Generation Z is often labelled a generation in crisis. In academic literature, public discourse, workplace discussions, and social media, members of Gen Z are commonly depicted as confused, anxious, impatient, entitled, distracted, or emotionally fragile. At such an early stage of life, no previous generation has received such intensive discussion, interpretation, and diagnosis. Ironically, this excess of explanation has produced misunderstanding rather than clarity. Gen Z is not confused; it is over-explained and deeply under-supported.
Broadly speaking, Generation Z includes those born from the mid-1990s to the early 2010s. It is the first generation to grow up entirely within a digital society. For Gen Z, the internet is not an external influence encountered later in life; it is the social environment in which identity, friendships, learning, political awareness, and emotional expression are formed. Algorithms shape visibility; social media structures belong; and constant connectivity defines everyday interaction. Unlike earlier generations, Gen Z cannot meaningfully separate “online life” from “real life” because digital life has become a foundational layer of social existence.
Despite this transformation, Gen Z is expected to operate within structures designed by earlier generations. The education system still rewards obedience, standardisation, and delayed relevance. Contemporary workplaces emphasise productivity and loyalty but provide limited job security and shrinking career opportunities. Families often expect conformity to older moral codes. These norms were created in an era of predictable futures and linear life paths, and teachers expect respect without providing them the required guidance. But Gen Z has grown up with economic uncertainty, climate anxiety, expanding markets, and relationship uncertainty. As a result, these expectations no longer fit their lived experiences.
Gen Z has also become the most stigmatised generation in mental and moral terms. Earlier generations were criticised for political idealism or economic behaviour, but Gen Z is scrutinised for its emotions, identity, and mental health. Its anxiety is medicalised; its political engagement is dismissed as performative; and its discomfort with rigid institutions is framed as immaturity. “Confusion” has become a social label imposed upon the generation rather than a condition experienced by it. Although Generation Z is often discussed in public discourse, it remains poorly understood. Societal discussions about this cohort often occur without meaningful engagement with its members. Most importantly, powerful people who control social institutions are from other generations, which may explain why they reject this generation’s new behaviour.
Surveys, opinion pieces, and expert analyses attempt to interpret Generation Z as anti-social and reactive. Despite being highly visible in discussions, the generation largely lacks influence over the systems that shape its daily experiences. Furthermore, their issues are often dismissed as transient trends rather than acknowledged as rational responses to ongoing structural instability. What stands out most starkly is the lack of social support available to Gen Z.
Expectations have grown, but support systems have not kept pace. Young people are constantly encouraged to be resilient, adaptable, creative, emotionally aware, and entrepreneurial, even as they face unstable jobs, strained mental health services, and fewer spaces for meaningful social interaction. Although self-care is widely promoted, the basic conditions needed to make it possible, such as security, time, and trust in institutions, are often missing. As a result, responsibility is pushed onto individuals, even when the pressures they face are structural. This gap between expectations and support also shapes how this generation relates to social norms, deepening the misunderstanding around it.
Gen Z often speaks openly and confidently about their priorities-such as identity, mental health, work-life balance, relationships, and ethical values. Older generations sometimes see this confidence as arrogance or impatience. In the past, people were taught to judge their behaviour mainly through social approval, family honours, community expectations, and respect for institutions. Following these norms was rewarded, while going against them carried clear social penalties. Gen Z has grown up in a digital world with many voices and viewpoints, rather than a single moral authority. Its confidence, therefore, is not a sign of recklessness but of a different way of relating to authority and social expectations.
The main generational tension is a structural mismatch. Gen Z is a digital generation living in a pre-digital moral order. Its ideas of time, success, identity, and belonging are shaped by speed, visibility, and constant comparison. Institutions still work through hierarchy, patience, and delayed rewards. When Gen Z resists these expectations, society calls them “confused” rather than recognising outdated structures.
Generation Z does not need endless diagnoses or labels for its behaviour. It needs structural empathy. Such empathy means rethinking education for relevance and dialogue. It means re-imagining work beyond insecurity, improving mental health support, and making space for genuine inter-generational conversation rather than moral policing. Clarity about one’s priorities does not remove vulnerability. Confidence is not a substitute for social support.
If Gen Z seems unsettled, it is not due to a lack of direction. Society continues to explain this generation without offering true support. Until institutions adapt to Gen Z’s reality, the label of confusion will stick. The confusion does not reflect the generation but society’s reluctance to change.
(The author is Assistant Professor of Sociology at UILS,Chandigarh University, Punjab)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
