View Message

Nope, I don't like it. But it's less bad for a boy than for a girl! I think it's a good name for a dog... Bailey just seems really underdressed to me, like baggy overalls. Not sure why.

---

I like "soft" names for guys, but they have to be what I think of as "soft" in a masculine way.* Clover doesn't make the cut. Names that are naturey in a poetic way that suggests sense appeal or abstract symbolism, usually seem more feminine to me. Azure might sort of work for a boy because it suggests the sky and sounds like Asher, but I wouldn't really like it because I think of it as referring to the color. My idea of masculine nature names are names like Forest, Zephyr, River, Rowan. Ones that suggest movement or majestic space or strength. Other "soft masculine" names, to me, are ones full of soft sounds, that are place/surnames and traditionally male names. Like Tristan, Leith, Lucian, Francis, Silas.

---

I don't like Brecken and I don't think it sounds particularly masculine. Just seems trendy/surnamey, like Braxton. NMS. Kenny seems like a very artificial nickname for it. Brec would be better.

---

* Maybe I should add a disclaimer, this comment is about my taste, and what I feel can make names seem gendered for me personally; I'm not implying that I judge people for naming their daughters Rowan or their sons Ivy or whatever. If I meet women with names that I think are mannish, or men with names I think are womanish ... I'm OK and you're OK. I just don't give my approval to theoretical babynames that I think would give me that impression because it's not to my taste. I like unisex naming, but I wouldn't want to have a name that I think gives a truly gender-bending impression.

This message was edited 4/19/2013, 2:43 PM