Anyway I can consider myself whatever I want I don't need your approval. I know what I experienced.

It's not about "needing my approval" I'm just stating things the way that they are. The 90s is technically 1990-99, no matter what you, I or anyone else does to twist it.

And I fully experienced the late '90s which was my point.

Except you spent more of your puberty years to adulthood in the 2000s, which was my point.

That's not childhood. His point.

That's not childhood. His point.

But I was explaining why 84/85 could be considered a 90s adolescent but not him/her.

And I said I started puberty in 1999 so I COULD be considered a very late 90s adolescent as well.

But people born in 85 spent a good few years in puberty in the 90s and were 18 by 2003.

So? Again being 18 in 2003 vs being 16 in 2003 is not some vastly different thing.

18 is legal. 16 isn't.

LOL ok I was legal by spring 2005. Again what makes a couple years so vastly different to you. You are a joke.

You spent all the early and some of the mid 2000s coming of age. Someone born in 1985 was only under 18 in the early 2000s.

In some states you come of age at 21, in others you come of age at 18 but people born in 1985 spent a number of years being in puberty in the 90s. Unlike you.

You can't purchase alcohol in any state under 21. You don't truly have full adult rights in ANY state until the age of 21. They spent 3 years at best vs 1 for me, the MAJORITY of the '90s (a 10 year period) they were a young child, period.

Actually boys enter puberty on average at 11, girls at 10.

LOL and you're even furthering my argument. I had some late '90s early adolescence (that an early '90s born DID NOT at all) as I've said MULTIPLE times now.

85 spent half or at least close to half of the 90s being in puberty, you didn't.

I STILL WAS PARTIALLY A LATE '90S ADOLESCENT, which is my ****ing point.