I work to teach my writing students to not make sweeping statements. I'm baffled by the sheer dreck churned out here by one Erika Salen or Sallen-- it was written both ways on the hyperlink attached to the author's name (below). I'm not a baby-boomer, and I'm not her target for derision, but I also realize the only point of articles like this is to get people to hop on their site to scroll through (hopefully, for them!) hundreds of ads. Still, articles such as this aren't well written, are rife with logical fallacies, and their overall theme seems to be that Baby Boomers are stupid and have terrible taste in food. It's going to be fun for them when they're the oldsters. "NO!" they will insist, "we were the COOL ones, and we have great taste!" Their condescending progeny will tell them how hackneyed and sad they are, because they will have learned how to respect older generations from their own parents, i.e., not at all.
Impudent upstarts gotta impugn, I suppose. It's really sad what passes for professional writing, of late. I'm too busy now, but I may come back to pick this apart. The sheer amount of things they get utterly wrong is staggering, perhaps most especially the idea that the 1970s alone were solely responsible for any kind of food suspended in jellies. Hello? Aspic? From times before electricity and modern refrigeration? If one is going to write about historical periods of food production, one should, ya know, do a little research. If only there were some readily available compendium on the history of everything that the author could have consulted for some facts, instead of this judgey screed.
Oh, never mind. What an absolutely ignorant load of twaddle!
Okay, zoomer. "How dare I?"
You should be in school.