Boy names on girls spark strong feelings.
Need proof? Tell the people of the internet you plan to name your daughter Owen or Parker or James.
Then run for cover.
Sure, some people will respond positively. But depending on the forum, you could also find yourself accused of thievery, trendiness, and general bad taste.
It is so very frustrating to feel like your favorite boy name is now unusable. Because this doesn’t go both ways nearly as often – rarely do we see boys borrow from the girls, or reclaim names from the feminine side. (Not never – Pax is one notable exception. Jamie might count, too. But exceptions are few.) That’s one reason why the pool of possible boy names feels smaller – or maybe more limited – than the choices for our daughters.
Make no mistake, this is a touchy subject. And yet, reasons abound for viewing boy names on girls as nothing to worry about.
Here’s why.
TEN: BOY NAMES ON GIRLS ARE NOTHING NEW.
Long before there was Madison, there was Shirley.
Charlotte Bronte chose the name for the heroine of an 1849 novel, explaining that Shirley’s father had hoped for a son. It was gaining steadily in use in the US when Shirley Temple became a household name. The name Shirley peaked at #2 in the 1930s, and today? It’s hard to imagine parents choosing Shirley for a son.
Or a daughter, come to that.
Countless names have followed similar paths, including Ashley and Courtney, Beverly and Joyce. Our memory is short, and while this feels like a new phenomenon, it’s a tale as old as time.
NINE: HARD BRIGHT LINES ARE IN SHORT SUPPLY.
Many of us assume that once, maybe even recently, every name neatly corresponded to male or female, with no overlap. Think about it, though, and logic dictates this can’t possibly be true.
Andrea is masculine in Italian. So is Elia. Romance languages blur the lines.
But even within English, the story quickly grows complicated. An oft-cited early theft? Evelyn. You might know that male writer Evelyn Waugh married a woman with the same first name.
Only it didn’t start out as a given name at all. Evelyn began as a surname, given to boys – but ultimately derived from Aveline, which was feminine. Aveline faded, but was revived as Evelina … and Evelina shortened to Evelyn.
That’s not name theft – it’s evolution.
EIGHT: THE IDEA OF STRICTLY BOY/GIRL NAMES ISN’T UNIVERSAL.
Some languages dictate that certain sounds belong to feminine names, while others are strictly masculine.
But that’s not universal. Hebrew, for example, offers dozens and dozens of truly unisex names.
Some might argue that English is closer to Hebrew than, say, Spanish. After all, Kate is a (almost certainly) a girl’s name, while Nate reads boy. And Tate? That depends.
If your language doesn’t insist upon clear rules, it opens the door to individual perception.
SEVEN: THE RULES WE DO HAVE? THEY LEAD US ASTRAY.
Do some parents go out of their way to research masculine names for their daughters? Probably.
But most simply hear a name and think it sounds feminine.
Take Avery. With Ava and Emily so popular, you might expect Avery to become a powerhouse – and it has. There’s no Madison without Madeline and Alison (which isn’t stolen from the boys at all – it’s a diminutive form of Alice, with history tracing back centuries.) Aubrey caught on because of a Bread song … and the well-established girl’s name Audrey.
Since sound is the only thing to go on, we’ll always get it wrong.
SIX: FAMILY NAMING TRADITIONS ENCOURAGE THE PRACTICE.
Too often, our sons receive family names. Our daughters? They’re given names that are pretty.
That bias helps explain why classic boy names remain in such rotation, changing relatively little over the years, while girls’ names feel far more subject to fashion.
But when you do encounter a family naming tradition, there’s a good chance it might be applied in a gender neutral fashion. This seems more true in the American South and perhaps New England, but examples are heard everywhere. Years ago, I asked a neighbor what she was planning to name her baby if it was a boy. She responded with her maiden name – something along the lines of Parker. And if it’s a girl? She laughed. Parker.
It’s nicely egalitarian, and might be worth embracing. Or, to think of it another way, it’s a shame to never use a beloved family name simply because you don’t have a son.
FIVE: SOMETIMES THE MOMENT DICTATES THE NAME.
Even families without specific traditions sometimes find themselves drawn to a specific name.
Kate Garry Hudon’s masculine middle acknowledges the passing of her uncle Garry, who died shortly before her birth. Similarly, Blake Lively might be comfortable with boy names on girls – but she and husband Ryan Reynolds named daughter James for Ryan’s departed dad.
Sometimes the idea of saving an honor name for a future son misses the point – it’s this pregnancy, and this child’s life connected to a specific moment.
FOUR: IS IT REALLY STEALING IF IT’S SITTING IN THE RECYCLE PILE?
Sometimes a name rises in use for boys and girls at the same time, and slows down for our sons as it gains blockbuster status for our daughters.
But that’s not a rule.
At other times, a masculine name is languishing, all-but-forgotten.
Some Laurences used to shorten their name to Lauren. And a small, but steady, number of men were named Lauren in the US. Just enough to put Lauren on the edge of the most popular boy names in the US for years.
But then Betty Joan Perske adopted the stage name Lauren Bacall, and it became a sensation for our daughters.
Was it a tailored twist on classic Laura? Or a straight-up hijacking of a boys’ name? It feels more like the former than the latter.
For an even more dramatic example, take Madison. The name left the boys” Top 1000 in the US after 1952. The movie Splash launched the name in 1984. Parents who considered the name Madison for their daughters knew all about Madeline and Allison, but probably had never encountered Madison as masculine.
If parents aren’t using it, does it stay in the vault? It seems open to re-discovery … even if that means we choose it for our daughters instead.
THREE: NAMES CAN – AND DO – HOLD STEADY AS UNISEX OR MASCULINE – EVEN WHEN THEY’RE USED IN BIG NUMBERS FOR GIRLS.
Girls have been named Dylan, Cameron, and Ryan, but all three of those names remain decidedly more popular for our sons.
Other names, like Rowan and Jordan, hold steady as unisex for years.
We can’t know what will happen, of course. But it’s a good reason to feel confident that your favorite boy name won’t be unwearable because of a television character/celebrity parent/someone commenting on an online forum adopted the name for a daughter.
TWO: A NEW GENERATION MINDS ALL OF THIS MUCH LESS.
Can you find girls who dislike being mistaken for a boy based on their name? Probably. And boys can object to meeting a girl who shares their name.
But the more common it becomes, the less anyone minds. The more we pause and ask if Charlie or Alex or Riley or Quinn is a boy or a girl. (Or don’t ask at all, because so often, it really doesn’t matter.)
And, of course, our kids surprise us. Because my son has played sports with a boy named Kelly. I’d asked if Kelly was a girl, and my son sputtered. “Who names a girl Kelly?” He knew one person with the name. That person was a boy. Obviously, it was a boy’s name. What a crazy question to ask!
ONE: THE PROBLEM ISN’T BOY NAMES ON GIRLS. IT’S THE IDEA THAT OUR BOYS CAN’T SHARE A NAME WITH SOMEONE ELSE’S DAUGHTER.
The right name can be the right name, nevermind if you welcome a daughter or a son.
It’s worth recognizing if your choice is controversial – and deciding how you feel about that in advance.
But ultimately, boy names on girls are only a problem when we behave as if being used for girls somehow taints names, making them less appropriate for our son.
SO … SHOULD YOU USE BOY NAMES ON GIRLS?
My main objection to boy names on girls isn’t about shrinking the pool of possible names for our sons.
It’s the idea that finding strong names for our daughters somehow requires eschewing anything feminine. Eleanor and Ruth find this idea ridiculous. Actually, so do Nancy and Amy and Angela and Marie and Christine and hundreds of other names, all worn by women who have excelled in any number of fields.
Tailored favorites, like Claire and Jane and Helen and Katherine, all feel conventionally and traditionally feminine without being frilly. But does it matter? Just look at the Forbes 100 index of the world’s most powerful women. For every Judith, there’s a Vicki.
Don’t embrace boy names on girls because it’s the only way to find strong names for our daughters. But if other reasons make a traditionally masculine name a compelling choice? Then proceed … with your eyes open.
How do you feel about boy names on girls? Have you ever considered BNOGs for your family?
First published on July 2, 2011, this post was revised and re-published on November 25, 2020.
My older child is gender creative and has a traditionally masculine name. Hindsight is 20/20, but I wish I had given him a more gender neutral name. At this point he loves his name and I hope it is never a cause of pain.
Honestly, I live in fear for my child’s future. We live in a very homogenous corner of the USA, but we are extremely fortunate to have found a supportive community. All of this anger and condemnation surrounding the appropriate gender of names is just a reflection of our society’s own bigotry.
Such an interesting debate on here. Names have been borrowed by both genders throughout the ages. However, this cannot be viewed as not being colored at all by patriarchy. After all, I have known Johnnies, Billies, and Charlies with nicknamey forms of their fathers’ names. I even knew an older female James, named after her father. In all of these cases, it was because they had saved the name for a junior, but finally gave up and settled with using it on a girl. So, in some (not all) cases, it was still influenced by the patriarchy.
Names are not ruined by girls using them… but if the name becomes overwhelmingly used by girls, it may become inconvenient. I saw this with a brother with a name that became overwhelmingly female… Simple things, like people thinking he was using a fake id, getting assigned to the wrong locker room, winning Prom Queen (someone nominated him as a mean joke… and he won), etc. So, it’s not a “he’ll get beat to a pulp”, but more a “do I really want him to potentially need to bring 3 forms of ID”?
Then the final issue, which has already been discussed… Yes, name your daughter Kyle. It has a nice sound, so why not? Because until you’re truly willing to name your son Mary, you’re not saying “gender doesn’t matter”. Instead, you’re saying “masculine is superior to feminine.” And then you can listen to how many parents say things like how they want their daughter to have a “strong” (read: masculine) name, not a “frilly” name (read: feminine).
So, I do think you’re rushing to a bit of a conclusion about why people don’t like this trend. Yes, some people may think their son, Robin, may get beat to a pulp. However, there are also many others (including a non-name nerd friend who recently mentioned this to me) who view it as potentially inconvenient or simply reinforcing patriarchy. Once Mary becomes as popular on boys as James is on girls, then I will completely support this trend.
“Then the final issue, which has already been discussed… Yes, name your daughter Kyle. It has a nice sound, so why not? Because until you’re truly willing to name your son Mary, you’re not saying “gender doesn’t matter”. Instead, you’re saying “masculine is superior to feminine.” And then you can listen to how many parents say things like how they want their daughter to have a “strong” (read: masculine) name, not a “frilly” name (read: feminine).”
PREACH!
YES YES YES. This has always been my issue – until we start talking about girl names on a boy (GNOB) in the same way, this really, really isn’t about gender neutrality at all.
I’m all for using family names on kiddos of either gender, but otherwise the justification for this trend irks me.
That said, the coach for the newly formed Racing Louisville women’s soccer team is a man called Christy, and I absolutely adore it. I think he is Irish (I assume his name is short for Christian, but I really have no idea). I just thought it was a refreshing change to see a name that most in the US think of as a girl’s name on a man.
I always chuckle a little when people say “I could not imagine a girl named X, but I could totally see a girl named X.” Once upon a time no one could imagine a girl named Jocelyn or Evelyn, Shannon or Kelly, Ryan or Michael. Saying that there was once a boy named Evelyn as the same time as a girl was named Evelyn is to me the same thing as saying there once was a girl named Shannon and a boy named Shannon at the same time. The more time passes, the more names almost always trend female. Over time, we can “imagine” those names on girls much more than we can “imagine” others that still retain a masculine edge.
Either way, my biggest beef with this trend is not really about the names themselves but the societal perceptions, as a few people have already mentioned up thread. I will be all for boy’s names on girls when it is reciprocated and girl’s names are used on boys. It is isn’t “hip” “cute” or “trendy” when a boy is named Elizabeth or Jessica, it is a recipe for shunning and a lifetime of embarrassment. As a feminist, the double standard leaves a very bitter taste in my mouth.
Not rally sure if I would ever give my child a name that feels like it belongs to the opposite sex, but when it comes to middle names I’m not really sure what the problem is. They’re only middle names. At work I constantly see names of people where the middle names “oficially” belong to the opposite sex.
I prefer girly names for girls and boyish names for boys. My friends think Ebony is a unisex name I think its 4 girls and girls only.
I see what you did there with Madison and splash.
My daughter is named Riley Anne! Riley is my maiden name, so it worked out well!
The reaction to boys names on girls is now pretty mild compared to the opposite of using girl’s names on boys. Comments like “gross” even get used in those situations. So there is a double standard, added to an almost irrational fear around giving a boy a name that could be used by a girl, even if it’s not that common. Recently I’ve even seen people put off using Sawyer for a boy because there is a perception it is crossing to the girls even though it ranks around the 200s for boys and not in the top 1000 for girls. If a name is really “unisex” then it should be usable for both genders, and not unisex for girls and unisex for boys. What does that really mean if you start to gender differentiate unisex names? There is also this myth that a boy who meets a girl with the same name will somehow be scarred for life. That’s just irrational. Sure there may be awkward moments, and teasing too, but teasing is part of being a kid, if it’s not your name it’s something else.As a guy with a “girl’s” name I wish people would be more open minded about this. There are even cultural differences and people seem to be so ignorant of these. Ashley and Robin and Terry are common names for boys in the UK. Tracey is a girl’s name. It’s more like the opposite in the US. And recently I saw a thread somewhere about naming a boy Andrea because of Italian heritage and what the reactions would be like.
I dislike many unisexual names on girls because I think it implies that a girl can only be equal to the boys if she’s got a boy’s names. I’ve read so many times in forums that giving a girl a boy’s name will give her an edge later on in life and I can’t even describe how much I resent that view point.
I agree that many names that seem dated on a girl sound fresh on a boy, like Kelly, Shelby, Ashley.
I think it’s good that newer unisexual names like Jayden, Riley and Peyton aren’t being completely given up by the boys although.
I totally agree with you about using one gender-bending name per child. I hate the birth announcements that don’t list the sex of the baby, because sometimes it is really hard to tell.
Personally, I don’t see what the big deal is. I love the names Sawyer, Emerson, Avery, Sage, and Taylor for boys and that didn’t stop because they are being used on girls too. I went to school with boys and girls named Casey, Jamie, Leigh/Lee & Aaron/Erin and it didn’t scar anyone. Plus, even the popular names aren’t used as much as in the past so the chance of a boy and girl with the same name being in the same class (especially the further down you go on the list) is slim.
If you look at the soc sec list, you will find nine boys named Elizabeth, thirteen boys named Ella, seven boys named Grace, twenty boys named Emily, & seven boys named Victoria so there are some parents who will use girl names on boys.
Good post, Abby. I enjoyed reading this and everyones’ comments.
Happy 4th!
Sarah
Many of those obviously “wrong gender” names that are very low on the list (this goes both ways) are more likely than not errors in the SSA recording the person’s gender. (Before the early 1990s or so in the days before computers were prevalent these errors were more common, with many of the most popular names having enough errors accumulated to show up in the top 1,000 of the opposite gender.)
Yeah, I figured some of those were mistakes, but I’ve run across baby boys named Emily, Evelyn, Haley, and Grace when searching through birth announcements for my blog so some of them are true. You could tell that Emily’s parents were foreign so maybe they just didn’t realize that they gave their son such a feminine name. I shouldn’t have used such extreme examples to show that some parents use “girl names” on boys, just not to the extent of “boy names” on girls.
Cheers.
So-called girls names that I would give to a son:
Sojourner
Madrigal
Lark
Raven
Firenze
Fiore
Monserrate
Topaz
Shiloh
Averil
Sirocco
Betony
Onyx
Romilly
Ember
Haven
Traditionally Maculine names that I would give to a daughter (so, a shorter list):
Meriwether
Huckleberry
Archer
Florizel
Cymbeline
Seraphim
Haven
…Something tells me I’m the odd one here. This happens to me all the time, where I either see a name and think it would be cool for a boy, or meet a man or fictional male character with this name, and then I look it up and it’s only listed under girls. So as it turns out, my tastes for boy’s aren’t solidly masculine to the rest of the world. But looking at the list, it’s not really the same thing as naming a boy Elizabeth.
The thing don’t like about girls being named Barkley, Ryan, Emerson, and Kyle is that I didn’t find them particularly appealing as boy’s names to begin with! Charlie for a girl? That’s kind of cute, I guess.
This is really interesting, Abby, and I guess I’m not sure how I feel because I agree with so many different points! Yes, there are names and surnames. And, yes, many a surname has a quote-on-quote masculine meaning (i.e., son of), but then again many don’t! And, what if it is your maiden name and you love it and want to use it regardless of gender? What if it’s the last name of your favorite character ever in your favorite book from childhood? What if it’s your best friend’s last name? What if it’s your grandma’s maiden name, long since lost in your family tree? I say go for it. Girl or boy. But, what if you’re expecting a girl, likely your only child, and you want to honor your brother…by using his first name. And let’s say it’s Richard. Should you be able to? Well, yea! Same goes for baby boys. If you want to honor your mother Madeline with your son’s name, do it. And if you’ve loved Evangeline forever and can’t think of calling your child anything else, use it. Even if you are having a boy. But, don’t be naive and expect everyone to love it! I get the argument about not wanting to use “boys’ names” for girls until we can use “girls’ names” for boys without getting a second look, but the reality is that many people still frown on “boys’ names” on girls and the thought of “girls’ names” on boys is, for whatever reason, epically more horrifying for the general public. I don’t know why, and I don’t really want to concern myself with it, but it’s a reality. I think if you, as the parent, don’t have confidence in your choice and don’t love it enough to deal with the likely distaste from others, then you probably shouldn’t pull a gender swap on your child’s name. But, if you can take the heat, why not fuel the fire?
My own personal taste? Probably a little too classic and on-the-beaten-path to really want to fuel the fire. But, do I like those “unisex” names? Sometimes. Do I like surnames? Yep. Do I like occupational names? Yes! So, bring on your Quinn’s and Ellis’ and Halsey’s. Bring on your son named Shelby and your daughter named Toby. I’m not gonna bat an eye. But you know who is? My grandma. And maybe your next-door neighbor. And maybe even your best friend.
Another interesting thing to bring into this debate – word names. Is it me or are word names, be they nature-inspired or just plain words, more acceptable on girls? Rain and Melody and Fable and Dahlia and Serenity and Diamond. I’d say those are all girls. Sure, there are celebrity baby boys named Story and Morocco and Egypt and Sparrow and whatnot (well, not literally Whanot, I hope!), but Honor? Liberty? Satchel? And the newly-named Willow Sage? Girls. And, again, this is the celebrosphere we’re talking about. How many little boys do you know with word names? How many little girls?
I’ve heard of non-celebrity boys/men named Lake and River, so yes I do know of some RL males with word-type names.
Like I said, this wouldn’t bother me if it was done both ways (like it is in other languages, like French or Japanese). I do find it extremely sexist that it is socially acceptable naming their daughters Alexis, when a little boy named Margaret (or even a masculine name like Hilary or Jocelyn!) would be seen as child abuse.
As it stands, it’s just a reflection on our own society, where masculinity is something positive and femininity a weakness – hence it’s fine for girls to be like boys, but not the opposite.
Good post! It’s not the use of names like these on girls that bothers me, but rather those who don’t want to use them on boys once they become “girly” fearing the worst for their sons. Hence why when someone asks about a name like Avery or Harper for a boy I usually mention that you should still consider it because continuing to use such names for boys helps keep them masculine. Having a GN name (and being male) myself, I think the hype of a unisex-named boy being doomed in school and throughout life is exaggerated. Sure, I have had a fair share of “Isn’t that a girl’s name?” comments and letters mistakenly addressed to “Ms. Kelly Lastname” but the only full-fledged “teasing” I got was from someone who found anyway he could to tease people. With the current generation of babies and children having more names used both ways than ever before I think many of the names mentioned here can be comfortably used for either gender (and in the future expect more situations like what happened with the “Kelly Hildebrandt” couple in 2009).
About reason #9: From my experience the same is true for the guys with unisex names I know. I love my name, but I’ve also talked to another male Kelly who dislikes his name and goes by his MN instead. Whether it be for a boy or girl, some people like having a gender-ambiguous name while others don’t. A good compromise, like waltzingmorethanmatilda said, is to use a gender-specific middle name that can be used in addition to or instead of the unisex FN.
About the surnames comment: That’s why I feel a bit more defensive about names like Rory (a traditional Irish/Scottish boy’s name, with a masculine meaning on top of that) on a girl (Pam Satran, I forgive you though), while names originating as nature names/place names/surnames/etc. are more loosely gendered IMO (hence why I think names like Bailey, River, and Shannon are more doable either way). OTOH, the bias still creeps in with names like Savannah and Summer generally being regarded as strictly feminine.
I just may blow a gasket… About 99.9 percent of these so-called “boys” names being used for girls are SURNAMES. Surnames are not male. Calling a surname masculine strikes me as sexist.
Nearly all of the names discussed above are surnames, everything from Addison to Riley to Kelly and Jordan. Hilary, Lindsay, Tiffany, Kelsey and McKenzie are ALL surnames. Same for Ryan, Avery, Cameron, Madison, Allison, Tyler, Logan, Parker, Taylor, Blake, Quinn, Owen, Irving, Peyton, Kendall, Dexter, Meredith, Casey, Reese, Delaney, Scott, Todd, Travis and Bailey. Even my own name, Joy, is a surname.
Furthermore, many uber-male names have become surnames: James, Roberts, Richards, Williams, Patrick, Andrews, Thomas, Francis.
People have had surnames for hundreds of years, so they aren’t inherently masculine. (And, yes, I know that many surnames above have been used mostly for boys, and using surnames for given names is not new, but the explosion started around the 50s.)
Surnames are mostly masculine in etymology (since in most cultures the transmission of surnames is patrilineal). Therefore, most of them originate in male names – Addison (Adam’s son), Avery (same as Alfred), Madison (Maud’s son), Taylor (a tailor), Owen, Reese, Scott (masculine Welsh names). Plus they were traditionally used as a middle name, not a given name – usually in honour of the maternal family, a godparent, etc. The child would always have a “proper” given name.
Anyway, since they are literally “family names” I think it’s strange to use them as given names, especially if they have no relation whatsoever to your ancestry.
Most of them are SURNAMES with MASCULINE meanings. Anything starting with Mc like MacKenzie means “son of”! How is that appropriate on a baby girl?
I suppose I read “son of” as “descended from” – after all, if my last name were Jameson, odds are that my father’s name isn’t actually James, right? Because parents generally don’t call their kids James Jameson or John Johnson. (Though I guess Alfred Avery and Adam Addison are more plausible.) Still, you’d probably have to go back dozens and dozens of generations to find your original James … and so while I am, at some point, descended from my ancestral James, the meaning is softened.
On the other hand, James naming his daughter Jameson seems potentially more meaningful than James naming his daughter Emily or Olivia or Grace. In the absence of an English-language equivalent to denote a female descendant, “son” stands in for both, just like “mankind” is inclusive.
Guess I didn’t make my point very well. I just don’t feel that a name has been swiped from the boys if it’s a surname to start with. Show me a raft of little boys named Sabrina or Andrew shooting to the top 20 for girls and then I’ll be more sympathetic.
And I AM in the camp of uber-feminine names for girls. My own personal favorites are Caroline, Louisa, Georgiana, Genevieve, Suzanne, Madeleine, Eva, Chloe, Elizabeth, Katharine, Jane, Natalie, Marianne, Jeanne and Sabrina.
“…What I do have a problem with is how unbending our conceptualization of gender is. When the day comes that I hear/read someone suggest Aidan for a girl and then suggest Olivia for a boy, I
I have more of a problem with surname-napping. Probably because I am from the South where giving your maiden or other meaningful name is a custom, it drives me NUTS when people choose random surnames that they have no connection to. So when someone complains about Addison, Avery or the like going to the girls, I find it rather ironic. Most of these gender-bending names are actually surnames anyway (and yes, I know that line is blurry and my stance is somewhat flawed), and so haven’t been included in the canon of “Boys Names” for long anyway. And the argument that “there aren’t any boys names left” doesn’t really wash either, since there have always been far fewer boys names than girls. George, Charles, Thomas, Henry-these names have no risk of being taken over by the girls. It’s only when parents want to choose unusual, original names-and thus generally resort to the surname style-that they run into parents considering them for girls.
That’s fair enough, Caroline – I know someone who has a Very Significant Surname on her short list for a girl. It is also a name that reads gender-neutral, trendy, and is frequently subject to respellings. Her attitude is that it doesn’t spoil the meaning for her, and that’s great, but I can imagine a parent feeling like the name was ruined by its overuse.
I think all of us could name a Duggar-sized family of boys without feeling like we’d run out of options!
I tend to like gender crossovers in the middle slot as in, say Amelia George A. The names that really bug me are the 97 rhymes-with-Aiden names that are everywhere right now. Part of the problem is that I’m playing the Sib Set game over at YCII and so I’ve seen every permutation of the name as it goes from 1-799. Bah, what everyone else said.
Give it a few years and names like Riley, Avery, Peyton, Dakota, Reese, Emery, Finley, and Skylar will be fully feminine. That’s just how is works, it happened with other names, it will happen with those. Its different with Ryan, Cameron, Logan and Parker for example, because those names were always a lot more popular for boys than girls, so people’s perception on those names are that they’re firmly masculine.
I do not like boy names on girls, I just think what’s the point really? We dont see parents rushing to the “baby girl names” section of the book to name their son. And whether we like it or not, its VERY unlikely you’ll meet a male Whitney, Vivian, Hilary, Cassidy, Kelsey, Lindsay, Courtney, Jody, Lauren, Kimberley, Beverley, Leslie, Paige, Shelby, etc, especially under the age of 5.
You already see this happening with modern unisex names that parents already perceive as mostly feminine, like Addison, Madison, Aubrey, Bailey, Mackenzie, Haley, Ashley, Kenzie, etc, parents have ditched these for their sons because they’re “girly”.
Yes new unisex names arrive, almost always boy names in origin, and 95% are tipped feminine once they’ve run it’s course.
The same happens in the UK, but at least over there things are a little bit more balanced with names like Mackenzie, Bailey, Riley, Morgan, Sydney, Taylor, Finlay, Jamie, Ashley and Aubrey still seen as masculine.
It is frustrating that the perception is that names can only go one way … but Peyton has held steady and Jayden has skyrocketed for boys without girls’ use derailing it. Some spellings tend to signal gender – Payton is more popular for girls, as is Jaidyn. I do think this new bunch of names has some staying power on both sides of the chart.
I should also add, just to be clear, that I wasn’t trying to imply that only people in Wales would or should take issue with Emrys on a girl. Anyone who had first been introduced to the name as “masculine” first could find it uncomfortable to see it on a boy and might speak out about it on the internet. Equally, there are plenty of people in the country of origin who wouldn’t even raise an eyebrow about it.
Surname-firstnames have been used for both boys and girls for centuries, often on both genders within the same family. So Mason, Tate, Logan, Reeve, Cloudsly, Healy and the like have all happily sat on girls and boys in the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries.
I agree with Waltzing that there can be issues with cultural cross-over. As pointed out in Point 7, “very often a name was scarcely used for either gender when it is first discovered by the parents of girls”, and this is where people get tetchy in such an international forum as the internet. Because, “new” discoveries for parents in one country, are old established classics in others.
Lets say a couple in Ottawa see the name Emrys on a list and think it sounds really great for a girl and use it. They have no previous exposure to the name other than it sounds a bit like Emma and a bit like Alice. No one else they have ever met, or even in their state has used it or heard of it either and they get very positive feedback out it. In their own social context the name is perfectly acceptable and not at all shocking. However, once put on the internet (“my daughter is called Emrys”) the parents will be coming into contact with people on the other side of the pond for whom Emrys isn’t an unused new discovery but a crusty old reliable. They see Emrys and picture the old man next door, that cute male actor from that TV program, or their great great grandfather’s name and “Why didn’t you just call you daughter Albert?” comes back the response. Celtic names in particular (both Riley and Evan were used as an example), having been quite isolated for a long time to the British Isles, get used in this way quite a lot.
“Boys names on girls” is often perfectly fine and acceptable IRL, in the context of their own cultural and social situation,and not in any way scarring. The issues come when projected onto an international forum like the internet.
Excellent point, Elea – thanks!
Oh and I’m not a fan of the two unisex names trend either – Riley Anne and Evan Marie, is one thing, Riley Blair and Evan Lee is another. Remember that quiz on unisex names For Real Names had on her blog? I don’t think anyone did better than about 60% at guessing which were male and which were female, while many of us didn’t even get half right.
I hear you! I do think that you get one unisex/gender-bender name per child. William Lynn is great. Blair Elisabeth? Go for it! But if your name would make ForReal’s quiz, well … that’s a signal to rethink. Hmmm … there’s a post in that …
I’m becoming more and more accepting of traditionally male names becoming unisex, but I agree that giving a girl two of these unisex names will just cause confusion because it makes the name look quite distinctly masculine. I also tend to be rather more in love with unisex names on boys — I had a serious crush on Cassidy for a boy while a teenager! I’m not sure that I’m brave enough to go that route with my own son though.
I agree that if you do use a unisex/gender bender name then you should definitely go with a gender specific name to avoid some of the confusions and to give the child an option to go with that name if they wish. But it can also be hard to predict ahead of time what names might shift or become popular. When my mom chose Chelsea for me it wasn’t really popular at all, at least not in the UK that she knew of, but it was listed in the girl;s names in her book. But my middle name Kieran was most definitely a boys name and I have only ever heard of male Kierans, but now rather suprisingly (and worrying to me LOL) is that at least on the forums in the US this name seems to be trending girl now too. So you can try and avoid problems but might still get caught out.
I’m going to go with Sara A. on this one…I don’t have a problem with boys names on girls or vice versa…but there are quite a few unisex names that I dislike (Jayden, Peyton ..)… just like there are quite a few (currently singularly) masculine and feminine names that I dislike as well. I myself adore the name Laurence for a girl (traditionally its the feminine version of Laurent) and I’d like take back one for the boys and honor my mother in the process by using Lynn for a boys middle name. Some might argue that I should use Lynn for a daughter in order to honor my mother, but I feel that Lynn as a girls middle is rather contrite where it feels fresh and viable for a boy.
If our second had been a boy, I would likely have used Clare in the middle spot to honor my mom. (Though it might’ve ended up being an extra middle.) And I agree – often a name feels fresh for a boy again when it still sounds dated for a girl. Kelly, for example – love it on a boy, but it feels like a mom’s name on a girl.
I realized I just contracted myself in the above post saying that Luca is too feminine yet I like unisex names on men. I should clarify that it all really comes down to the name but that Im certainly not against unisex names on men.
Abby I hope you address this topic on the nameberry blog, I think it would be beneficial for some of the conservative namenerds to see the points you made in the article. Its always good to see both sides.
Wow, great article and Im really impressed that someone with Abby’s stature in the name world, would be fair about unisex names. I am all for unisex names on girls, so long as they have some familiar use in the real world already with girls using them. If its a name like Parker, Sulliven, Miller, even Kyle….Im just not keen on it. The name has to feel either somewhat feminine to my ears or be neutral. A name I do like is Luca, its to feminine for my taste to use on a boy (unless we lived in Italy) and its not used on girls in the US (at least enough to be familiar) so although I love the name, I will likely not use it for either gender. Lastly, I do like unisex names on boys as well. Kelly, Tracy, Shannon…yes I think these give off a very cool vibe. Ive known a few and they never seemed to have any issues.
I guess another issue is “foreign” names that are masculine or feminine in their own countries, but do a gender-switch when they move to an Anglophone country. In France, Anne and Marie can be male names, Claude and Laurence are female names. Misha is a boy’s name in Russian, but is seen as feminine here. Cruz is unisex, but traditionally mostly feminine in Spain, but very masculine here so far. This often seems to be a cross-cultural sore point.
My nephew has a unisex name, and it’s quite common, so he’s used to sharing a classroom with boys and girls that have his name. It never seems to have bothered him or his family at all.
I don’t mind unisex names, but I do wish parents would introduce them as “my son Peyton” or “my daughter River” rather than just saying their names, as I worry I’m going to make some massive social faux pas at some point and give them a complex or something. If I ever pick a unisex name (which I’d probably only do on a boy), I promise faithfully to say, “my son Leaf” (or whatever) until he’s well into puberty and his masculinity is hopefully no longer in any doubt.
I have to agree with the “my son/daughter River” point especially after meeting people who are offended that you didnt automatically know their little Ryan was a girl. Im sorry but if you are going to use a unisex name be prepared for people to make mistakes…if your child is four months old, bald, wearing a white onesie and named Ryan Im not going to know shes a girl…
Sometimes a child can be 15 or so and you’re still in the dark … I have trouble telling emo girls from emo boys …
That’s an excellent point, Waltzing – in fact, I think I need to reshape some of these bullets to get that in there. There are plenty of examples where the masculine form would be feminine in English, and a few that go the other way, too.
You make some good points, and I do agree that the world is not going to come crashing down because of an increase in the use of traditionally masculine names on girls. However, I agree strongly with Sarah A that as long as the borrowing remains unidirectional, it seems a reminder of our discomfort with the notion of boys who have anything feminine about them. I’m particularly bothered when I hear of parents who chose a masculine name for their daughter because they wanted her to have a ‘strong’ name, as though it would be impossible to find a name that is both strong and feminine.
I actually like masculine-sounding nicknames for girls, such as Nick, Sam or Jo, but only as short forms for feminine names. I just find the whole surname-or-masculine-name-on-a-girl to be a trend that was played out a long time ago and would be happy to see it die out. But with young, attractive female celebrities named Hayden, Taylor, Evan, Blake, and Leighton on the scene, plus fictional characters like Glee’s Quinn, I doubt that’s likely to happen any time soon.
I agree, Havoye – it is frustrating that almost anything goes for girls, but it is VERY easy to trigger “he’ll get beat to a pulp” comments with so many boys’ names.
On the other hand, we have loosened up at least a little when it comes to boys’ names. Popular choices DO end in -a, like Noah and Joshua. So that’s something. And while the rise of the -aidens still confuses me, it does signal a greater willingness to be creative with our sons’ names – sort of.
My daughter’s name was picked partly because it was medieval French in origin but still familiar to the modern ear (Stephanie) and feminine without being frilly. All the boys names I like are firmly masculine. Aaron, Dexter, Peregrine.
I look at it differently since it’s likely we’ll move to Germany sometime in the next 5-6 years, we need to keep the German naming conventions in mind. Our youngest daughter’s birth name was a newly unisex, surname name. Germans not only see the name as male but as “Amerikaner.” I wanted my daughter to have a name that could easily cross borders and a lot of the new unisex names scream “I AM AN AMERICAN!”
My neighbor kids names are Loren, Kelly, Casey and Mica. They’re a blended family, but I find it fascinating that Kelly the only boy.
So you were keeping German naming conventions in mind…but still gave your daughter a unisex name that reads as male and American to Germaans? How does that make sense?
Sorry I wasn’t clear there…
We adopted our youngest daughter and we changed her name because her birth name didn’t met German naming conventions.
Julie-
Ah I see. Sorry if my orginal response came off harsh. After re-reading, it seems judgemental. I do think it makes sense to take into consideration where your child will grow up when choosing names.
I’ll admit that this is one of those issues that really started sticking in my craw only after I became a name nerd, go figure 😉 I personally don’t have a problem with it if it’s a nice enough name.
I like the names Kyle, Shannon, Kelly, Meredith, Casey, etc. so to see them on girls isn’t a big deal because I find them attractive already. But Riley, Peyton, Jayden, etc. I’d rather not hear on anyone (no offense).
What I do have a problem with is how unbending our conceptualization of gender is. When the day comes that I hear/read someone suggest Aidan for a girl and then suggest Olivia for a boy, I’ll feel better about the gender flipping. I really dislike how it’s often those who suggest boy names for girls that balk at girl names for boys.
I agree that if it’s a name you really love and is important to you, then go for it. Noor and Farah both have history as boys names and they’re still on our list!
I actually attended high school (and I graduated in 1997) with a girl named Aidan.
I’m actually surprised nobody’s mentioned Cary (born Archibald Leach) Grant yet.
I answered your question on why there aren’t any boys called Olivia; I figured I’d better just go write my own blog entry and stop hogging someone else’s thread! 🙂
http://waltzingmorethanmatilda.com/2011/07/10/help-help-a-girl-stole-my-boy-name-or-how-much-should-we-panic-about-gender-bending-names/
We like the gender nurture name Aubrey but we made her name more girly. Until parents can named your son Sue or Anne without getting beat up. Parents should stick to girls names for girls and stick with boys names for boys. We lived in double standard world. Not only a boys name will affect him in school but can affect him as a man in the work place. People won’t take him seriously because of his name.
Sharon, I understand your hesitation. But I don’t think it plays out that way in the real world – and with every passing generation, that’s more + more true. My kids are growing up with girls and boys with the names Riley and Micah and Jordan, and it’s just shrugged off. Part of it is that so few names repeat that we don’t know enough Kellys to see them as feminine. If we’ve met one Kelly and he’s a boy, then that’s just the way it is.
Well, I clearly prefer my kids to either be boyish or girlish, but don’t have a major problem with most boys names on girls/ girls names on boys. I just think some of them sound ugly on either: Kyle’s got an ugly sound, period. There’s a host of reasons why I prefer girls names on girls & boys names on boys but the main one is simple: I was mistaken for a boy between the ages of 7 – 11. Short hair, a stick- like figure and a penchant for jeans & tees did it. I still get mistaken for a guy on the phone, even now! Yes, I have a low voice for a woman, think Lauren Bacall and you’ve got my tone, perfectly.
If someone on a board asked for thoughts on a boy named Rex, I’d say “That’s my top boy name”! And probably add that I think a girl Rex might cry more than she ought because of her name. But might is just that, a big maybe. All I know is what I prefer both on my own kids and what I hear on others. But I’d never shun someone because They named their kids something I dislike nor would I shun them because of their name. We have good friends named Carol & Kelly. Go ahead, which one’s which? ( for the record, Carol’s the guy, Kelly’s the gal). we also know a guy Kelly and a girl Wally. So, it really doesn’t hinder my progress in the world. I just don’t like doing it myself! 😀
Thanks, Lola! And I cannot imagine a girl named Rex – but I can imagine a girl named Ryan or Reese, just as easily as I can imagine a boy with either of those names.
BTW, love Carol on a boy – not so much on a girl. But I do think that if I can say that, someone ought to be able to say the opposite – that they like it only for a girl.
Back in the 90s, my parents’ church had a male pastor named Carol. And he must have been born in the early 1940s, I think. Just a different spelling than Carroll, really.