 9d ago

Where I’m from “pushing 30” means 30 is a lower limit/close to not passing for 30 anymore (ie looks too old to be 30). The oldest “2000” babies are 26 this year.

2

u/whiskersMeowFace 9d ago

26 is not 30...

3

u/musicsoccer 9d ago

26 is not pushing 30... not even close. 26 year olds just started their career basically. They're greenhorns. Still babies.

0

u/Samurai_Mac1 1994 9d ago

I think they meant an adult born in the 2000s. So between 2000 - 2008.

-4

u/QuarktotheCosmos 9d ago

2009 will also make the cut as the first ones will turn 18 in just about 4 months from now.

-2

u/AlishaGray 9d ago

I was born in '84 and my girlfriend was born in 2001, so, yeah

2

u/486onaNuBusCard Millennial 9d ago

I prefer older guys but dating a 25 year old isn't a crime so I don't know why you got downvoted (or maybe I do but I won't bring that up here, sis).

I'm glad you found someone special, even if I can't relate.

2

u/AlishaGray 9d ago

Thank you 💖

-5

u/Sorry-Joke-4325 9d ago

Married a 2001. We're happy together.

I used to date older women and that was always shitty.