Why are people in the DC area so weird about name popularity?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get these comments that are like "oh they thought they were being so unique by naming their kid Milo but he's one of three in class." First of all, Milo is ranked #120 -- if there are three of them in one class, it's a freak accident unlikely to be repeated in that child's life. And second, since name popularity is published online and widely reported on, I doubt anyone is using a popular name without knowing it's popular. Parents giving their kids more popular names know they are more popular and are okay with it, and thus by definition cannot think they are being "so unique." If anything, they are bucking the apparent trend of obsessing over giving your name a totally original, rare name and just saying "screw it, we just really like this name and it's okay if our special snowflake sometimes shares a name with a classmate or coworker."

Milo is ranked #120 in the nation, but do you think it is ranked #120 in Little Rock? In Arlington, VA? In Arlington, TX? Names differ in popularity by region, and that is why we had 2 girls named Xanthe, 2 girls named Sage, and 2 boys named Gray in my kid’s 1st grade year in ny (45 kids total). Not a single Jacob.

... and? Who cares? Why does the popularity of the name matter? All of the names you just mentioned are not very popular overall, too, so even if the kid winds up in a little bubble where there are a couple in school with them, in the rest of their life they will have a fairly uncommon name.

So why does it matter? Why fixate?

Answered in the first comment posted-status. Giving your kid a trending name is often judged as low class. DC is a pretty status obsessed place and no parent here want to use Milo and in three years see it has become the next Brayden.

Brayden may be considered a "low class" name but it's not particularly popular. It's ranked #190, not far on the list from names like Finn, Oscar, Nico, and Max, all names used by people I know who valued a name that wasn't "too popular."

The popularity of a name is not what makes it low or high class. If anything, an obsession with choosing an "original" name is precisely what leads to those Utah manglings like Brayden/Jayden/Kayden or Kinsleigh/Paisley/Brynleigh. Those are efforts to be unique. It would have been been classier to just name their kids William and Sofia.

Popularity is similar but not the same as trends. Did you not read what I wrote, or can you not understand the difference?

A name Brayden is not as popular as James, but it is absolutely more trendy. Any name chart curve can show this information. It’s not popularity that makes a name low class (to some people) it’s trendiness.

Thank you, my reading comprehension is fine. This thread is about popularity, if you wanted to make a distinction about "trendiness" then you should have said so. Brayden is not that popular of a name. It might be trendy, but I think the real issue is that it trends among people who lack status. It is popular among middle class families in places like Utah, which makes it "low class" to a UMC person living in a coastal city. The issue is not its popularity but its social coding.

By comparison, look at the trend of the name Ezra, which has recently followed the same trajectory as Brayden but a few years behind: https://www.behindthename.com/name/brayden/top/united-states?compare=Ezra&type=percent

It's a similarly "spiky" name reflecting a very sudden interest in the name -- a trend. Yet Ezra is coded as intellectual, coastal, and cosmopolitan. It is currently much more popular than Brayden. But it's considered as more "high class" than Brayden.

So no, it's not just that popular names are viewed as more "low class".

Ezra is only viewed (by some) as more cosmopolitan and intellectual because it’s “a few years behind”, as you yourself acknowledged.

Soon enough the masses will catch on that “cosmopolitan intellectual” parents are using it and use it too and it will be just as plebeian as Mason or Braydon or something. This phenomenon has been widely documented.

I disagree. People in coastal cities will view Brayden and Ezra totally differently even when they have similar popularity because of other associations. Ezra is one of those "old person" names that have become popular recently. A lot of people using it are likely naming after a relative (fun fact: Ezra is a Hebrew name and in Ashkenazi tradition, you are not supposed to name children after living relatives, so there's kind of a built in name cycle in some Jewish communities as people name children after great-grandparents but rarely after grandparents) or have positive associations with famous Ezras like Ezra Pound.

Meanwhile, Brayden is one of those invented names that didn't exist before the year 2000. It has no history and thus has a much narrower association with the sorts of people who choose names like Brayden now, who are largely not well-educated elites in large cities.

They may have similar popularity spikes, but they will never have similar cultural or class associations because they are simply very different names.

Look, I’m sorry that you used a trendy name for your kid. You can disagree all you want but there is plenty of data and reporting on this phenomenon.

Names get popular and trend because the masses observe what names have cultural cachet and prestige and then use them for their own children. Then these names become “too popular” or too “common” and have less prestige so the masses move on to the next elite-sounding name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get these comments that are like "oh they thought they were being so unique by naming their kid Milo but he's one of three in class." First of all, Milo is ranked #120 -- if there are three of them in one class, it's a freak accident unlikely to be repeated in that child's life. And second, since name popularity is published online and widely reported on, I doubt anyone is using a popular name without knowing it's popular. Parents giving their kids more popular names know they are more popular and are okay with it, and thus by definition cannot think they are being "so unique." If anything, they are bucking the apparent trend of obsessing over giving your name a totally original, rare name and just saying "screw it, we just really like this name and it's okay if our special snowflake sometimes shares a name with a classmate or coworker."

Milo is ranked #120 in the nation, but do you think it is ranked #120 in Little Rock? In Arlington, VA? In Arlington, TX? Names differ in popularity by region, and that is why we had 2 girls named Xanthe, 2 girls named Sage, and 2 boys named Gray in my kid’s 1st grade year in ny (45 kids total). Not a single Jacob.

... and? Who cares? Why does the popularity of the name matter? All of the names you just mentioned are not very popular overall, too, so even if the kid winds up in a little bubble where there are a couple in school with them, in the rest of their life they will have a fairly uncommon name.

So why does it matter? Why fixate?

Answered in the first comment posted-status. Giving your kid a trending name is often judged as low class. DC is a pretty status obsessed place and no parent here want to use Milo and in three years see it has become the next Brayden.

Brayden may be considered a "low class" name but it's not particularly popular. It's ranked #190, not far on the list from names like Finn, Oscar, Nico, and Max, all names used by people I know who valued a name that wasn't "too popular."

The popularity of a name is not what makes it low or high class. If anything, an obsession with choosing an "original" name is precisely what leads to those Utah manglings like Brayden/Jayden/Kayden or Kinsleigh/Paisley/Brynleigh. Those are efforts to be unique. It would have been been classier to just name their kids William and Sofia.

Popularity is similar but not the same as trends. Did you not read what I wrote, or can you not understand the difference?

A name Brayden is not as popular as James, but it is absolutely more trendy. Any name chart curve can show this information. It’s not popularity that makes a name low class (to some people) it’s trendiness.

Thank you, my reading comprehension is fine. This thread is about popularity, if you wanted to make a distinction about "trendiness" then you should have said so. Brayden is not that popular of a name. It might be trendy, but I think the real issue is that it trends among people who lack status. It is popular among middle class families in places like Utah, which makes it "low class" to a UMC person living in a coastal city. The issue is not its popularity but its social coding.

By comparison, look at the trend of the name Ezra, which has recently followed the same trajectory as Brayden but a few years behind: https://www.behindthename.com/name/brayden/top/united-states?compare=Ezra&type=percent

It's a similarly "spiky" name reflecting a very sudden interest in the name -- a trend. Yet Ezra is coded as intellectual, coastal, and cosmopolitan. It is currently much more popular than Brayden. But it's considered as more "high class" than Brayden.

So no, it's not just that popular names are viewed as more "low class".

Ezra is only viewed (by some) as more cosmopolitan and intellectual because it’s “a few years behind”, as you yourself acknowledged.

Soon enough the masses will catch on that “cosmopolitan intellectual” parents are using it and use it too and it will be just as plebeian as Mason or Braydon or something. This phenomenon has been widely documented.

I disagree. People in coastal cities will view Brayden and Ezra totally differently even when they have similar popularity because of other associations. Ezra is one of those "old person" names that have become popular recently. A lot of people using it are likely naming after a relative (fun fact: Ezra is a Hebrew name and in Ashkenazi tradition, you are not supposed to name children after living relatives, so there's kind of a built in name cycle in some Jewish communities as people name children after great-grandparents but rarely after grandparents) or have positive associations with famous Ezras like Ezra Pound.

Meanwhile, Brayden is one of those invented names that didn't exist before the year 2000. It has no history and thus has a much narrower association with the sorts of people who choose names like Brayden now, who are largely not well-educated elites in large cities.

They may have similar popularity spikes, but they will never have similar cultural or class associations because they are simply very different names.

Look, I’m sorry that you used a trendy name for your kid. You can disagree all you want but there is plenty of data and reporting on this phenomenon.

Names get popular and trend because the masses observe what names have cultural cachet and prestige and then use them for their own children. Then these names become “too popular” or too “common” and have less prestige so the masses move on to the next elite-sounding name.

Can you link to this "data and reporting"? Most of what I've read talks about how naming trends are just super diverse now and there are no more juggernaut names like Jennifer anymore. There was also this interesting article in the Post last year about how, as parents have started emphasizing individualism and uniqueness in baby names, trends become concentrated on sounds within the name. The article mostly focuses on name suffixes, but I've also seen commentary on sites like Nameberry about how names tend to cluster around popular starting letters or sounds, or how there are waves of trends around shorter versus longer names (for instance, the general trend of giving girls longer three- and four-syllable names has given way to a trend of shorter one- and two-syllable names, which has resulted in many of the nicknames for those longer names becoming popular stand along names for younger kids).

Anyway, I think your analysis is off, and not because I'm defensive about what I named my kid. I think you are viewing it narrowly as someone who is obsessed with the "prestige" of names, which in itself indicates a striver focus. In other words, exactly what others on the thread have mentioned -- DC has a striver culture of people who are determined to "win" at baby naming, and strivers are more focused on giving kids unusual names. Interestingly, a lot of the wealthy people I know have given their kids pretty popular, common names recently. I wonder if being wealthy allows them not to worry so much that their child's name will make or break them. Their kids are going to be fine no matter what, so they can go ahead and name them Zoe or Noah and not worry about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get these comments that are like "oh they thought they were being so unique by naming their kid Milo but he's one of three in class." First of all, Milo is ranked #120 -- if there are three of them in one class, it's a freak accident unlikely to be repeated in that child's life. And second, since name popularity is published online and widely reported on, I doubt anyone is using a popular name without knowing it's popular. Parents giving their kids more popular names know they are more popular and are okay with it, and thus by definition cannot think they are being "so unique." If anything, they are bucking the apparent trend of obsessing over giving your name a totally original, rare name and just saying "screw it, we just really like this name and it's okay if our special snowflake sometimes shares a name with a classmate or coworker."

Milo is ranked #120 in the nation, but do you think it is ranked #120 in Little Rock? In Arlington, VA? In Arlington, TX? Names differ in popularity by region, and that is why we had 2 girls named Xanthe, 2 girls named Sage, and 2 boys named Gray in my kid’s 1st grade year in ny (45 kids total). Not a single Jacob.

... and? Who cares? Why does the popularity of the name matter? All of the names you just mentioned are not very popular overall, too, so even if the kid winds up in a little bubble where there are a couple in school with them, in the rest of their life they will have a fairly uncommon name.

So why does it matter? Why fixate?

Answered in the first comment posted-status. Giving your kid a trending name is often judged as low class. DC is a pretty status obsessed place and no parent here want to use Milo and in three years see it has become the next Brayden.

Brayden may be considered a "low class" name but it's not particularly popular. It's ranked #190, not far on the list from names like Finn, Oscar, Nico, and Max, all names used by people I know who valued a name that wasn't "too popular."

The popularity of a name is not what makes it low or high class. If anything, an obsession with choosing an "original" name is precisely what leads to those Utah manglings like Brayden/Jayden/Kayden or Kinsleigh/Paisley/Brynleigh. Those are efforts to be unique. It would have been been classier to just name their kids William and Sofia.

Popularity is similar but not the same as trends. Did you not read what I wrote, or can you not understand the difference?

A name Brayden is not as popular as James, but it is absolutely more trendy. Any name chart curve can show this information. It’s not popularity that makes a name low class (to some people) it’s trendiness.

Thank you, my reading comprehension is fine. This thread is about popularity, if you wanted to make a distinction about "trendiness" then you should have said so. Brayden is not that popular of a name. It might be trendy, but I think the real issue is that it trends among people who lack status. It is popular among middle class families in places like Utah, which makes it "low class" to a UMC person living in a coastal city. The issue is not its popularity but its social coding.

By comparison, look at the trend of the name Ezra, which has recently followed the same trajectory as Brayden but a few years behind: https://www.behindthename.com/name/brayden/top/united-states?compare=Ezra&type=percent

It's a similarly "spiky" name reflecting a very sudden interest in the name -- a trend. Yet Ezra is coded as intellectual, coastal, and cosmopolitan. It is currently much more popular than Brayden. But it's considered as more "high class" than Brayden.

So no, it's not just that popular names are viewed as more "low class".

Ezra is only viewed (by some) as more cosmopolitan and intellectual because it’s “a few years behind”, as you yourself acknowledged.

Soon enough the masses will catch on that “cosmopolitan intellectual” parents are using it and use it too and it will be just as plebeian as Mason or Braydon or something. This phenomenon has been widely documented.

I disagree. People in coastal cities will view Brayden and Ezra totally differently even when they have similar popularity because of other associations. Ezra is one of those "old person" names that have become popular recently. A lot of people using it are likely naming after a relative (fun fact: Ezra is a Hebrew name and in Ashkenazi tradition, you are not supposed to name children after living relatives, so there's kind of a built in name cycle in some Jewish communities as people name children after great-grandparents but rarely after grandparents) or have positive associations with famous Ezras like Ezra Pound.

Meanwhile, Brayden is one of those invented names that didn't exist before the year 2000. It has no history and thus has a much narrower association with the sorts of people who choose names like Brayden now, who are largely not well-educated elites in large cities.

They may have similar popularity spikes, but they will never have similar cultural or class associations because they are simply very different names.

Look, I’m sorry that you used a trendy name for your kid. You can disagree all you want but there is plenty of data and reporting on this phenomenon.

Names get popular and trend because the masses observe what names have cultural cachet and prestige and then use them for their own children. Then these names become “too popular” or too “common” and have less prestige so the masses move on to the next elite-sounding name.

Can you link to this "data and reporting"? Most of what I've read talks about how naming trends are just super diverse now and there are no more juggernaut names like Jennifer anymore. There was also this interesting article in the Post last year about how, as parents have started emphasizing individualism and uniqueness in baby names, trends become concentrated on sounds within the name. The article mostly focuses on name suffixes, but I've also seen commentary on sites like Nameberry about how names tend to cluster around popular starting letters or sounds, or how there are waves of trends around shorter versus longer names (for instance, the general trend of giving girls longer three- and four-syllable names has given way to a trend of shorter one- and two-syllable names, which has resulted in many of the nicknames for those longer names becoming popular stand along names for younger kids).

Anyway, I think your analysis is off, and not because I'm defensive about what I named my kid. I think you are viewing it narrowly as someone who is obsessed with the "prestige" of names, which in itself indicates a striver focus. In other words, exactly what others on the thread have mentioned -- DC has a striver culture of people who are determined to "win" at baby naming, and strivers are more focused on giving kids unusual names. Interestingly, a lot of the wealthy people I know have given their kids pretty popular, common names recently. I wonder if being wealthy allows them not to worry so much that their child's name will make or break them. Their kids are going to be fine no matter what, so they can go ahead and name them Zoe or Noah and not worry about it.

Sorry, here's the link to that Post story. It's worth a read.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2024/baby-names-trendy-suffixes/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get these comments that are like "oh they thought they were being so unique by naming their kid Milo but he's one of three in class." First of all, Milo is ranked #120 -- if there are three of them in one class, it's a freak accident unlikely to be repeated in that child's life. And second, since name popularity is published online and widely reported on, I doubt anyone is using a popular name without knowing it's popular. Parents giving their kids more popular names know they are more popular and are okay with it, and thus by definition cannot think they are being "so unique." If anything, they are bucking the apparent trend of obsessing over giving your name a totally original, rare name and just saying "screw it, we just really like this name and it's okay if our special snowflake sometimes shares a name with a classmate or coworker."

Milo is ranked #120 in the nation, but do you think it is ranked #120 in Little Rock? In Arlington, VA? In Arlington, TX? Names differ in popularity by region, and that is why we had 2 girls named Xanthe, 2 girls named Sage, and 2 boys named Gray in my kid’s 1st grade year in ny (45 kids total). Not a single Jacob.

... and? Who cares? Why does the popularity of the name matter? All of the names you just mentioned are not very popular overall, too, so even if the kid winds up in a little bubble where there are a couple in school with them, in the rest of their life they will have a fairly uncommon name.

So why does it matter? Why fixate?

Answered in the first comment posted-status. Giving your kid a trending name is often judged as low class. DC is a pretty status obsessed place and no parent here want to use Milo and in three years see it has become the next Brayden.

Brayden may be considered a "low class" name but it's not particularly popular. It's ranked #190, not far on the list from names like Finn, Oscar, Nico, and Max, all names used by people I know who valued a name that wasn't "too popular."

The popularity of a name is not what makes it low or high class. If anything, an obsession with choosing an "original" name is precisely what leads to those Utah manglings like Brayden/Jayden/Kayden or Kinsleigh/Paisley/Brynleigh. Those are efforts to be unique. It would have been been classier to just name their kids William and Sofia.

Popularity is similar but not the same as trends. Did you not read what I wrote, or can you not understand the difference?

A name Brayden is not as popular as James, but it is absolutely more trendy. Any name chart curve can show this information. It’s not popularity that makes a name low class (to some people) it’s trendiness.

Thank you, my reading comprehension is fine. This thread is about popularity, if you wanted to make a distinction about "trendiness" then you should have said so. Brayden is not that popular of a name. It might be trendy, but I think the real issue is that it trends among people who lack status. It is popular among middle class families in places like Utah, which makes it "low class" to a UMC person living in a coastal city. The issue is not its popularity but its social coding.

By comparison, look at the trend of the name Ezra, which has recently followed the same trajectory as Brayden but a few years behind: https://www.behindthename.com/name/brayden/top/united-states?compare=Ezra&type=percent

It's a similarly "spiky" name reflecting a very sudden interest in the name -- a trend. Yet Ezra is coded as intellectual, coastal, and cosmopolitan. It is currently much more popular than Brayden. But it's considered as more "high class" than Brayden.

So no, it's not just that popular names are viewed as more "low class".

Ezra is only viewed (by some) as more cosmopolitan and intellectual because it’s “a few years behind”, as you yourself acknowledged.

Soon enough the masses will catch on that “cosmopolitan intellectual” parents are using it and use it too and it will be just as plebeian as Mason or Braydon or something. This phenomenon has been widely documented.

I disagree. People in coastal cities will view Brayden and Ezra totally differently even when they have similar popularity because of other associations. Ezra is one of those "old person" names that have become popular recently. A lot of people using it are likely naming after a relative (fun fact: Ezra is a Hebrew name and in Ashkenazi tradition, you are not supposed to name children after living relatives, so there's kind of a built in name cycle in some Jewish communities as people name children after great-grandparents but rarely after grandparents) or have positive associations with famous Ezras like Ezra Pound.

Meanwhile, Brayden is one of those invented names that didn't exist before the year 2000. It has no history and thus has a much narrower association with the sorts of people who choose names like Brayden now, who are largely not well-educated elites in large cities.

They may have similar popularity spikes, but they will never have similar cultural or class associations because they are simply very different names.

It's trendy because it has a trendy sound (ah ending). Plenty of Jewish kids have great grandfathers named Irving and Morton and no one is using those names.

[Anonymous]

When I moved to our FxCo neighborhood about 20 years ago, a neighbor mom upon meeting my preschool age DD, immediately expressed disappointment: DD’s name was THE name they had selected for their future DD! And any time I ran into this neighbor she kept bringing this up, “we can’t use THAT name and now have to come up with something else…” Weirdly, her DS was one of about 10 Jacks in our development. She ended up naming her DD a near identical name to DD. (Think Eliza v. Elisa)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get these comments that are like "oh they thought they were being so unique by naming their kid Milo but he's one of three in class." First of all, Milo is ranked #120 -- if there are three of them in one class, it's a freak accident unlikely to be repeated in that child's life. And second, since name popularity is published online and widely reported on, I doubt anyone is using a popular name without knowing it's popular. Parents giving their kids more popular names know they are more popular and are okay with it, and thus by definition cannot think they are being "so unique." If anything, they are bucking the apparent trend of obsessing over giving your name a totally original, rare name and just saying "screw it, we just really like this name and it's okay if our special snowflake sometimes shares a name with a classmate or coworker."

Milo is ranked #120 in the nation, but do you think it is ranked #120 in Little Rock? In Arlington, VA? In Arlington, TX? Names differ in popularity by region, and that is why we had 2 girls named Xanthe, 2 girls named Sage, and 2 boys named Gray in my kid’s 1st grade year in ny (45 kids total). Not a single Jacob.

... and? Who cares? Why does the popularity of the name matter? All of the names you just mentioned are not very popular overall, too, so even if the kid winds up in a little bubble where there are a couple in school with them, in the rest of their life they will have a fairly uncommon name.

So why does it matter? Why fixate?

Answered in the first comment posted-status. Giving your kid a trending name is often judged as low class. DC is a pretty status obsessed place and no parent here want to use Milo and in three years see it has become the next Brayden.

Brayden may be considered a "low class" name but it's not particularly popular. It's ranked #190, not far on the list from names like Finn, Oscar, Nico, and Max, all names used by people I know who valued a name that wasn't "too popular."

The popularity of a name is not what makes it low or high class. If anything, an obsession with choosing an "original" name is precisely what leads to those Utah manglings like Brayden/Jayden/Kayden or Kinsleigh/Paisley/Brynleigh. Those are efforts to be unique. It would have been been classier to just name their kids William and Sofia.

Popularity is similar but not the same as trends. Did you not read what I wrote, or can you not understand the difference?

A name Brayden is not as popular as James, but it is absolutely more trendy. Any name chart curve can show this information. It’s not popularity that makes a name low class (to some people) it’s trendiness.

Thank you, my reading comprehension is fine. This thread is about popularity, if you wanted to make a distinction about "trendiness" then you should have said so. Brayden is not that popular of a name. It might be trendy, but I think the real issue is that it trends among people who lack status. It is popular among middle class families in places like Utah, which makes it "low class" to a UMC person living in a coastal city. The issue is not its popularity but its social coding.

By comparison, look at the trend of the name Ezra, which has recently followed the same trajectory as Brayden but a few years behind: https://www.behindthename.com/name/brayden/top/united-states?compare=Ezra&type=percent

It's a similarly "spiky" name reflecting a very sudden interest in the name -- a trend. Yet Ezra is coded as intellectual, coastal, and cosmopolitan. It is currently much more popular than Brayden. But it's considered as more "high class" than Brayden.

So no, it's not just that popular names are viewed as more "low class".

Ezra is only viewed (by some) as more cosmopolitan and intellectual because it’s “a few years behind”, as you yourself acknowledged.

Soon enough the masses will catch on that “cosmopolitan intellectual” parents are using it and use it too and it will be just as plebeian as Mason or Braydon or something. This phenomenon has been widely documented.

I disagree. People in coastal cities will view Brayden and Ezra totally differently even when they have similar popularity because of other associations. Ezra is one of those "old person" names that have become popular recently. A lot of people using it are likely naming after a relative (fun fact: Ezra is a Hebrew name and in Ashkenazi tradition, you are not supposed to name children after living relatives, so there's kind of a built in name cycle in some Jewish communities as people name children after great-grandparents but rarely after grandparents) or have positive associations with famous Ezras like Ezra Pound.

Meanwhile, Brayden is one of those invented names that didn't exist before the year 2000. It has no history and thus has a much narrower association with the sorts of people who choose names like Brayden now, who are largely not well-educated elites in large cities.

They may have similar popularity spikes, but they will never have similar cultural or class associations because they are simply very different names.

It's trendy because it has a trendy sound (ah ending). Plenty of Jewish kids have great grandfathers named Irving and Morton and no one is using those names.

According to the PP, this makes Irving and Morton very "prestigious" names that will confer a high social status on you and your family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get these comments that are like "oh they thought they were being so unique by naming their kid Milo but he's one of three in class." First of all, Milo is ranked #120 -- if there are three of them in one class, it's a freak accident unlikely to be repeated in that child's life. And second, since name popularity is published online and widely reported on, I doubt anyone is using a popular name without knowing it's popular. Parents giving their kids more popular names know they are more popular and are okay with it, and thus by definition cannot think they are being "so unique." If anything, they are bucking the apparent trend of obsessing over giving your name a totally original, rare name and just saying "screw it, we just really like this name and it's okay if our special snowflake sometimes shares a name with a classmate or coworker."

Milo is ranked #120 in the nation, but do you think it is ranked #120 in Little Rock? In Arlington, VA? In Arlington, TX? Names differ in popularity by region, and that is why we had 2 girls named Xanthe, 2 girls named Sage, and 2 boys named Gray in my kid’s 1st grade year in ny (45 kids total). Not a single Jacob.

... and? Who cares? Why does the popularity of the name matter? All of the names you just mentioned are not very popular overall, too, so even if the kid winds up in a little bubble where there are a couple in school with them, in the rest of their life they will have a fairly uncommon name.

So why does it matter? Why fixate?

Answered in the first comment posted-status. Giving your kid a trending name is often judged as low class. DC is a pretty status obsessed place and no parent here want to use Milo and in three years see it has become the next Brayden.

Brayden may be considered a "low class" name but it's not particularly popular. It's ranked #190, not far on the list from names like Finn, Oscar, Nico, and Max, all names used by people I know who valued a name that wasn't "too popular."

The popularity of a name is not what makes it low or high class. If anything, an obsession with choosing an "original" name is precisely what leads to those Utah manglings like Brayden/Jayden/Kayden or Kinsleigh/Paisley/Brynleigh. Those are efforts to be unique. It would have been been classier to just name their kids William and Sofia.

Popularity is similar but not the same as trends. Did you not read what I wrote, or can you not understand the difference?

A name Brayden is not as popular as James, but it is absolutely more trendy. Any name chart curve can show this information. It’s not popularity that makes a name low class (to some people) it’s trendiness.

Thank you, my reading comprehension is fine. This thread is about popularity, if you wanted to make a distinction about "trendiness" then you should have said so. Brayden is not that popular of a name. It might be trendy, but I think the real issue is that it trends among people who lack status. It is popular among middle class families in places like Utah, which makes it "low class" to a UMC person living in a coastal city. The issue is not its popularity but its social coding.

By comparison, look at the trend of the name Ezra, which has recently followed the same trajectory as Brayden but a few years behind: https://www.behindthename.com/name/brayden/top/united-states?compare=Ezra&type=percent

It's a similarly "spiky" name reflecting a very sudden interest in the name -- a trend. Yet Ezra is coded as intellectual, coastal, and cosmopolitan. It is currently much more popular than Brayden. But it's considered as more "high class" than Brayden.

So no, it's not just that popular names are viewed as more "low class".

Ezra is only viewed (by some) as more cosmopolitan and intellectual because it’s “a few years behind”, as you yourself acknowledged.

Soon enough the masses will catch on that “cosmopolitan intellectual” parents are using it and use it too and it will be just as plebeian as Mason or Braydon or something. This phenomenon has been widely documented.

I disagree. People in coastal cities will view Brayden and Ezra totally differently even when they have similar popularity because of other associations. Ezra is one of those "old person" names that have become popular recently. A lot of people using it are likely naming after a relative (fun fact: Ezra is a Hebrew name and in Ashkenazi tradition, you are not supposed to name children after living relatives, so there's kind of a built in name cycle in some Jewish communities as people name children after great-grandparents but rarely after grandparents) or have positive associations with famous Ezras like Ezra Pound.

Meanwhile, Brayden is one of those invented names that didn't exist before the year 2000. It has no history and thus has a much narrower association with the sorts of people who choose names like Brayden now, who are largely not well-educated elites in large cities.

They may have similar popularity spikes, but they will never have similar cultural or class associations because they are simply very different names.

It's trendy because it has a trendy sound (ah ending). Plenty of Jewish kids have great grandfathers named Irving and Morton and no one is using those names.

Irving and Morton are better than Ezra.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I grew up as a Jennifer/Jenny in the Midwest, and this was absolutely an important aspect of naming my children. I just wanted them to have more unique names.

I grew up as a Jennifer/Jenny in the east coast. I loved that everyone could speak and pronounce my first name. Didn’t get so lucky with my last name. We absolutely chose “easy” names for our children, without caring if they are popular.

[Anonymous]

My sister Ann, born in 1973, worried about giving her firstborn son a plain, “common”name - John - in 2002. She needn’t have been concerned because John was always the ONLY John in his school, neighborhood, team - among a sea of Jonathans, Jacks, Jacksons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get these comments that are like "oh they thought they were being so unique by naming their kid Milo but he's one of three in class." First of all, Milo is ranked #120 -- if there are three of them in one class, it's a freak accident unlikely to be repeated in that child's life. And second, since name popularity is published online and widely reported on, I doubt anyone is using a popular name without knowing it's popular. Parents giving their kids more popular names know they are more popular and are okay with it, and thus by definition cannot think they are being "so unique." If anything, they are bucking the apparent trend of obsessing over giving your name a totally original, rare name and just saying "screw it, we just really like this name and it's okay if our special snowflake sometimes shares a name with a classmate or coworker."

Milo is ranked #120 in the nation, but do you think it is ranked #120 in Little Rock? In Arlington, VA? In Arlington, TX? Names differ in popularity by region, and that is why we had 2 girls named Xanthe, 2 girls named Sage, and 2 boys named Gray in my kid’s 1st grade year in ny (45 kids total). Not a single Jacob.

... and? Who cares? Why does the popularity of the name matter? All of the names you just mentioned are not very popular overall, too, so even if the kid winds up in a little bubble where there are a couple in school with them, in the rest of their life they will have a fairly uncommon name.

So why does it matter? Why fixate?

Answered in the first comment posted-status. Giving your kid a trending name is often judged as low class. DC is a pretty status obsessed place and no parent here want to use Milo and in three years see it has become the next Brayden.

Brayden may be considered a "low class" name but it's not particularly popular. It's ranked #190, not far on the list from names like Finn, Oscar, Nico, and Max, all names used by people I know who valued a name that wasn't "too popular."

The popularity of a name is not what makes it low or high class. If anything, an obsession with choosing an "original" name is precisely what leads to those Utah manglings like Brayden/Jayden/Kayden or Kinsleigh/Paisley/Brynleigh. Those are efforts to be unique. It would have been been classier to just name their kids William and Sofia.

Popularity is similar but not the same as trends. Did you not read what I wrote, or can you not understand the difference?

A name Brayden is not as popular as James, but it is absolutely more trendy. Any name chart curve can show this information. It’s not popularity that makes a name low class (to some people) it’s trendiness.

Thank you, my reading comprehension is fine. This thread is about popularity, if you wanted to make a distinction about "trendiness" then you should have said so. Brayden is not that popular of a name. It might be trendy, but I think the real issue is that it trends among people who lack status. It is popular among middle class families in places like Utah, which makes it "low class" to a UMC person living in a coastal city. The issue is not its popularity but its social coding.

By comparison, look at the trend of the name Ezra, which has recently followed the same trajectory as Brayden but a few years behind: https://www.behindthename.com/name/brayden/top/united-states?compare=Ezra&type=percent

It's a similarly "spiky" name reflecting a very sudden interest in the name -- a trend. Yet Ezra is coded as intellectual, coastal, and cosmopolitan. It is currently much more popular than Brayden. But it's considered as more "high class" than Brayden.

So no, it's not just that popular names are viewed as more "low class".

Ezra is only viewed (by some) as more cosmopolitan and intellectual because it’s “a few years behind”, as you yourself acknowledged.

Soon enough the masses will catch on that “cosmopolitan intellectual” parents are using it and use it too and it will be just as plebeian as Mason or Braydon or something. This phenomenon has been widely documented.

I disagree. People in coastal cities will view Brayden and Ezra totally differently even when they have similar popularity because of other associations. Ezra is one of those "old person" names that have become popular recently. A lot of people using it are likely naming after a relative (fun fact: Ezra is a Hebrew name and in Ashkenazi tradition, you are not supposed to name children after living relatives, so there's kind of a built in name cycle in some Jewish communities as people name children after great-grandparents but rarely after grandparents) or have positive associations with famous Ezras like Ezra Pound.

Meanwhile, Brayden is one of those invented names that didn't exist before the year 2000. It has no history and thus has a much narrower association with the sorts of people who choose names like Brayden now, who are largely not well-educated elites in large cities.

They may have similar popularity spikes, but they will never have similar cultural or class associations because they are simply very different names.

It's trendy because it has a trendy sound (ah ending). Plenty of Jewish kids have great grandfathers named Irving and Morton and no one is using those names.

Irving and Morton are better than Ezra.

I see what you did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get these comments that are like "oh they thought they were being so unique by naming their kid Milo but he's one of three in class." First of all, Milo is ranked #120 -- if there are three of them in one class, it's a freak accident unlikely to be repeated in that child's life. And second, since name popularity is published online and widely reported on, I doubt anyone is using a popular name without knowing it's popular. Parents giving their kids more popular names know they are more popular and are okay with it, and thus by definition cannot think they are being "so unique." If anything, they are bucking the apparent trend of obsessing over giving your name a totally original, rare name and just saying "screw it, we just really like this name and it's okay if our special snowflake sometimes shares a name with a classmate or coworker."

Milo is ranked #120 in the nation, but do you think it is ranked #120 in Little Rock? In Arlington, VA? In Arlington, TX? Names differ in popularity by region, and that is why we had 2 girls named Xanthe, 2 girls named Sage, and 2 boys named Gray in my kid’s 1st grade year in ny (45 kids total). Not a single Jacob.

... and? Who cares? Why does the popularity of the name matter? All of the names you just mentioned are not very popular overall, too, so even if the kid winds up in a little bubble where there are a couple in school with them, in the rest of their life they will have a fairly uncommon name.

So why does it matter? Why fixate?

Answered in the first comment posted-status. Giving your kid a trending name is often judged as low class. DC is a pretty status obsessed place and no parent here want to use Milo and in three years see it has become the next Brayden.

Brayden may be considered a "low class" name but it's not particularly popular. It's ranked #190, not far on the list from names like Finn, Oscar, Nico, and Max, all names used by people I know who valued a name that wasn't "too popular."

The popularity of a name is not what makes it low or high class. If anything, an obsession with choosing an "original" name is precisely what leads to those Utah manglings like Brayden/Jayden/Kayden or Kinsleigh/Paisley/Brynleigh. Those are efforts to be unique. It would have been been classier to just name their kids William and Sofia.

Popularity is similar but not the same as trends. Did you not read what I wrote, or can you not understand the difference?

A name Brayden is not as popular as James, but it is absolutely more trendy. Any name chart curve can show this information. It’s not popularity that makes a name low class (to some people) it’s trendiness.

Thank you, my reading comprehension is fine. This thread is about popularity, if you wanted to make a distinction about "trendiness" then you should have said so. Brayden is not that popular of a name. It might be trendy, but I think the real issue is that it trends among people who lack status. It is popular among middle class families in places like Utah, which makes it "low class" to a UMC person living in a coastal city. The issue is not its popularity but its social coding.

By comparison, look at the trend of the name Ezra, which has recently followed the same trajectory as Brayden but a few years behind: https://www.behindthename.com/name/brayden/top/united-states?compare=Ezra&type=percent

It's a similarly "spiky" name reflecting a very sudden interest in the name -- a trend. Yet Ezra is coded as intellectual, coastal, and cosmopolitan. It is currently much more popular than Brayden. But it's considered as more "high class" than Brayden.

So no, it's not just that popular names are viewed as more "low class".

Ezra is only viewed (by some) as more cosmopolitan and intellectual because it’s “a few years behind”, as you yourself acknowledged.

Soon enough the masses will catch on that “cosmopolitan intellectual” parents are using it and use it too and it will be just as plebeian as Mason or Braydon or something. This phenomenon has been widely documented.

I disagree. People in coastal cities will view Brayden and Ezra totally differently even when they have similar popularity because of other associations. Ezra is one of those "old person" names that have become popular recently. A lot of people using it are likely naming after a relative (fun fact: Ezra is a Hebrew name and in Ashkenazi tradition, you are not supposed to name children after living relatives, so there's kind of a built in name cycle in some Jewish communities as people name children after great-grandparents but rarely after grandparents) or have positive associations with famous Ezras like Ezra Pound.

Meanwhile, Brayden is one of those invented names that didn't exist before the year 2000. It has no history and thus has a much narrower association with the sorts of people who choose names like Brayden now, who are largely not well-educated elites in large cities.

They may have similar popularity spikes, but they will never have similar cultural or class associations because they are simply very different names.

Look, I’m sorry that you used a trendy name for your kid. You can disagree all you want but there is plenty of data and reporting on this phenomenon.

Names get popular and trend because the masses observe what names have cultural cachet and prestige and then use them for their own children. Then these names become “too popular” or too “common” and have less prestige so the masses move on to the next elite-sounding name.

Brayden and Cayden and Hayden did not start out in Westchester or Boston or Brooklyn, I can tell you that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get these comments that are like "oh they thought they were being so unique by naming their kid Milo but he's one of three in class." First of all, Milo is ranked #120 -- if there are three of them in one class, it's a freak accident unlikely to be repeated in that child's life. And second, since name popularity is published online and widely reported on, I doubt anyone is using a popular name without knowing it's popular. Parents giving their kids more popular names know they are more popular and are okay with it, and thus by definition cannot think they are being "so unique." If anything, they are bucking the apparent trend of obsessing over giving your name a totally original, rare name and just saying "screw it, we just really like this name and it's okay if our special snowflake sometimes shares a name with a classmate or coworker."

Milo is ranked #120 in the nation, but do you think it is ranked #120 in Little Rock? In Arlington, VA? In Arlington, TX? Names differ in popularity by region, and that is why we had 2 girls named Xanthe, 2 girls named Sage, and 2 boys named Gray in my kid’s 1st grade year in ny (45 kids total). Not a single Jacob.

... and? Who cares? Why does the popularity of the name matter? All of the names you just mentioned are not very popular overall, too, so even if the kid winds up in a little bubble where there are a couple in school with them, in the rest of their life they will have a fairly uncommon name.

So why does it matter? Why fixate?

Answered in the first comment posted-status. Giving your kid a trending name is often judged as low class. DC is a pretty status obsessed place and no parent here want to use Milo and in three years see it has become the next Brayden.

Brayden may be considered a "low class" name but it's not particularly popular. It's ranked #190, not far on the list from names like Finn, Oscar, Nico, and Max, all names used by people I know who valued a name that wasn't "too popular."

The popularity of a name is not what makes it low or high class. If anything, an obsession with choosing an "original" name is precisely what leads to those Utah manglings like Brayden/Jayden/Kayden or Kinsleigh/Paisley/Brynleigh. Those are efforts to be unique. It would have been been classier to just name their kids William and Sofia.

Popularity is similar but not the same as trends. Did you not read what I wrote, or can you not understand the difference?

A name Brayden is not as popular as James, but it is absolutely more trendy. Any name chart curve can show this information. It’s not popularity that makes a name low class (to some people) it’s trendiness.

Thank you, my reading comprehension is fine. This thread is about popularity, if you wanted to make a distinction about "trendiness" then you should have said so. Brayden is not that popular of a name. It might be trendy, but I think the real issue is that it trends among people who lack status. It is popular among middle class families in places like Utah, which makes it "low class" to a UMC person living in a coastal city. The issue is not its popularity but its social coding.

By comparison, look at the trend of the name Ezra, which has recently followed the same trajectory as Brayden but a few years behind: https://www.behindthename.com/name/brayden/top/united-states?compare=Ezra&type=percent

It's a similarly "spiky" name reflecting a very sudden interest in the name -- a trend. Yet Ezra is coded as intellectual, coastal, and cosmopolitan. It is currently much more popular than Brayden. But it's considered as more "high class" than Brayden.

So no, it's not just that popular names are viewed as more "low class".

Ezra is only viewed (by some) as more cosmopolitan and intellectual because it’s “a few years behind”, as you yourself acknowledged.

Soon enough the masses will catch on that “cosmopolitan intellectual” parents are using it and use it too and it will be just as plebeian as Mason or Braydon or something. This phenomenon has been widely documented.

I disagree. People in coastal cities will view Brayden and Ezra totally differently even when they have similar popularity because of other associations. Ezra is one of those "old person" names that have become popular recently. A lot of people using it are likely naming after a relative (fun fact: Ezra is a Hebrew name and in Ashkenazi tradition, you are not supposed to name children after living relatives, so there's kind of a built in name cycle in some Jewish communities as people name children after great-grandparents but rarely after grandparents) or have positive associations with famous Ezras like Ezra Pound.

Meanwhile, Brayden is one of those invented names that didn't exist before the year 2000. It has no history and thus has a much narrower association with the sorts of people who choose names like Brayden now, who are largely not well-educated elites in large cities.

They may have similar popularity spikes, but they will never have similar cultural or class associations because they are simply very different names.

It's trendy because it has a trendy sound (ah ending). Plenty of Jewish kids have great grandfathers named Irving and Morton and no one is using those names.

Irving and Morton are better than Ezra.

I see why you did there!

But I disagree-Irving, Morton, Sherman, Milton, Sidney, Irwin, Myron, Howard, Byron…what I call “First Generation Jewish in the US” circa 1920] are awful and should not be revived.

I’d chose Samuel, Isaac, Moses, Ezra, Simon, Ari, Asher in a hot minute!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get these comments that are like "oh they thought they were being so unique by naming their kid Milo but he's one of three in class." First of all, Milo is ranked #120 -- if there are three of them in one class, it's a freak accident unlikely to be repeated in that child's life. And second, since name popularity is published online and widely reported on, I doubt anyone is using a popular name without knowing it's popular. Parents giving their kids more popular names know they are more popular and are okay with it, and thus by definition cannot think they are being "so unique." If anything, they are bucking the apparent trend of obsessing over giving your name a totally original, rare name and just saying "screw it, we just really like this name and it's okay if our special snowflake sometimes shares a name with a classmate or coworker."

Milo is ranked #120 in the nation, but do you think it is ranked #120 in Little Rock? In Arlington, VA? In Arlington, TX? Names differ in popularity by region, and that is why we had 2 girls named Xanthe, 2 girls named Sage, and 2 boys named Gray in my kid’s 1st grade year in ny (45 kids total). Not a single Jacob.

... and? Who cares? Why does the popularity of the name matter? All of the names you just mentioned are not very popular overall, too, so even if the kid winds up in a little bubble where there are a couple in school with them, in the rest of their life they will have a fairly uncommon name.

So why does it matter? Why fixate?

Answered in the first comment posted-status. Giving your kid a trending name is often judged as low class. DC is a pretty status obsessed place and no parent here want to use Milo and in three years see it has become the next Brayden.

Brayden may be considered a "low class" name but it's not particularly popular. It's ranked #190, not far on the list from names like Finn, Oscar, Nico, and Max, all names used by people I know who valued a name that wasn't "too popular."

The popularity of a name is not what makes it low or high class. If anything, an obsession with choosing an "original" name is precisely what leads to those Utah manglings like Brayden/Jayden/Kayden or Kinsleigh/Paisley/Brynleigh. Those are efforts to be unique. It would have been been classier to just name their kids William and Sofia.

Popularity is similar but not the same as trends. Did you not read what I wrote, or can you not understand the difference?

A name Brayden is not as popular as James, but it is absolutely more trendy. Any name chart curve can show this information. It’s not popularity that makes a name low class (to some people) it’s trendiness.

Thank you, my reading comprehension is fine. This thread is about popularity, if you wanted to make a distinction about "trendiness" then you should have said so. Brayden is not that popular of a name. It might be trendy, but I think the real issue is that it trends among people who lack status. It is popular among middle class families in places like Utah, which makes it "low class" to a UMC person living in a coastal city. The issue is not its popularity but its social coding.

By comparison, look at the trend of the name Ezra, which has recently followed the same trajectory as Brayden but a few years behind: https://www.behindthename.com/name/brayden/top/united-states?compare=Ezra&type=percent

It's a similarly "spiky" name reflecting a very sudden interest in the name -- a trend. Yet Ezra is coded as intellectual, coastal, and cosmopolitan. It is currently much more popular than Brayden. But it's considered as more "high class" than Brayden.

So no, it's not just that popular names are viewed as more "low class".

Ezra is only viewed (by some) as more cosmopolitan and intellectual because it’s “a few years behind”, as you yourself acknowledged.

Soon enough the masses will catch on that “cosmopolitan intellectual” parents are using it and use it too and it will be just as plebeian as Mason or Braydon or something. This phenomenon has been widely documented.

I disagree. People in coastal cities will view Brayden and Ezra totally differently even when they have similar popularity because of other associations. Ezra is one of those "old person" names that have become popular recently. A lot of people using it are likely naming after a relative (fun fact: Ezra is a Hebrew name and in Ashkenazi tradition, you are not supposed to name children after living relatives, so there's kind of a built in name cycle in some Jewish communities as people name children after great-grandparents but rarely after grandparents) or have positive associations with famous Ezras like Ezra Pound.

Meanwhile, Brayden is one of those invented names that didn't exist before the year 2000. It has no history and thus has a much narrower association with the sorts of people who choose names like Brayden now, who are largely not well-educated elites in large cities.

They may have similar popularity spikes, but they will never have similar cultural or class associations because they are simply very different names.

Look, I’m sorry that you used a trendy name for your kid. You can disagree all you want but there is plenty of data and reporting on this phenomenon.

Names get popular and trend because the masses observe what names have cultural cachet and prestige and then use them for their own children. Then these names become “too popular” or too “common” and have less prestige so the masses move on to the next elite-sounding name.

Can you link to this "data and reporting"? Most of what I've read talks about how naming trends are just super diverse now and there are no more juggernaut names like Jennifer anymore. There was also this interesting article in the Post last year about how, as parents have started emphasizing individualism and uniqueness in baby names, trends become concentrated on sounds within the name. The article mostly focuses on name suffixes, but I've also seen commentary on sites like Nameberry about how names tend to cluster around popular starting letters or sounds, or how there are waves of trends around shorter versus longer names (for instance, the general trend of giving girls longer three- and four-syllable names has given way to a trend of shorter one- and two-syllable names, which has resulted in many of the nicknames for those longer names becoming popular stand along names for younger kids).

Anyway, I think your analysis is off, and not because I'm defensive about what I named my kid. I think you are viewing it narrowly as someone who is obsessed with the "prestige" of names, which in itself indicates a striver focus. In other words, exactly what others on the thread have mentioned -- DC has a striver culture of people who are determined to "win" at baby naming, and strivers are more focused on giving kids unusual names. Interestingly, a lot of the wealthy people I know have given their kids pretty popular, common names recently. I wonder if being wealthy allows them not to worry so much that their child's name will make or break them. Their kids are going to be fine no matter what, so they can go ahead and name them Zoe or Noah and not worry about it.

It’s funny this conversation has come full circle to my first comment, which you are now agreeing with and was the first comment in the entire thread. It comes down to status and prestige.

https://slate.com/business/2005/04/where-baby-names-come-from.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get these comments that are like "oh they thought they were being so unique by naming their kid Milo but he's one of three in class." First of all, Milo is ranked #120 -- if there are three of them in one class, it's a freak accident unlikely to be repeated in that child's life. And second, since name popularity is published online and widely reported on, I doubt anyone is using a popular name without knowing it's popular. Parents giving their kids more popular names know they are more popular and are okay with it, and thus by definition cannot think they are being "so unique." If anything, they are bucking the apparent trend of obsessing over giving your name a totally original, rare name and just saying "screw it, we just really like this name and it's okay if our special snowflake sometimes shares a name with a classmate or coworker."

Milo is ranked #120 in the nation, but do you think it is ranked #120 in Little Rock? In Arlington, VA? In Arlington, TX? Names differ in popularity by region, and that is why we had 2 girls named Xanthe, 2 girls named Sage, and 2 boys named Gray in my kid’s 1st grade year in ny (45 kids total). Not a single Jacob.

... and? Who cares? Why does the popularity of the name matter? All of the names you just mentioned are not very popular overall, too, so even if the kid winds up in a little bubble where there are a couple in school with them, in the rest of their life they will have a fairly uncommon name.

So why does it matter? Why fixate?

Answered in the first comment posted-status. Giving your kid a trending name is often judged as low class. DC is a pretty status obsessed place and no parent here want to use Milo and in three years see it has become the next Brayden.

Brayden may be considered a "low class" name but it's not particularly popular. It's ranked #190, not far on the list from names like Finn, Oscar, Nico, and Max, all names used by people I know who valued a name that wasn't "too popular."

The popularity of a name is not what makes it low or high class. If anything, an obsession with choosing an "original" name is precisely what leads to those Utah manglings like Brayden/Jayden/Kayden or Kinsleigh/Paisley/Brynleigh. Those are efforts to be unique. It would have been been classier to just name their kids William and Sofia.

Popularity is similar but not the same as trends. Did you not read what I wrote, or can you not understand the difference?

A name Brayden is not as popular as James, but it is absolutely more trendy. Any name chart curve can show this information. It’s not popularity that makes a name low class (to some people) it’s trendiness.

Thank you, my reading comprehension is fine. This thread is about popularity, if you wanted to make a distinction about "trendiness" then you should have said so. Brayden is not that popular of a name. It might be trendy, but I think the real issue is that it trends among people who lack status. It is popular among middle class families in places like Utah, which makes it "low class" to a UMC person living in a coastal city. The issue is not its popularity but its social coding.

By comparison, look at the trend of the name Ezra, which has recently followed the same trajectory as Brayden but a few years behind: https://www.behindthename.com/name/brayden/top/united-states?compare=Ezra&type=percent

It's a similarly "spiky" name reflecting a very sudden interest in the name -- a trend. Yet Ezra is coded as intellectual, coastal, and cosmopolitan. It is currently much more popular than Brayden. But it's considered as more "high class" than Brayden.

So no, it's not just that popular names are viewed as more "low class".

Ezra is only viewed (by some) as more cosmopolitan and intellectual because it’s “a few years behind”, as you yourself acknowledged.

Soon enough the masses will catch on that “cosmopolitan intellectual” parents are using it and use it too and it will be just as plebeian as Mason or Braydon or something. This phenomenon has been widely documented.

I disagree. People in coastal cities will view Brayden and Ezra totally differently even when they have similar popularity because of other associations. Ezra is one of those "old person" names that have become popular recently. A lot of people using it are likely naming after a relative (fun fact: Ezra is a Hebrew name and in Ashkenazi tradition, you are not supposed to name children after living relatives, so there's kind of a built in name cycle in some Jewish communities as people name children after great-grandparents but rarely after grandparents) or have positive associations with famous Ezras like Ezra Pound.

Meanwhile, Brayden is one of those invented names that didn't exist before the year 2000. It has no history and thus has a much narrower association with the sorts of people who choose names like Brayden now, who are largely not well-educated elites in large cities.

They may have similar popularity spikes, but they will never have similar cultural or class associations because they are simply very different names.

Look, I’m sorry that you used a trendy name for your kid. You can disagree all you want but there is plenty of data and reporting on this phenomenon.

Names get popular and trend because the masses observe what names have cultural cachet and prestige and then use them for their own children. Then these names become “too popular” or too “common” and have less prestige so the masses move on to the next elite-sounding name.

Can you link to this "data and reporting"? Most of what I've read talks about how naming trends are just super diverse now and there are no more juggernaut names like Jennifer anymore. There was also this interesting article in the Post last year about how, as parents have started emphasizing individualism and uniqueness in baby names, trends become concentrated on sounds within the name. The article mostly focuses on name suffixes, but I've also seen commentary on sites like Nameberry about how names tend to cluster around popular starting letters or sounds, or how there are waves of trends around shorter versus longer names (for instance, the general trend of giving girls longer three- and four-syllable names has given way to a trend of shorter one- and two-syllable names, which has resulted in many of the nicknames for those longer names becoming popular stand along names for younger kids).

Anyway, I think your analysis is off, and not because I'm defensive about what I named my kid. I think you are viewing it narrowly as someone who is obsessed with the "prestige" of names, which in itself indicates a striver focus. In other words, exactly what others on the thread have mentioned -- DC has a striver culture of people who are determined to "win" at baby naming, and strivers are more focused on giving kids unusual names. Interestingly, a lot of the wealthy people I know have given their kids pretty popular, common names recently. I wonder if being wealthy allows them not to worry so much that their child's name will make or break them. Their kids are going to be fine no matter what, so they can go ahead and name them Zoe or Noah and not worry about it.

It’s funny this conversation has come full circle to my first comment, which you are now agreeing with and was the first comment in the entire thread. It comes down to status and prestige.

https://slate.com/business/2005/04/where-baby-names-come-from.html

That article is 20 years old, and Freakonomics has been pretty widely debunked as bad science in the meantime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get these comments that are like "oh they thought they were being so unique by naming their kid Milo but he's one of three in class." First of all, Milo is ranked #120 -- if there are three of them in one class, it's a freak accident unlikely to be repeated in that child's life. And second, since name popularity is published online and widely reported on, I doubt anyone is using a popular name without knowing it's popular. Parents giving their kids more popular names know they are more popular and are okay with it, and thus by definition cannot think they are being "so unique." If anything, they are bucking the apparent trend of obsessing over giving your name a totally original, rare name and just saying "screw it, we just really like this name and it's okay if our special snowflake sometimes shares a name with a classmate or coworker."

Milo is ranked #120 in the nation, but do you think it is ranked #120 in Little Rock? In Arlington, VA? In Arlington, TX? Names differ in popularity by region, and that is why we had 2 girls named Xanthe, 2 girls named Sage, and 2 boys named Gray in my kid’s 1st grade year in ny (45 kids total). Not a single Jacob.

... and? Who cares? Why does the popularity of the name matter? All of the names you just mentioned are not very popular overall, too, so even if the kid winds up in a little bubble where there are a couple in school with them, in the rest of their life they will have a fairly uncommon name.

So why does it matter? Why fixate?

Answered in the first comment posted-status. Giving your kid a trending name is often judged as low class. DC is a pretty status obsessed place and no parent here want to use Milo and in three years see it has become the next Brayden.

Brayden may be considered a "low class" name but it's not particularly popular. It's ranked #190, not far on the list from names like Finn, Oscar, Nico, and Max, all names used by people I know who valued a name that wasn't "too popular."

The popularity of a name is not what makes it low or high class. If anything, an obsession with choosing an "original" name is precisely what leads to those Utah manglings like Brayden/Jayden/Kayden or Kinsleigh/Paisley/Brynleigh. Those are efforts to be unique. It would have been been classier to just name their kids William and Sofia.

Popularity is similar but not the same as trends. Did you not read what I wrote, or can you not understand the difference?

A name Brayden is not as popular as James, but it is absolutely more trendy. Any name chart curve can show this information. It’s not popularity that makes a name low class (to some people) it’s trendiness.

Thank you, my reading comprehension is fine. This thread is about popularity, if you wanted to make a distinction about "trendiness" then you should have said so. Brayden is not that popular of a name. It might be trendy, but I think the real issue is that it trends among people who lack status. It is popular among middle class families in places like Utah, which makes it "low class" to a UMC person living in a coastal city. The issue is not its popularity but its social coding.

By comparison, look at the trend of the name Ezra, which has recently followed the same trajectory as Brayden but a few years behind: https://www.behindthename.com/name/brayden/top/united-states?compare=Ezra&type=percent

It's a similarly "spiky" name reflecting a very sudden interest in the name -- a trend. Yet Ezra is coded as intellectual, coastal, and cosmopolitan. It is currently much more popular than Brayden. But it's considered as more "high class" than Brayden.

So no, it's not just that popular names are viewed as more "low class".

Ezra is only viewed (by some) as more cosmopolitan and intellectual because it’s “a few years behind”, as you yourself acknowledged.

Soon enough the masses will catch on that “cosmopolitan intellectual” parents are using it and use it too and it will be just as plebeian as Mason or Braydon or something. This phenomenon has been widely documented.

I disagree. People in coastal cities will view Brayden and Ezra totally differently even when they have similar popularity because of other associations. Ezra is one of those "old person" names that have become popular recently. A lot of people using it are likely naming after a relative (fun fact: Ezra is a Hebrew name and in Ashkenazi tradition, you are not supposed to name children after living relatives, so there's kind of a built in name cycle in some Jewish communities as people name children after great-grandparents but rarely after grandparents) or have positive associations with famous Ezras like Ezra Pound.

Meanwhile, Brayden is one of those invented names that didn't exist before the year 2000. It has no history and thus has a much narrower association with the sorts of people who choose names like Brayden now, who are largely not well-educated elites in large cities.

They may have similar popularity spikes, but they will never have similar cultural or class associations because they are simply very different names.

Look, I’m sorry that you used a trendy name for your kid. You can disagree all you want but there is plenty of data and reporting on this phenomenon.

Names get popular and trend because the masses observe what names have cultural cachet and prestige and then use them for their own children. Then these names become “too popular” or too “common” and have less prestige so the masses move on to the next elite-sounding name.

Can you link to this "data and reporting"? Most of what I've read talks about how naming trends are just super diverse now and there are no more juggernaut names like Jennifer anymore. There was also this interesting article in the Post last year about how, as parents have started emphasizing individualism and uniqueness in baby names, trends become concentrated on sounds within the name. The article mostly focuses on name suffixes, but I've also seen commentary on sites like Nameberry about how names tend to cluster around popular starting letters or sounds, or how there are waves of trends around shorter versus longer names (for instance, the general trend of giving girls longer three- and four-syllable names has given way to a trend of shorter one- and two-syllable names, which has resulted in many of the nicknames for those longer names becoming popular stand along names for younger kids).

Anyway, I think your analysis is off, and not because I'm defensive about what I named my kid. I think you are viewing it narrowly as someone who is obsessed with the "prestige" of names, which in itself indicates a striver focus. In other words, exactly what others on the thread have mentioned -- DC has a striver culture of people who are determined to "win" at baby naming, and strivers are more focused on giving kids unusual names. Interestingly, a lot of the wealthy people I know have given their kids pretty popular, common names recently. I wonder if being wealthy allows them not to worry so much that their child's name will make or break them. Their kids are going to be fine no matter what, so they can go ahead and name them Zoe or Noah and not worry about it.

It’s funny this conversation has come full circle to my first comment, which you are now agreeing with and was the first comment in the entire thread. It comes down to status and prestige.

https://slate.com/business/2005/04/where-baby-names-come-from.html

The first comment in the thread says that some people think trendy names are a negative class indicator, but that's different from the argument above, which is about "prestige" not class. And even if you argue that prestige and class are the same thing, it's actually a different argument.

You are saying that people in the DC area choose unpopular names because of a fear of appearing "low class" by choosing a "trendy name" which you are defining as a popular name (even though some unpopular names are trendy and some popular names are decidedly not trendy).

The above argument says that people in DC choose unpopular names because they are actively seeking the "prestige" of a name no one else has. This argument ignores trendiness and focuses exclusively on popularity.

These are related but not the same.