Has Elliott always been a girls name?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate giving little girls boys names. It's like saying there's something wrong with the girls names already there. People never name their boys girls names either, so it's pretty sexist.

+1 Giving a girl a boy's name seems to imply that being a girl isn't good enough. But you can name a little girl Elliott or Stan or Harry and she will still be a little girl at the end of the day. Why not embrace the fact that she's a little girl and give her a feminine name?

Being a girl is awesome. Women are strong. Our mothers, grandmothers and great grandmas were some mighty amazing women and they didn't need to be named Harold to be amazing.

So women are strong and amazing, but they’re not allowed to name their daughters something unfeminine? Mmkay.

Oh, please. You know what PP meant. This idea that men's names are inherently stronger is misogynist garbage. I, too, am fed up with parents giving their girls traditionally male names because they want something "strong-sounding."

+3. Just another variation on the theme that we women should learn to be more like men, instead of recognizing that women, and stuff that was historically associated with women, is pretty great in its own right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But that’s the thing...generally, no one is co-opting the truly masculine sounding names. They’re using names like Elliott that have a “feminine” cadence. That’s how Ashley, Leslie, and Vivian ended up as girls’ names; they already sounded feminine.

What's a "feminine cadence" about these names? I'm asking sincerely. Are you thinking, for example, that Elliott sounds like Elliette, and -ette is feminine? Or Ashley and Leslie end in -y, like Molly and Amy? Or Vivian is like Vivi-ann?

And in that case, wouldn't there be lots of girl named Noah (like Susannah and Rebekah!) or Logan ((like Log-ann!)?

I guess I feel like the names that will never be widely used for girls sound very...abrupt? John, Hank, Bob, Jake, etc. But the male names that are trending for girls sound like existing feminine names. Juliette, Colette, Elliott. Adrienne, Vivian, Ryan, Dylan. And so forth.

As another PP pointed out, Logan has been used as girl’s name for quite some time...it’s probably much more widely used than Elliott or any of the other names mentioned in this thread.

I'm looking at the top 10 boy names for 2017. Noah #2, feminine -ah ending. Logan #5, feminine -n ending, a long-time girl's name (in the top 1,000 for girls starting in 1988). Benjamin #6, Mason #7 - feminine -n ending again. Elijah #8, feminine -ah ending.

Maybe it's not true that people give girls boy names but don't give boys girl names?

[Anonymous]

Can we stop trying to give girls boy names? Girls should be able to stand on their own merits - teach your girls that much!

[Anonymous]

I love traditional boys names on girls! Sorry! You guys are reading way too much into it.

[Anonymous]

No, it’s not a girl’s name. But yes, it’s a trend to give the name to girls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But that’s the thing...generally, no one is co-opting the truly masculine sounding names. They’re using names like Elliott that have a “feminine” cadence. That’s how Ashley, Leslie, and Vivian ended up as girls’ names; they already sounded feminine.

What's a "feminine cadence" about these names? I'm asking sincerely. Are you thinking, for example, that Elliott sounds like Elliette, and -ette is feminine? Or Ashley and Leslie end in -y, like Molly and Amy? Or Vivian is like Vivi-ann?

And in that case, wouldn't there be lots of girl named Noah (like Susannah and Rebekah!) or Logan ((like Log-ann!)?

I guess I feel like the names that will never be widely used for girls sound very...abrupt? John, Hank, Bob, Jake, etc. But the male names that are trending for girls sound like existing feminine names. Juliette, Colette, Elliott. Adrienne, Vivian, Ryan, Dylan. And so forth.

As another PP pointed out, Logan has been used as girl’s name for quite some time...it’s probably much more widely used than Elliott or any of the other names mentioned in this thread.

I'm looking at the top 10 boy names for 2017. Noah #2, feminine -ah ending. Logan #5, feminine -n ending, a long-time girl's name (in the top 1,000 for girls starting in 1988). Benjamin #6, Mason #7 - feminine -n ending again. Elijah #8, feminine -ah ending.

Maybe it's not true that people give girls boy names but don't give boys girl names?

Oh dear. This post perfectly encapsulates our current naming train wreck. Whether a name is boy, girl, or unisex depends on the meaning (in some cases) and it’s history of usage, not the sounds it contains.

[Anonymous]

It makes me think of Friends, when Pheobe decides to name one of the boy babies Chandler and then the triplets are born and “Chandler is a girl”

A few years ago I read about a girl athlete named Chandler, (skiing or soccer? Maybe it was volleyball...) I totally wondered if her naming was a direct result of that friends episode, as I had never before Friends, or since... heard of anyone male or female named Chandler.

[Anonymous]

One of my mother's closest friends is named Elliott. She must be 70plus so it is not a new thing at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One of my mother's closest friends is named Elliott. She must be 70plus so it is not a new thing at all.

+1. My mother is from a sort of ritzy old money town - lots of her female friends have surnames like Elliott, Locke, Brady, Bowen, McKay, etc. as first names. It is an old money thing to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of my mother's closest friends is named Elliott. She must be 70plus so it is not a new thing at all.

+1. My mother is from a sort of ritzy old money town - lots of her female friends have surnames like Elliott, Locke, Brady, Bowen, McKay, etc. as first names. It is an old money thing to do.

Which is why it’s so trashy if you’re not old money and particularly if you’re using a surname that isn’t a family name to use a last name as first name.