What does Gen Z really want? It’s the question at the heart of a thousand nigh-on identical think pieces; and at the fulcrum, it seems, of endless board meetings chaired by Gen Xers, and populated by ‘geriatric Millennials’, like me.

My generation was simple. We wanted avocados, didn’t we? We wanted everything to be in millennial pink and to have brunch every day (bottomless on weekends).

But Gen Z, so we’re told, are different – they’re far more morally evolved types. Conscious consumers. They care about the planet, but not about gender. They do lots of lip syncing on Tik Tok, and inexplicably, unironically, like Nu Metal. They celebrate their acne by covering spots with cute little stars rather than hiding it away by caking on layers of foundation and concealer a la Superdrug-girlie circa 2002.

Obviously it goes without saying that Gen Z – i.e. every single person born between 1997 and 2012 –  is not a uniform, monolithic entity. It’s a vast swathe of people just trying to muddle through their lives in consistently trying 21^st century times. And as such, the answer to what they want is probably things like job prospects, financial stability, affordable tuition fees, an end to things like deepfake porn and the influence of Andrew Tate.

But that’s all by the by in those aforementioned boardrooms. There, Gen Z wants little more than all-lower-case lettering; bright colours (‘funky!’); a faintly Web 1.0 ‘aesthetic’; and an insistence from the brands aimed at them that they ‘don’t see gender’.

This brand, called ‘being’ (yes, without a capital B) very proudly ticks all of those boxes. At my most cynical, I’d say that it feels as though the big generational conundrum (what DO they want?!!!) has been reduced to its most basic visual signifiers, raised by trend reports and focus groups in battery farms and shoved through the big brand conveyor belt to emerge into the world, good to go.

Being was created by a company called Zuru Edge, which is an interesting proposition in itself, in that it doesn’t do brand design as such, rather it creates brands from scratch; from their very naissance through R&D, to visual identity design. It even has its own production supply chain.

In its own words, Zuru Edge is ‘disrupting stale categories and leading them into the 21st century’ by creating ‘the brands of tomorrow and bringing them to the world, today’ – ones that, naturally, are ‘driven by purpose, innovation and data’.  So in short, it’s a bit different from the usual ‘here is a brand, and this is the brand design by XYD design studio/in-house creative team’ sort of projects.

Being is basically a haircare brand, but it’s billed as so much more: its stated raison d’etre is to ‘meaningfully transform the narrative by envisioning a beauty landscape that unites individuals of all identities, hair types and abilities’.

Where things all get rather woolly – and arguably patronising/regressive – is in the claims that ‘inclusivity is ingrained in being’s design ethos and woven into the very fabric of its products’. That might be true in the shampoo/conditioner itself – perhaps it’s truly a formula that works across everything from Afro hair to wispy thinning locks.

But to claim that certain fonts/colours etc. are ‘inclusive’ is to inherently say that others are not. Apparently the colour schemes (pinky red and white for the main logomark; a range of shades from pink to a lovely mauve to a verdant green across packaging and campaign imagery) were chosen because they’re ‘genderless’. But aren’t all colours genderless? Isn’t that statement in itself a rather old fashioned ‘blue for boys and pink for girls’ worldview to start from?

All this isn’t to say the packaging isn’t nice – it really is nice. As is the being website. The simplicity is grabby, with striking layouts using just two colours on-pack – one bold shade for the backdrop, another for the typography. The hues are well-chosen; it all feels fresh and rather fun; the shimmery silver gift box style outer packs are a cute touch. I’m not quite sure what to say about the logo/icon that appears as the dot on the ‘i’ of ‘being’ other than that it looks a lot like a fidget spinner.

The quirky serif logotype is fine, decent enough, but feels slightly flat as a brand name wordmark. However, the use of Druk – the beloved, uncompromisingly bold sans serif from Commercial Type –  works superbly across its various applications on packaging, campaign materials and more. It’s punchy, strong, and still feels a bit different, despite its popularity. Various weights of Druk are used together, often in a single line of text – for me, that little twist is one of the absolute standout elements of the brand design.

There’s clearly a lot to like about being, and it’s been widely celebrated by the design industry, scooping a Best Award in New Zealand and being heaped with praise in the process. But it leaves me rather cold; and slightly confused.

Perhaps that’s because I’m a geriatric millennial – too jaded and too old for all this stuff. Perhaps it’s because it’s the millionth all lower case brand name that broke this camel’s back. But maybe, just maybe, it’s because there are so many good ideas here, but they’ve been squished into such a formulaic mush of staid ‘Gen Z’ tropes that it’s impossible to see the purpose-driven woods for the disruptive trees.