Finley Rae Baldwin

[namefan]

I think that if you want to use Finley for a boy, go for it anyway but be prepared for the gender confusion. After all, I'm a guy with a unisex name who doesn't have any major issues with his name.

[elea]

Karen, I understand your points but I'm afraid I have to disagree somewhat.

Just because a boys name isn't popular in the US doesn't mean that it should be used on girls imo. Many names have a rich cultural heritage and usage and just because it's unfamiliar to American ears, does that mean parents have a right to ignore that heritage?

Ok, so it ends in -ley, but so does Bradley. And does the rule stop at just -ley or the 'ee' sound in general. Are Henry, Anthony, Barry, Geoffrey, Harvey, Jeremy acceptable to by the same standard?

Finlay/Finley has just as many cultural and historical roots as Henry etc. So, for Irish people in particular, it's the equivalent of using one of the above names on a girl -- and seems just as ridiculous.

I can understand why people in other countries regard some Americans as 'name-ignorant' because it seems in some cases, parents in the US are taking a name from another culture, not bothering to look at the history and cultural significance and just shove it on a girl because it fits their own name standards. I'm not saying I agree completely with this argument -- I'm just putting the point across. Many European countries have name laws that protects the usage of names and prevents gender-bending.

I do know for a fact that any girl who came to Britain called Finley would get decidedly funny looks, as there are loads of boys called Finlay/Finlay here. Just like if a girl called Henry went to America.

[karen]

I don't know what your name is namefan, but I think Finley, was already deemed unusable by the majority of parents of boys by the fact of going unused in hot demand. Why did it not appeal to parents of boys before it was "taken" by girls? The example of Bailey really surprised me, first that it had risen to above 200th most popular girls name by 1994, charting steadily up and up since 1983. It had pretty dismal statistics on the boy's side, only passing the top 1000 mark, barely, for 2 years prior to the debut of "Party of Five," where it seemed to spur some higher popularity for the run of the show and then declined again, where it is still above 800th.

Was this name unusable for boys? It seems like it was, because nobody was using it. Were they unaware how popular it was for girls when they did start to use it? Probably that too. I'm surprised by this fact today, but there it is. When a name goes unused, it's probably unusable already. This is a fallacy of naming, that a name must always be a boy's name or this is some epidemic issue of solid boy's names being taken like, right off a boy himself. This name went unused for ages, by anyone. I don't see how there's claim to it for parents of boys, or why they would mind, all of a sudden they want to use it.

The way name trends work over time is that certain sounds are no more appealing for a name at all, but some sounds become more associated with other girls names so when people are looking for a name, Bailey sounds like a girls name, Finley sounds quite feminine as well. Maybe not in England, they have different traditions and may have kept it well in use for males all along. That's where you get different ideas of "all boy here" kind of names that, in America, are too close to recently popular established girl's names - like Ashley. That, I understand, is still "all boy" in the UK. Astonishing.

But you get a name like Francis in the US, which is not well-used, but not 'never used much if ever in several decades,' which maintains itself as a clearly masculine name, despite the name Frances existing at all. Frances is not very popular now, as you may notice, such that it seems to need that little extra, so Francis is a boy still and even now, and parents are more likely to choose Francesca, and maybe even call her Frankie, and that's still fine with Frankie the boy in her class. I don't know, it was when I went to school with Chrises and Pats and Franc/i/e/ses. Maintain a name as a firmly established "all boy" name by choosing it massively enough to matter statistically or it will lapse if it sounds too girly, or sounds like a fresher taste of a name already gone for good to the girls.

[susan]

Very masculine names that end in ley, lay, or ly, these would be so funny on girls:
Audley
Barclay
Brawley
Huntley
Digby
Manly
Riddley
Stanley
Vassily

Finley doesn't bother me that much on a girl. I feel neutral about it. What's the difference between Finley and Ashley?

[karen]

Karen, I understand your points but I'm afraid I have to disagree somewhat.

Just because a boys name isn't popular in the US doesn't mean that it should be used on girls imo. Many names have a rich cultural heritage and usage and just because it's unfamiliar to American ears, does that mean parents have a right to ignore that heritage?

Ok, so it ends in -ley, but so does Bradley. And does the rule stop at just -ley or the 'ee' sound in general. Are Henry, Anthony, Barry, Geoffrey, Harvey, Jeremy acceptable to by the same standard?

Finlay/Finley has just as many cultural and historical roots as Henry etc. So, for Irish people in particular, it's the equivalent of using one of the above names on a girl -- and seems just as ridiculous.

I can understand why people in other countries regard some Americans as 'name-ignorant' because it seems in some cases, parents in the US are taking a name from another culture, not bothering to look at the history and cultural significance and just shove it on a girl because it fits their own name standards. I'm not saying I agree completely with this argument -- I'm just putting the point across.

I understand that what may seem somewhat ignorant to people all over the world is really an American attitude - do what you want. Seriously. Nobody in the US has touched these names for decades, and seem to have been first picked for the girls. I don't think it has any claim left for the boys here. It's kind of sad that parents of boys feel so tragically possessive of names they now hear that they like, but no longer can use. They had their chance. Statistics definitely point to girls' parents yanking them up out of non-use while parents of boys decided they sound like some stuffy old man or a sissy.

I know this isn't the typical imagery these names have in the UK, but that's because you maintained the usage of these names for boys all along. They were clearly never the least bit popular in the US, and we do love our Irish names, even people who aren't Irish are always looking for something that's just not so "cliche," as each wave of names hits, fads out, and we have to find that rare name nobody else got yet. It is a little weird as far as American fads go. But we have our own rich heritage and tradition, and that is to appropriate stuff, call things ours, and really enjoy the heck out of it so later we can tell you how nobody cool does that anymore.

But seriously, surnames etal. have also gone used by females for ages, not so much as currently, but this is hardly something absolutely fresh and new. The internet makes searching one's genealogy more convenient and ever more accurate, so you can pluck the name off of someone who might have been the most hated person in the county where they lived 300 years ago. Seriously never met anyone meaner than that guy, but their name looks so romantically historic on their records. Since women are hyphenating their names less, some still want to use their maiden name, and give their daughters a nice strong name that would otherwise go erased only to come up in another 300 years by someone looking up their family tree. As far as rich American cultural traditions, I'm in favor of this - I'm not really in favor of taking surnames that belonged to other people just because they'd sound like a nice name. Some names are too established, however, as first names, to rationally avoid on principle. It's quite the same principle of avoiding using a name nobody in the US uses for girls because it is a boys name in England or Ireland, when obviously, the people have spoken. Girls' parents saw it first, so to speak. Nobody was naming their sons this here, and now they want it "back." This is how America works.

Yeah, so I guess I am into checking statistics. Americans can be dopey but for the most part, it's cool. I think I would die if I lived somewhere they had to make and keep very many strict laws and guidelines to keep parents from using names they want to use. Talk about too much government. I like how the culture forms around this without interference, even if we come up with some wack-a-doozies. That's a little bit too much fun to miss.

[karen]

I might add, for the most part, people are having fewer children, so that name you love for a boy, especially where surnames are concerned, might seem appropriate for a girl anyway, and not save it for a boy. Parents of 4 or more daughters and no sons might agree they'd expected a boy eventually, but 4 is way above average. Family names are especially sentimental whether they belonged to a man or woman, if they can or can't be feminized, and especially surnames. My surname is not appropriate as a name for anyone - I really think that's the only thing wrong with my whole name. I can still think of someone famous whose middle name is my surname, so it might not be as awful as I think it is. But anyway, family planning really reduces the chances some families will ever have a son to give these names to.

[namefan]

I might add, for the most part, people are having fewer children, so that name you love for a boy, especially where surnames are concerned, might seem appropriate for a girl anyway, and not save it for a boy. Parents of 4 or more daughters and no sons might agree they'd expected a boy eventually, but 4 is way above average. Family names are especially sentimental whether they belonged to a man or woman, if they can or can't be feminized, and especially surnames. My surname is not appropriate as a name for anyone - I really think that's the only thing wrong with my whole name. I can still think of someone famous whose middle name is my surname, so it might not be as awful as I think it is. But anyway, family planning really reduces the chances some families will ever have a son to give these names to.

Karen, if the family name in question was a name usually used for a girls and could not easily be masculinized, would you use it on a boy anyway if you never had any girls?

[karen]

First of all, I never said I have a stake in this, so let's get this out of the way beforehand. I have my personal preferences, and do not actively desire a male name, or perceived male name, or to use any of the surnames I can think of in my family for a daughter's first name, so vice versa is probably out. I don't always like what other people do, but for the most part, I don't tell them what they do is awful either, if I don't happen to like it. Awful for the child or for the downfall of society in general. I'm more inclined to prefer authentic spellings, surnames that are actually in your own or spouse's family tree, no more than 2 middle names, but I don't really demand people adhere to these guidelines or feel that they are making a mockery of something just because I might take it too seriously.

So anyway, if someone wants to use a surname for a child's first name, and that child happens to be a boy, and that surname just happens to sound like or be spelled like a familiar female name, it can be what they want to do. It is because society deems anything feminine about a boy could be traumatizing that I probably would not do that, but I would assess the name for usability in the first place. Is it even usable for a girl? Are there names that just don't "pass" the first name test in general? I guess this is not what you asked, but it would all be on a case-by-case basis. I think people tend to use surnames as names on the value of how it sounds anyway. You may notice that not just any surname gets this privilege, although we are expanding what society is comfortable with. People who know they have odd-sounding, hard to spell and/or very ethnic surnames don't tend to insist on their use. I have that kind of name.

My favorite grandmother's maiden name is even worse - she is my favorite person in my family, who has a bad maiden name, and her first name my mother still insists is a man's name, I adore, but it is not a man's name and hasn't been considered a man's name for a very long time. I'm not talking unisex or recently acquired, she's almost 92. As statistics go, it hasn't been used on girls much lately, but that might change as a celebrity recently used it. It has been used for boys relative more commonly than Finley, but if you asked anyone except those boys' parents, they'd have to agree.

I'm a little chuffed (I think I used that word right) that if I had only boys at this point, it would be very difficult to honor the one person who actually means the most to me. In a remarkable move, I may take great effort not to honor anyone else if she can't be favored, but that's just how I feel. Anyone else could do what they want if she were their grandmother, including the use of her first name on a boy or her maiden name, which is too odd for use, or create some way to misspell it or anagram it or a likely variation or do ok with the first initial, or ignore the problem and hit up some other relatives' names who were maybe not the best but not the worst, they just have simpler names to use or fix up.

Naming a child is something I consider to be a personal process and though we may offer advice, arrangements, suggestions, steer people away from making mistakes both small and enormous, I really can't tell anybody what to do. I think that's boring anyway, when everyone likes and chooses the same things for the same typical reasons.

The gender problem here is you only get so many of your own children you can name. The parents who reject male names once they have seen a few or a lot of girls, or statistically significant amounts of girls, with the same name - they are the ones who are dropping the ball because nobody wants to be the only one picking up the ball and naming their son proudly. This is the root of the problem. Having a girl's name might corrupt someone and ruin their childhood and their life. I don't know how I feel about it, I think a lot of time that fear is overstated and the resentment for girls and their parents just sounds ugly.

It really ultimately depends on the name, and how usable it is. If I feel very strongly about wedging my grandmother's name on a boy somehow, I will find a way that works for me and him. If I feel very strongly that it's unusable, I will tend to avoid it for a child of either sex. I think there's still a limit to what names do sound attractive on a girl, and parents tend to avoid saddling them with anything large and lumbering and very masculine. Boys' parents want a lot softer world with a lot of interesting ambiguously derived names for their boys now, but they don't want to participate in the feminism of letting those names go and come back. They call the name "unusable," this is still a division of how we want to raise our boys into manly men with names that seem really quite unisex, heaven forfend we actually get over it and have some equality options, we've become so threatened by little baby girls' parents who want their half of that. It's unusable thereafter because the boys' parents just give away their half much of the time.

I don't really think most boy names that some girls have or equally distributed really make a boy's life too hard to have that name. Most names chosen for girls are not or haven't been popular for boys in ages. These sound the most feminine already. Others just sound more tomboyish, relatively retaining a lot more masculinity and still seem built for use by boys, and are still being used for boys enough to stay visible. You see how in England, Finley is still being used for boys to the full exclusion of girls? It's because they keep using it, that's why.

I hope somewhere in this, I answered your question. I didn't mean to write so much this time, but I think this issue keeps annoying people and it never really gets discussed. Some people like it, feel neutral, and some people just get so wound up. I feel sort of neutral, yet obviously annoyed about some of it.

[bebe]

With names like Ashley and Kelly being used for boys. I think Finley is rather harmless on a girl.
Im sure when people started naming there daughters Jamie people were outraged as it was "a boys name" but now... I look at it being completely unisex... (btw- Jaime for a girl.. LOVE it... in french "J'aime" is "I love you")

[smp123]

I actually like it. :) It's cute and sweet.