New Post
Search
Help[Opinions] Re: Madison
in reply to a message by queenv
I think it's a fashion that always existed. What about Kelly? Shirley? Tracey? Lindsay?
Kelly was already pretty common in the 50s and 60s. Same with Tracey. Shirley was super common in the 30s, I think. It's not a very recent trend. In 1849 Charlotte Bronte named a girl in one of her novels Shirley. I think the father of the character Shirley had intended to give the name to a son and used it anyway when he had a daughter. I actually consider that a good thing. I mean women have surnames too, why can only boys have them as first names? What if some women would really like to give their maiden names to their daughters? I think this is how it all started anyway. I mean why are surnames considered masculine? Women have surnames too.
Kelly was already pretty common in the 50s and 60s. Same with Tracey. Shirley was super common in the 30s, I think. It's not a very recent trend. In 1849 Charlotte Bronte named a girl in one of her novels Shirley. I think the father of the character Shirley had intended to give the name to a son and used it anyway when he had a daughter. I actually consider that a good thing. I mean women have surnames too, why can only boys have them as first names? What if some women would really like to give their maiden names to their daughters? I think this is how it all started anyway. I mean why are surnames considered masculine? Women have surnames too.
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
Hmmmm....well, I think that surnames being used on boys and then becoming unisex or switching to all girls has always happened to some extent, as in the examples you use. Come to think of it, Courtney for girls was popular when I was a teenager. But it seems to have really picked up lately and the names are skipping boys and going right to girls.
Also, in the past, it seems to me that these names were just more feminine sounding than they are now. Kelly, Shirley, Tracey, Ashley, Courtney, all sound feminine to me. Madison, Addison, Bailey, MacKenzie, don't. Lindsay doesn't, either...I've never liked it.
So I'm still thinking there's a new trend here. To me, most surnames sound inherently masculine...as in, I can see naming a boy Harrison, Robinson, Blake, Walker, Baker, but I just can't see them on girls, but that's a matter of opinion.
Also, in the past, it seems to me that these names were just more feminine sounding than they are now. Kelly, Shirley, Tracey, Ashley, Courtney, all sound feminine to me. Madison, Addison, Bailey, MacKenzie, don't. Lindsay doesn't, either...I've never liked it.
So I'm still thinking there's a new trend here. To me, most surnames sound inherently masculine...as in, I can see naming a boy Harrison, Robinson, Blake, Walker, Baker, but I just can't see them on girls, but that's a matter of opinion.
1