Results 6 to 10 of 46
July 6th, 2013 08:48 AM #6Senior Member
[FONT=Palatino Linotype][CENTER]My darling Marian Illyria Aphrodite, March 2013 & Little Bunny (a girl!) due 9th of February 2014[/CENTER][/FONT]
- Join Date
- Jul 2012
- London, England
July 6th, 2013 09:48 AM #8
I'm not personally attracted to the core classic names, except Mary. I think Mary is perfection. Anyway...
People have different motivations for choosing the name that they do, other than being perceived as imaginative. I do agree that if some of these names had a naming respite, they might sound fresher down the line, but sometimes history/family/name image trumps freshness. Nothing wrong with that. I wouldn't mind being named any of the girl names above.
July 6th, 2013 11:21 AM #10
Blandness is in the eye of the beholder... We are at an interesting time in naming history were many names feel both old and stogy yet fresh and new. These names aren't in that category like Martha or Betty would be, and I understand how they may not be exciting to you cause you've seen them so much, but I much prefer these clean, truly timeless names to many others.Esmeralda | Marceline | Enid | Rosalind | Floralba
Evander | Atlas | Cassius | Lorcan
July 6th, 2013 11:31 AM #12Member
- Join Date
- Jun 2013
I love classic and traditional names and like most of the names you want to retire. I'd rather see the overly imaginative and bizarre spellings retired than timeless classics.
July 6th, 2013 11:54 AM #14
I don't agree. These names are timeless classics for a reason. If you are bored by them, then simply don't use them for your children.~Izzy, looking for a new nickname
Currently Loving: Romilly, Esme, Piper, Helia, Scout..Rhett, Colin, Rhys, Adrian, Jonah