This is tongue in cheek of course...but man oh man it's amazing how many boys names have migrated over to the girls' section forever to be labeled girly.
Saw a baby name book the other day that was divided into sections with the names typed on either pink paper or blue paper. The pink section was 3x as thick as the blue.
Needless to say we cannot come up with ANY boy names we like and are getting weary and discouraged. I know we'll eventually come up with a name... Ok, that's my vent.
Re: Pathetic vent...girls stop stealing boys' names!
5 REs + 3 surgical hysteroscopies for septum/lap + 3 failed IUIs
IVF w/ICSI/AH & acu = BFP!, unexplained spontaneous m/c @ 8w2d (our little girl),
FET w/acu = BFP!, B/G twins!, lost MP @19w, dx w/funneling cervix @20w,
twins nearly lost to IC @21w, saved by rescue cerclage, 17P & 16w of bedrest
Our twins born @36w4d via CS when A came foot first
Thankful for every day
We are in the opposite boat! We can't find a girl name to save our life. (Okay, not one we can totally agree on and love).
Good luck on finding your boy name!
I was just going to post this last night! I love Morgan, Avery, Emory etc. but for boys.
Also,my FN is Erin, which is a legitimate girl name that sounds the same as a boys name. No one seems to know that though, and assume that I am a man and are very surprised when they meet me that I have boobs. OR they spell my name Aaron knowing full well that I am a female. My point: giving girls boy names may seem really cutesy, but it SUCKS to have one
According to SSA, there were 311 boys named Ellis born in 2010 (and 149 girls), so it's still a boy's name by more than 2:1.
Baby Name Popularity by State
I feel like there are fewer boys names than girls names because people are less worried about their daughters being taken seriously than their sons. Sons need tried and true, strong names, but daughters can have cutesy or unique names because girls are taken less seriously by and large, there is "less at stake" when naming them.
/end feminist rant
I have a boy name. It's not gender neutral. However, it's not common. I never was made fun of by peers. The only people who made any kind of stink about it were adults. They usually just asked if my parents had wanted a boy. It did not scar me at all. In fact, I think it made me more outspoken. It also helped me land interviews and get jobs because people remembered me since they had been surprised when I turned out to be a girl.
I get not liking that names are becoming more and more gender neutral. I have the same issue with 2 boys names that I currently like. However, if someone wants to name their daughter a boys name that is primarily a boys name, I have no problem with that. It won't become gender neutral or trendy because one person did it.
I've still only met one person (yes a male) with my name.Oh, don't I know it!! I had a similar vent a few weeks ago. I have two boys and we had a difficult time naming them with all the boy names shifting toward the girl side. I could never name my son a name that he might be thought of as a girl. Girls can wear a boys name easier than a boy can wear a unisex name. Frustrating!! I am losing half my boy name options to the girls!
My male cousin's name is Ellis. He lives in Arkansas now.
Looks like someone just scored herself some nuggets.
P/SAIF Welcome
Invisible Finish Line
3T's Traveling Ovary Blog
7DPO Progesterone: low. CD3 BW: normal, HSG: clear
DX: severe MFI (low all 3) and low T. Undergoing replacement therapy.
Huh? I know 3 Ellis boys and 0 Ellis girls.
But, whatever. I think we need to accept that boy names for girls are in, and move on. I've seen a girl on the bump with DS's name (Anderson). I personally think it's hideous for a female, but to each her own. It's not going to kill him to possibly run into a female Anderson down the line. I wouldn't purposely choose a name trending unisex (Logan, Dylan, etc.) but I'm also not going to spaz about the name stealers.
(read it. you know you want to.)
anderson . september 2008
vivian . february 2010
mabel . august 2012
I can definitely understand why the OP and PPs are frustrated by this occurrence, but here is what bothers me about that frustration: very few girls (though there are some notable exceptions) are given purely masculine first names, such as Mark, or John or Gustav, etc. Most are given names that, though have been used by boys for a long time, started out as surnames. The Sawyers and the Ellises of the world come from surnames. So given that, why should boys have the monopoly on familial surnames? In this day and age, perhaps girls should be allowed to be named after the surnames in their own families as well, without critical judgment. It should be an honor for both boys and girls to be bestowed these names.
(Now, personally, I don't particularly like the surname-as-first-name phenomenon, and neither my sons nor my daughters will be given surnames as their first names.) Just my opinion. Please correct me if I have misunderstood anything.On the contrary. We named E her name because it had a strong feminist connection. Ellis was the pen name of Emily Bronte, when she couldn't get published as an Emily. Having people take our daughter seriously was a strong motivator behind choosing her name. It's why we didn't choose a more "feminine" name.
Hmm. I guess I owe you some nuggets. But even if the name were more popular for boys, we still would have named her that. This whole masculine/feminine name thing is socially constructed anyway. Rip off.
Eh, there are so many 'boy' names that girls have used for decades. Shannon, Leslie, Ashley, Kelly, etc.
Plus I think there are some names (like Riley, Logan, or Quinn) that work equally well for a boy or girl. Who says one gender has to own a name?