Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's more tragic when parents pick the fugliest name they can think of in an effort to be different. I'll take Emma over Hortense any day.

Yes! This. If you love the name, use it. Who cares how popular the name is? I know several Jennifer's my age and each one is unique as a person. I love the names Emma or Sophia or Hannah. Original name ... So what?

Yes!! +1. I think there is a resurgence of "classic" names that people seem to like because they are "different" but are actually totally ugly. Matilda? Gertude? Horrible.

When we picked our kids names, we picked names we liked. We used a name for DD that we had picked several years before, without even looking at a list. It just happened not to be very common. When it was time to name DC 2 (a boy) we had lots of trouble. I just wasn't crazy about most boy names and wanted something that went with DD name. My husband is the one that picked DS name and he did it out of a book. Again, it turned out to not be very common.

Both are more common today then when the kids were born, but I think DD is still no higher than 80s and DS is in the 200s.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hm, I thought my son's name was super popular but it's ranked #347 for the year he was born. It's a super common name though. Live and learn.

Are there multiple spellings? How popular is it now?

It's Philip. Still in the 300s

Lol, some of you actuall believe you are trendsetters. We're all subject to the strange and powerful nature of suggestion as a pp described. You just happened to jump on it early; you're an early adopter, not a trendsetter. Ugh, this is so dumb (and my kid has a beautiful, classic name, not on the op's list, but nonetheless in the same vein, because beautiful classic names are in. And I like them!)

Anonymous wrote:OP, I was kind of wondering the same thing. There are 8 Sophies in the daycare/preschool where DS goes (out of probably 150 kids). You'd think it would be a little more self-regulating - a name becomes "too" popular so people stop using it and it becomes less popular... but I guess the opposite happens and the more popular it is, the more popular it becomes.

You missed Owen - there are 5 at his school (more Owens than Jacobs actually).

Love Owen!

"So, I don't understand your point? You'd deliberately give your child an uncommon name? Why would you do that to a child? "

Also don't understand OP's point.

Anonymous wrote:Hm, I thought my son's name was super popular but it's ranked #347 for the year he was born. It's a super common name though. Live and learn.

Are there multiple spellings? How popular is it now?

Anonymous wrote:I have an Evelyn. Her name was barely in the top ten the year she was born but it was ranked 24th last year. I also have four friends that have daughters named Evelyn.
We were definitely ahead of the pack but when she gets into the work place I can see her going by Evelyn Jones or Evelyn J. In the 90s I worked in a store with about 10 female employees. 3 of them were named Michelle and they all worked in the same department.

Ooops. I meant her name was hardly in the top 100. She is ten.

Anonymous wrote:I think it's more tragic when parents pick the fugliest name they can think of in an effort to be different. I'll take Emma over Hortense any day.

Yes! This. If you love the name, use it. Who cares how popular the name is? I know several Jennifer's my age and each one is unique as a person. I love the names Emma or Sophia or Hannah. Original name ... So what?

I have an Evelyn. Her name was barely in the top ten the year she was born but it was ranked 24th last year. I also have four friends that have daughters named Evelyn.
We were definitely ahead of the pack but when she gets into the work place I can see her going by Evelyn Jones or Evelyn J. In the 90s I worked in a store with about 10 female employees. 3 of them were named Michelle and they all worked in the same department.

Hm, I thought my son's name was super popular but it's ranked #347 for the year he was born. It's a super common name though. Live and learn.

I think it's more tragic when parents pick the fugliest name they can think of in an effort to be different. I'll take Emma over Hortense any day.

Anonymous wrote:It's a question as a spin-off (hence "s/o") of the other post. The only people getting defensive are those who named their kids with overused names. It's not that we "care," it's just a poll-type question. Defensive, much?

Oh, and yes: JAKE and JACK. So many Jakes and Jacks!

No, I'm not defensive, just honestly curious why it bothers people. My DD's name is not popular, but if it had been we would still have used it. We chose her name because it was meaningful to us (it was my grandmother's name), not based on naming trends.

Oh my God, Matthew. How completely unoriginal. As are Mark, Luke, and John. Where in heaven did so many people get the insane idea that this is the name they should pick? Just because a famous celebrity hangs out with someone by that name, people shouldn't take his preferences as gospel.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My 1st grader, Sophie, has never had another Sophie in her class - including four years in daycare, kindergarten, and this year. So we haven't had to worry about the Sophie M. thing.

that's because you were ahead of the trend. If you named a baby Sophie now or within the past 2 years it would be a different story.
I have a first grader (born 2005) named Henry. We've never another Henry in his class. But if I go to a playground anywhere in NW DC, I hear the name "Henry" called out a half dozen times to different children, all age 4 or older. It's STRIKING how common it is.
I wouldn't use it again if I was naming a child today although I don't really mind how popular it is because my son has never had to be "Henry X" and likely never will be.

Previous poster here again--my post should have read "age 4 or YOUNGER", not older