Generational identity is shaped not just by age, but by shared historical experiences, cultural memory, and socioeconomic conditions. Terms like Boomers, Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z originated in the Western context, rooted in events like post-WWII prosperity, the Cold War, or the tech boom. However, in India, these categories do not map meaningfully onto our lived realities. Indian generations are shaped by unique structural shifts: Independence, Partition, Green Revolution, Emergency, Liberalisation, and the Digital Age. A family in India may contain members born in entirely different socio-economic Indias - from scarcity and socialism to globalisation and Instagram. This highlights the importance of situated sociology - the idea that each society must evolve its own conceptual frameworks based on its material conditions and symbolic values. Imported terms erase the nuances of caste, migration, gendered domesticity, rural-urban divides, and digital literacy. For example, an Indian born in 1970 waited years for a telephone or scooter, while a child born in 2010 learns from AI tutors. Therefore, a more grounded sociological approach calls for defining Indian generations through cultural transitions, not borrowed timelines - capturing shifts from radio to reels, Doordarshan to YouTube, joint families to urban solitude. This also helps policymakers tailor welfare, digital inclusion, and education schemes to real-life needs, not foreign age brackets. As sociologist Yogendra Singh emphasized, Indian society must be studied through the lens of continuity and change, rather than mimicking Western periodisation. Understanding generational shifts through our own language is not just cultural assertion, but a tool for social justice and inclusive policy.

The case of Nina Kutina highlights key sociological themes like migration, marginalisation, and the clash between individual agency and state control. Kutina, a foreign woman living in isolation with her children, represents how undocumented migrants often exist outside formal structures of citizenship and legality, facing social exclusion. Her preference for forest life reflects asceticism and rejection of modern materialism, challenging mainstream social norms around motherhood, education, and survival. The state’s response shows Weber’s idea of bureaucratic authority where legal rules dominate personal freedom, forcing deportation despite peaceful living. This also reflects intersectionality, where being a woman, foreigner, and mother amplifies her vulnerability. The case raises questions on cultural relativism- whether alternative lifestyles can be respected in modern nation-states- and exposes how the modern legal system leaves little space for non-conventional ways of life.