Do you think this Gen X name will ever be popular again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not gen x-specific but a classic name that's been around forever. So much the better it's not popular now!

??? Why would someone want to give their child an unpopular name? Weird.

NP. Why would someone want to give their child a popular name that so many others will have? Weird.

Because most of us want our children to have a recognizable and popular name?

It’s not like a name is some precious commodity where obscurity bestows novelty and makes a child more unique or something.

Interesting. We deliberately excluded all of the popular names. We chose common names that were less popular. We did not want our kids having to deal with being one of 4 kids in the class with the same name and having to use a last initial to separate. We even know two kids who have the same first name and same last initial so they have to use their full first and last name to avoid confusion in class. A royal pain for everyone. My kids are very glad that they are are not Sophia A, Daniel B, Olivia C, or James D. We have run into a small handful of kids with their names over the years, but they love having more unique names. It's not for novelty, but for convenience of not having to be confused with several other kids with the same name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not gen x-specific but a classic name that's been around forever. So much the better it's not popular now!

??? Why would someone want to give their child an unpopular name? Weird.

NP. Why would someone want to give their child a popular name that so many others will have? Weird.

There are basically no names where that is true anymore, though. The most popular girl names now will account for around .1% of all babies that year. Compare that to the 70s when nearly 4% of all baby girls were named Jennifer.

There's more diversity of names in general, which somewhat unexpectedly has the benefit of making even the most popular names more unique. So you can name your kid Charlotte or Olivia and odds are actually decent they will never be in a class with a child who has the same name.

And conversely, you can give your kid a much less popular name and, whether by random chance or by micro-trends in your area/socio-economic class, they may encounter multiple kids with that name as they grow up, even if it's ranked way down in the 900s or something. I've seen this happen.

The regional distribution (what you call microtrends) is significantly more important than a national average. As we've navigated through various social groups (school, church, scouts, etc), we have noticed a lot more repetition of names than the national statistics would suggest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not gen x-specific but a classic name that's been around forever. So much the better it's not popular now!

??? Why would someone want to give their child an unpopular name? Weird.

NP. Why would someone want to give their child a popular name that so many others will have? Weird.

There are basically no names where that is true anymore, though. The most popular girl names now will account for around .1% of all babies that year. Compare that to the 70s when nearly 4% of all baby girls were named Jennifer.

There's more diversity of names in general, which somewhat unexpectedly has the benefit of making even the most popular names more unique. So you can name your kid Charlotte or Olivia and odds are actually decent they will never be in a class with a child who has the same name.

And conversely, you can give your kid a much less popular name and, whether by random chance or by micro-trends in your area/socio-economic class, they may encounter multiple kids with that name as they grow up, even if it's ranked way down in the 900s or something. I've seen this happen.

I think the other factor is data collection. My parents had no way of knowing they were giving me the most popular name. They didn't have a lot of friends who already had babies and they didn't have the internet. Now parents can look up baby name rankings, baby name videos, groups etc so it's a lot easier to find out a names popularity in advance.

I work in a job with elementary aged kids and I've definitely seen lower ranking names be more popular in some instances than top ten names.

I think this is an interesting point!

OP, I didn't think much about popularity when I was naming my kids (other than not wanting them to have the same name as a bunch of their classmates) but I love Christina regardless of its popularity.

[Anonymous]

Please please spell it Xtina!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not gen x-specific but a classic name that's been around forever. So much the better it's not popular now!

??? Why would someone want to give their child an unpopular name? Weird.

Why would someone want to give their child a boring name that half a dozen classmates will have? Weird.

Why? Because they like the name. What's weird is not choosing a name you like because you're worried about what other people will do. Have you always been a pu$$y or is it some new thing that comes with being a parent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not gen x-specific but a classic name that's been around forever. So much the better it's not popular now!

??? Why would someone want to give their child an unpopular name? Weird.

NP. Why would someone want to give their child a popular name that so many others will have? Weird.

Because most of us want our children to have a recognizable and popular name?

It’s not like a name is some precious commodity where obscurity bestows novelty and makes a child more unique or something.

I have a feeling you don't even know how stupid you sound.

You have no idea what "most of us" want. I don't know anybody who deliberately chose a name because it was popular, in fact it is more likely they decide to name their kid a name they like despite it being popular.

Seems like you may also think that using phrases like "obscurity bestows novelty" makes you sound smart but trust me, it doesn't.

Oh toots. I promise you I would lap you in an intellectual race. Maybe sit this one out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not gen x-specific but a classic name that's been around forever. So much the better it's not popular now!

??? Why would someone want to give their child an unpopular name? Weird.

NP. Why would someone want to give their child a popular name that so many others will have? Weird.

Because most of us want our children to have a recognizable and popular name?

It’s not like a name is some precious commodity where obscurity bestows novelty and makes a child more unique or something.

Interesting. We deliberately excluded all of the popular names. We chose common names that were less popular. We did not want our kids having to deal with being one of 4 kids in the class with the same name and having to use a last initial to separate. We even know two kids who have the same first name and same last initial so they have to use their full first and last name to avoid confusion in class. A royal pain for everyone. My kids are very glad that they are are not Sophia A, Daniel B, Olivia C, or James D. We have run into a small handful of kids with their names over the years, but they love having more unique names. It's not for novelty, but for convenience of not having to be confused with several other kids with the same name.

No, they're not. YOU are. Because you think you were clever or something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not gen x-specific but a classic name that's been around forever. So much the better it's not popular now!

??? Why would someone want to give their child an unpopular name? Weird.

NP. Why would someone want to give their child a popular name that so many others will have? Weird.

Because most of us want our children to have a recognizable and popular name?

It’s not like a name is some precious commodity where obscurity bestows novelty and makes a child more unique or something.

I have a feeling you don't even know how stupid you sound.

You have no idea what "most of us" want. I don't know anybody who deliberately chose a name because it was popular, in fact it is more likely they decide to name their kid a name they like despite it being popular.

Seems like you may also think that using phrases like "obscurity bestows novelty" makes you sound smart but trust me, it doesn't.

Oh toots. I promise you I would lap you in an intellectual race. Maybe sit this one out.

NP but I agree that most people want a somewhat unique name (though not a "made up" name). This board is full of threads asking if Henry/Nora/Aiden/Sophie etc is overused.

In response to OP, I like Christina and I think you should go for it. I associate it strongly with Christina Aguilera, but future generations won't.

[Anonymous]

Christina is one of my favorite names. It's classic, international and strong.

Not Christine, Christy, Tina, or anything with a K.

- mom to boys

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not gen x-specific but a classic name that's been around forever. So much the better it's not popular now!

??? Why would someone want to give their child an unpopular name? Weird.

NP. Why would someone want to give their child a popular name that so many others will have? Weird.

Because most of us want our children to have a recognizable and popular name?

It’s not like a name is some precious commodity where obscurity bestows novelty and makes a child more unique or something.

Interesting. We deliberately excluded all of the popular names. We chose common names that were less popular. We did not want our kids having to deal with being one of 4 kids in the class with the same name and having to use a last initial to separate. We even know two kids who have the same first name and same last initial so they have to use their full first and last name to avoid confusion in class. A royal pain for everyone. My kids are very glad that they are are not Sophia A, Daniel B, Olivia C, or James D. We have run into a small handful of kids with their names over the years, but they love having more unique names. It's not for novelty, but for convenience of not having to be confused with several other kids with the same name.

No, they're not. YOU are. Because you think you were clever or something.

No, my kids mention it when they talk about Daniel and we get confused whether it is Daniel B, Daniel S or Daniel E. They have both periodically said that they are glad that they have a name that other kids don't have. My kids are middle schoolers so they are experienced enough to be able to distinguish between what they like vs what they think we like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not gen x-specific but a classic name that's been around forever. So much the better it's not popular now!

??? Why would someone want to give their child an unpopular name? Weird.

NP. Why would someone want to give their child a popular name that so many others will have? Weird.

Because most of us want our children to have a recognizable and popular name?

It’s not like a name is some precious commodity where obscurity bestows novelty and makes a child more unique or something.

Interesting. We deliberately excluded all of the popular names. We chose common names that were less popular. We did not want our kids having to deal with being one of 4 kids in the class with the same name and having to use a last initial to separate. We even know two kids who have the same first name and same last initial so they have to use their full first and last name to avoid confusion in class. A royal pain for everyone. My kids are very glad that they are are not Sophia A, Daniel B, Olivia C, or James D. We have run into a small handful of kids with their names over the years, but they love having more unique names. It's not for novelty, but for convenience of not having to be confused with several other kids with the same name.

No, they're not. YOU are. Because you think you were clever or something.

No, my kids mention it when they talk about Daniel and we get confused whether it is Daniel B, Daniel S or Daniel E. They have both periodically said that they are glad that they have a name that other kids don't have. My kids are middle schoolers so they are experienced enough to be able to distinguish between what they like vs what they think we like.

Also, we chose common but infrequent names. They are not unusual names or clever names. We tried to avoid the top 100 or so names just to avoid the frequency. But there are a ton of good names that are common, well known names that are not unique, clever, trendy or frequently used.

[Anonymous]

Henry VIII nearly married Christina of Denmark.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Henry VIII nearly married Christina of Denmark.

And did marry three women named Catherine. As well as two women named Anne.

Jane’s parents obviously avoided the names on the “Top 100” lists of the late 1400s and early 1500s. Good for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not gen x-specific but a classic name that's been around forever. So much the better it's not popular now!

??? Why would someone want to give their child an unpopular name? Weird.

NP. Why would someone want to give their child a popular name that so many others will have? Weird.

There are basically no names where that is true anymore, though. The most popular girl names now will account for around .1% of all babies that year. Compare that to the 70s when nearly 4% of all baby girls were named Jennifer.

There's more diversity of names in general, which somewhat unexpectedly has the benefit of making even the most popular names more unique. So you can name your kid Charlotte or Olivia and odds are actually decent they will never be in a class with a child who has the same name.

And conversely, you can give your kid a much less popular name and, whether by random chance or by micro-trends in your area/socio-economic class, they may encounter multiple kids with that name as they grow up, even if it's ranked way down in the 900s or something. I've seen this happen.

The regional distribution (what you call microtrends) is significantly more important than a national average. As we've navigated through various social groups (school, church, scouts, etc), we have noticed a lot more repetition of names than the national statistics would suggest.

This is very true.

[Anonymous]

It’s popular in Germany, or it was 20 years ago. I’ve had 3 Au pairs named Christina.