Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 20 of 46
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    This is ridiculous, and offensive to me, and I wouldn't even touch those names. I know people with ALL of those names, I HAVE one as my own, and you are saying they need to be 'retired?' What does that mean? Are you just going to pull them from the universe with your large, opinionated hands and put them in some kind of poisonous, cosmic filing cabinet?

    You have another post about reviving names that I would consider retired. The names you have listed here have far better history, reputation, and sound than your 'Hollywood classics' you have such an affinity for.
    I'm not feeling incredibly profound at the moment. Check back later.

  2. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Columbus, OH
    These names are classics for a reason.

    They stand the test of time.

    They weather the storm of trendiness.

    If I said I know a brother and sister called Sarah and John, you can't really pinpoint the age they'd be, as they could be any age.

    However, if I said I know a brother and sister called Ashley and Kyle, you can pretty much work out what age range they're most likely to be in.

    It's that timelessness of those names that appeals to parents.

    I'd much rather see names like Nevaeh retired!!!!
    ⋆ Margaret Mary ⋆

    Elisabeth Aurelia ⋆ Iris Christabel ⋆ Ada Marianne ⋆ Harriet Cordelia
    Dorothea Helen ⋆ Charlotte Gwen ⋆ Josephine Violet ⋆ Sarah Clementine

    Asher Benedict ⋆ Joah Valentine ⋆ Samuel Archer ⋆ Nicholas Bertram
    August Lysander ⋆ John Willoughby ⋆ Gabriel Zachariah ⋆ Tobias Nathaniel

    Current guilty pleasures: Corliss + Winston

    Everything has beauty, but not everyone sees it.

  3. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    I'm torn, some of the names I agree with. I've used 2 of the names you've listed as middles for my sons and now they do feel just like filler names and I wish I had gone with something more interesting or personal to us. I'm considering another for my current pregnancy, but only because my other half wants a normal name to balance the more unique first and second middle names I like.

    But these names are classic for a reason, so if someone has a reason for loving them I think they should go for it, but I find them a bit bland or overdone so they've lost their sparkle for me.
    Mum to Mousie, Foo, Bumptious and Pudding.

  4. #22
    Join Date
    May 2013
    You think certain names need did you so eloquently put it? "Be slaughtered"...because... "They’re used in too many cross sections of class, ethnic, or religious backgrounds."

    I really hope I'm misunderstanding you, because this comment makes you sound like a bigot.

    If you think "classic" names are boring, fine. Don't use them. But they have stood the test of time and are popular on a global level because they hold meaning for people from many different walks of life. Personally, I think that's a beautiful thing!

  5. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Most of those names are/were popular for a reason - they have a long(er) history of usage and appeal to a broader set of social backgrounds than many "trendier" names. Sure they may not be very exciting, but they are the kind of names that would work well on (almost) any child and grow into them as they get older.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts