Reply to Gen-Z naming trends

Forum Index » Expectant and Postpartum Moms

Reply to "Gen-Z naming trends"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Being a girl, I’d be mad if I had a gender neutral or a boys name. [/quote]

The trend I see is a female name with a gender neutral nickname.
Chris, Pat, Sam, Max, Bobby, Jamie, Alex, Shaun, Casey, Charlie, Billy, Quinn, Andy, Frankie, Kelly, Tracy, Randy, Elliot, Rudy, and so on. [/quote]

Majority of these names read masculine to me, not gender neutral [/quote]

+1 and often the desire for a “gender neutral” name just means wanting to avoid femininity. People want to secure an advantage for their daughters by making sure they don’t have a [unserious, silly, weak] feminine name. It’s subconscious misogyny masked as being progressive.[/quote]

I don’t agree.  Kyle, for example, has always been used by both sexes.  Same with Dana, Grayson (and surname-first-name), Avery. It’s not like they’re naming their kids Harold or John.  [/quote]

I have heard many people IRL and on boards like this talk about choosing a unisex, or less feminine, name for their daughter specifically because it sounds more "professional" or "successful." People don't realize it, but the reason they instinctively fine less feminine/more masculine names to be "stronger" or more professional is misogyny. It's a learned association of masculine names with certain expectations (work, money, seriousness) and feminine names with certain expectations (beauty, care work, frivolity).

It applies to multiple categories of name. The last-name-as-first trend (Kennedy, Madison, Grayson, etc.). The unisex names (Sloane, Greer, Dana, Kyle, etc.). The unisex-nickname-on-feminine-full-name (Max/Maine, Sam/Samantha, Frankie/Francesca, etc).

You can also see it in the way people respond to a name that become unisex. Dana was a masculine name that became unisex when people started using it for their daughters. And now people are reluctant to use it for sons because it is "too feminine". Same with Ashley. People instinctively gravitate towards masculine names and reject feminine ones. Because we value men over women. It's okay for girls to be more masculine, but we are uncomfortable with boys being more feminine.

Gen Z and Millenials think they are being progressive and transgressive with unisex names. But in the end, [b]it's part of a long trend of rejecting femininity as weak and unappealing.[/b] It's been around a long time.[/quote]

This is true. Until you start naming boys Mary, Lisa, Sarah, Gladys, Gloria, Anne, Isabelle, and Sue, you aren't being gender neutral, you are are rejecting the feminine.[/quote]

Same with baby clothes. Going gender neutral just means dressing girls in "boy" clothes. I know so many new moms who tried that and then their daughters got to preschool and only wanted dresses, bows, ruffles, tutus, etc.[/quote]

I have two girls and as babies put them mostly in neutral clothes. Once they were old enough to choose, one wanted all “girly” clothes with pink and floofy, glitter etc. The other goes back and forth.

I have no problem with this as it is their choice (influenced by societal expectations, peers, etc for sure). When they are babies they have no choice.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics