View Message

This is a reply within a larger thread: view the whole thread

[Facts] Re: The name Mackenzie
While I agree that this post doesn't belong on the fact board, I also agree with the original poster about the change of names in modern times. I personally have no issue with 'unisex' names as a concept; names come from somewhere and hey, various last names originated from first names so why not the other way around? I think certain names originally intended for boys sound fine on girls. As long as we don't go overboard with Little Miss Thomas and her best friend, Little Miss Samuel. EEK!. I honestly think it depends on the name but I do understand objections to Mackenzie as a female name (although I like it myself). Really, many people don't want certain names to be overtaken by the girls. I get that; I adore Ashley and Kelly for boys but I'd shy away from them, thanks to girls being given those names.I hope that rant made sense...
vote up1vote down

Replies

Perhaps the point is that Tamsin/Thomasina and Samantha/Samella are there to fill the gap? But since Mackenzie is a ln and the practice of using a (family, or socially superior)ln as a fn traditionally applied to boys, people find their expectations raised and then exploded. Never comfortable! What fascinates me is that, when fewer given names were in circulation - one or two centuries ago - people seemed pretty happy to use them over and over. Now, with many more names available than ever before, suddenly it's not enough. Consumerism, perhaps?
vote up1vote down
I love the last line of your post. Consumerism, perhaps? - I have never thought of that. I'm finishing a Consumption & Gender class right now and I think that you're definitely on to something.
vote up1vote down