Let's not forget one thing here

LuvLoveXo

I frequent this board and feel compelled to address something. We all come here looking for opinions on names we've already chosen and names we're on the fence about or torn between when we can't decide. We come here when we're totally at a loss and cannot think of anything. We come here to get honest opinions on names we've heard and to see if anyone shares our thoughts on these names. The name of the board is Baby Names yet I find that a lot of people forget one thing. These babies will be babies and children for a very short part of their life. In all reality we are naming future ADULTS.

Sure you'd like your baby to have a cute name but when that baby is a teenager it will most often not be appreciated because they will be an adult. And they will remain an adult. Forever. Please think of your child as a professional adult. An uncommon name may not be always be a good thing. It can become an inconvenience. Giving your child a cutesy spelling of a somewhat normal name may not be a good idea either. There's no need to change a's to y's for a cute factor. Not only will it be a hassle to have a name almost always misspelled, it will give a first impression that the person shouldn't be taken seriously. It may sound cruel but it's the honest truth. I have personally sat on two boards of Fortune 500 companies and listened to snickers and saw eyes roll when presented with such unfortunate adults. I cannot tell you how many interviews have been conducted and the applicant immediately addresses the fact that we assumed they were of the opposite sex because their name was either gender neutral or intended for the opposite sex. My own cousin changed his name as an adult because it was a gender neutral name that his parents spelled in a cutesy way and it tortured him. It happens.

Before you commit to a name just please consider what it would be like to go through life with that name. That amazingly eccentric name you choose may just end up with someone who is not at all eccentric. Just some food for thought.

Ace226

Thank. You.

Kate0034

I completely agree with this. However, do you think some people on this board take this notion a little far? For instance, about a week ago I saw people attacking the spelling "Katharine." Sure, it's not the original spelling.. but it is familiar (Katharine Hepburn?), it is easy to pronounce, it doesn't mutilate the name, and it doesn't look "youneek." Is it really that big of a deal? Would a Fortune 500 company really side-eye "Katharine"? (For that matter...I know a very educated, successful adult "Kathryn"...and a "Cathryn".)

Not trying to harp on this name, it's just an example. To me this is so different from something like "Mackienzye." Or naming a girl James. Or all the other horrible names out there. But maybe it's not? What is your opinion on this?

wassuphoes

I'm going to piggy back on this a moment:

Please don't give your daughter a masculine name. 

Why? Well, would you name your son Sue? No? And why is that? Is it because he'll be made fun of, people might perceive him as "girly", it could hurt his future career? Then why would you subject your daughter to that?

Oh you say. But that's not as much an issue for a girl. It's OKAY for girls to be tomboys, or to have a masculine name. 

No. It's not. When you name your daughter Reese but won't name your son Rachel, you are saying that being a man, or having masculine qualities is better then women or feminine qualities. There is nothing wrong with feminine names or qualities. Your daughter will not be  better or stronger person because you named her James, but you are telling her that being a Jane isn't good enough. 

As women, we get screwed over for being women enough as it is. No need to start making our names inferior as well.

Jellyfish42

@Kate0034‌ I get what you're saying. I overlook "misspelled" names if they are a non-offensive deviation from the traditional spelling (Katharine, vs Katherine). I still think the name is misspelled, but its not to the point of being ridiculous. Its when you get into the dark recesses of replacing all the i's with y's or switching vowels around that I'm like, step away from the baby naming, lady.

Maybe I am biased, since I tend to love classic, traditional names. You (generalized you) can name your kid what you want, but don't be surprised or upset when in 10 years your kid hates his/her "u-neek" name.

4N6s

Amen.

magsugar13

Kate0034 said:

I completely agree with this. However, do you think some people on this board take this notion a little far? For instance, about a week ago I saw people attacking the spelling "Katharine." Sure, it's not the original spelling.. but it is familiar (Katharine Hepburn?), it is easy to pronounce, it doesn't mutilate the name, and it doesn't look "youneek." Is it really that big of a deal? Would a Fortune 500 company really side-eye "Katharine"? (For that matter...I know a very educated, successful adult "Kathryn"...and a "Cathryn".) Not trying to harp on this name, it's just an example. To me this is so different from something like "Mackienzye." Or naming a girl James. Or all the other horrible names out there. But maybe it's not? What is your opinion on this?

I think we all have a different level of tolerance. 

to me If a name is spelled wrong,  it doesnt matter if it is spelled a little wrong or a lot wrong. (using your example) 

to me kathryn is equally as bad ad mackienzye.

stahlop

As a junior high teacher I can tell you how aggravating it is to a kid when the teacher is trying to pronounce their name correctly. I have a Makla this year. Never in a million years would I have guessed it was pronounced Makayla, and you could just hear it in her voice when she had to correct me that this was how it had gone her whole life.

daniellelea1985

Another thing to consider...

Hiring managers at big corporations WILL pass on a resume with a too "younique" name unless they're desperate. I've seen it first hand!

nurse714

Thank you for this! The names I've been seeing on this board lately are driving me crazy.

LuvLoveXo

Kate0034 said:

I completely agree with this. However, do you think some people on this board take this notion a little far? For instance, about a week ago I saw people attacking the spelling "Katharine." Sure, it's not the original spelling.. but it is familiar (Katharine Hepburn?), it is easy to pronounce, it doesn't mutilate the name, and it doesn't look "youneek." Is it really that big of a deal? Would a Fortune 500 company really side-eye "Katharine"? (For that matter...I know a very educated, successful adult "Kathryn"...and a "Cathryn".)

Not trying to harp on this name, it's just an example. To me this is so different from something like "Mackienzye." Or naming a girl James. Or all the other horrible names out there. But maybe it's not? What is your opinion on this?

.

My opinion of Katherine is that it should be spelled like that or Catherine. My aunt is a Katherine and although her generation wouldn't assume there was a "Y" anywhere in the name she's gone through life being asked if it was with a "C" or "K". Either that or she's not asked and it's spelled wrong. Mind you she is not the aunt that named her son the gender neutral name with the cutesy spelling.

I'm not trying to deliberalty insult anyone on this board and that's why I didn't disclose what my cousin's name was. I can tell you I have seen this very same name suggested and it makes me cringe like many of the other names on here. At the end of the day it's a personal preference and decision. I'd just like people to keep in mind that they're choosing a name for someone else who may not appreciate the out of the box alternative.

AmyCee

Deleted because it was random and redundant

magsugar13

nurse714 said:

Thank you for this! The names I've been seeing on this board lately are driving me crazy.

And making your eyes bleed? Mine have been @-)

nurse714

magsugar13 said:

nurse714 said:

Thank you for this! The names I've been seeing on this board lately are driving me crazy.

And making your eyes bleed? Mine have been @-)

What's even worse it that so many are now co-signing for these horrible names.

allthecheese

nurse714 said:

magsugar13 said:

nurse714 said:

Thank you for this! The names I've been seeing on this board lately are driving me crazy.

And making your eyes bleed? Mine have been @-)

What's even worse it that so many are now co-signing for these horrible names.

Is everyone not moving to the new community? I only come on here once in a while but I've been appalled more and more later when I do come around. No one is sticking up for "the right" half the time.

nurse714

I'm over there but I haven't posted very much. I may be going there for good but I just hate to see this board go down like this.

brandyann15

New community? Where did everyone goe? I don't get a chance to get on much these days.

valeriemarie24

I'm so glad someone made this post. It's everything I've been thinking but haven't had the nerve to say.
A common trend I've seen is putting names that end in 'son' (Emerson, Jameson etc) on girls. I think any name that has the 'son' ending should be for boys. Maybe that's an unpopular opinion, but I just hate that trend

mommaKCS

wassuphoes said:

I'm going to piggy back on this a moment:

Please don't give your daughter a masculine name. 

Why? Well, would you name your son Sue? No? And why is that? Is it because he'll be made fun of, people might perceive him as "girly", it could hurt his future career? Then why would you subject your daughter to that?

Oh you say. But that's not as much an issue for a girl. It's OKAY for girls to be tomboys, or to have a masculine name. 

No. It's not. When you name your daughter Reese but won't name your son Rachel, you are saying that being a man, or having masculine qualities is better then women or feminine qualities. There is nothing wrong with feminine names or qualities. Your daughter will not be  better or stronger person because you named her James, but you are telling her that being a Jane isn't good enough. 

As women, we get screwed over for being women enough as it is. No need to start making our names inferior as well.

This is a societal issue. I'm not all for a girl named James, but I think certain names are genuinely unisex, and can be used on either sex. Genuinely unisex names can be exciting and healthy, and attacking those names or 'forcing' one to be one sex or the other is not doing anybody any good. Especially for those boys named Sue.

Remember, WE are the ones who create gender roles. WE are the ones to create the perception of weakness in femininity. Using that argument only increases and strengthens that perception.

ETA: And it absolutely IS OK for a girl/woman to be a tomboy or have masculine qualities. Just as it is OK for a boy/man to be feminine. Having your outlook on this is what's really unhealthy for GENDER equality. Gender is an identity. It's a perception.

magsugar13

j&jNY said:

magsugar13 said:

nurse714 said:

Thank you for this! The names I've been seeing on this board lately are driving me crazy.

And making your eyes bleed? Mine have been @-)

What's even worse it that so many are now co-signing for these horrible names.

Is everyone not moving to the new community? I only come on here once in a while but I've been appalled more and more later when I do come around. No one is sticking up for "the right" half the time.

I do both

The board has been taken over by Kinleys,Haylees, and eyleens, if you know what i mean .

honeybee530

I teach grades 4-8 but occasionally when I walk down the kindergarten hall I pay attention to the names on their little shoe buckets in the event something catches my eye and could make it to my "list". In all honesty, I most often catch myself rolling my eyes at the spelling of some of the names because rather than coming off as unique, they simply come off with the impression their parents are idiots and can't spell....LOL. Some I've seen most recently that grated on my nerves.....Mitcheale (instead of Mitchell), Ryeleigh (instead of Riley), Tjaden (Jaden, with a silent T....wtf?!?), Kaitlynne (instead of Kaitlyn/Caitlin)....just to name a few....I seriously kid you not...LOL.

wassuphoes

mommaKCS said:

I'm going to piggy back on this a moment:

Please don't give your daughter a masculine name. 

Why? Well, would you name your son Sue? No? And why is that? Is it because he'll be made fun of, people might perceive him as "girly", it could hurt his future career? Then why would you subject your daughter to that?

Oh you say. But that's not as much an issue for a girl. It's OKAY for girls to be tomboys, or to have a masculine name. 

No. It's not. When you name your daughter Reese but won't name your son Rachel, you are saying that being a man, or having masculine qualities is better then women or feminine qualities. There is nothing wrong with feminine names or qualities. Your daughter will not be  better or stronger person because you named her James, but you are telling her that being a Jane isn't good enough. 

As women, we get screwed over for being women enough as it is. No need to start making our names inferior as well.

This is a societal issue. I'm not all for a girl named James, but I think certain names are genuinely unisex, and can be used on either sex. Genuinely unisex names can be exciting and healthy, and attacking those names or 'forcing' one to be one sex or the other is not doing anybody any good. Especially for those boys named Sue. Remember, WE are the ones who create gender roles. WE are the ones to create the perception of weakness in femininity. Using that argument only increases and strengthens that perception. ETA: And it absolutely IS OK for a girl/woman to be a tomboy or have masculine qualities. Just as it is OK for a boy/man to be feminine. Having your outlook on this is what's really unhealthy for GENDER equality. Gender is an identity. It's a perception.

I re-read my post and see how you could infer that I believe it's not okay for men or women to act outside of their gender roles. For that, I apologize. There is absolutely nothing wrong with men who identify with feminine traits or women who identify with masculine traits. Whats more, gender is fluid and constantly changing, as it is a societal construct. So I'm sorry for the lack of clarity in my voice for that part.

However I think you have missed part of my point. 

Our language is a part of our cultural make up. Our language affects our society. Whats more, there are very, very, very few truly unisex names in the English Language, and nearly all of those come from surnames which are by definition genderless. Names like Reese, Aubrey, and James have no history or tradition as feminine names. They are masculine names. And what happens to masculine names that start being used as feminine names? It's not that they become unisex. They are abandoned as masculine. Look at Ashley. While never a popular name in the states, it's been recorded every year (okay, one year it wasn't) by the SSA since they started keeping records in 1880. It's popularity rank in 1880 was 684 for boys. it peaked at 282 in 1980. Ashley for a girl peaked at 1 in 1991.  Ashley for a girl in 2013 is 67, while Ashley for a boy is 2926. This trend doesn't help with gender inequality, it furthers the idea that things that are "girly" are not for boys.

When you name a girl a masculine name, you are telling her, whether you mean to or not, that being a girl isn't good enough. Girls deserve better then that.

Mamamads

mommaKCS said:

wassuphoes said:

I'm going to piggy back on this a moment:

Please don't give your daughter a masculine name. 

Why? Well, would you name your son Sue? No? And why is that? Is it because he'll be made fun of, people might perceive him as "girly", it could hurt his future career? Then why would you subject your daughter to that?

Oh you say. But that's not as much an issue for a girl. It's OKAY for girls to be tomboys, or to have a masculine name. 

No. It's not. When you name your daughter Reese but won't name your son Rachel, you are saying that being a man, or having masculine qualities is better then women or feminine qualities. There is nothing wrong with feminine names or qualities. Your daughter will not be  better or stronger person because you named her James, but you are telling her that being a Jane isn't good enough. 

As women, we get screwed over for being women enough as it is. No need to start making our names inferior as well.

This is a societal issue. I'm not all for a girl named James, but I think certain names are genuinely unisex, and can be used on either sex. Genuinely unisex names can be exciting and healthy, and attacking those names or 'forcing' one to be one sex or the other is not doing anybody any good. Especially for those boys named Sue.

Remember, WE are the ones who create gender roles. WE are the ones to create the perception of weakness in femininity. Using that argument only increases and strengthens that perception.

ETA: And it absolutely IS OK for a girl/woman to be a tomboy or have masculine qualities. Just as it is OK for a boy/man to be feminine. Having your outlook on this is what's really unhealthy for GENDER equality. Gender is an identity. It's a perception.

Thank you for this!! Summed up my thoughts on this exactly.

mattandlora

My name is a non-traditional spelling, Lora instead of Laura. However, my parents weren't trying to be unique or hippy. They were just reusing my great-grandmother's name. I don't know WTF her parents were doing though. Anyhow, it IS annoying when I have to spell it for people. All. The. Time. And I can't tell you how much time I've wasted changing the spelling on official documents, like tax papers and student loans.

My thoughts on non-traditional spellings: Use it if it's a family name and not ridiculous. Lora IS a known alternative, just not popular. Bryan vs. Brian, or Catherine vs. Kathryn are examples I can think of. Those are names where the general public is well-aware of the multiple spelling variations. Otherwise, just go with the traditional version. If you're thinking of using a unisex name, save it for the middle name.