View Message

[Opinions] Trendy or Dated?
Which is worse. I think trendy is much worse.Image hosting by Photobucket
Archived Thread - replies disabled
vote up1

Replies

Neither. That stuff seriously doesn't bother me. All names become dated at some point-ALL names. Except the very truest classics (Mary, Anne, Elizabeth, James, John, etc...). But even ones people think of as "classic" like Ava and Olivia will be dated to this generation in thirty years. Who cares? Just pick the names you like in life!
vote up2
Definitely trendy--I'd much rather be Myrtle than Mykenzee!
~Heather~
vote up1
Trendy is worse, because trendy names will be dated. Some names that are considered dated often sound quite offbeat or like family names. I know of two little girls named Cheryl and Nancy, and while those names are a bit dated, they're 1000 times better than trendy names like Makayla or Jaidyn or anything kr8ive or invented. I guess I always see trendy names as people with the pack mentality, parents name their kids the trendy names so they'll be the popular, cool kids. I'd rather see a kid with a dated name that atleast shows the parents can think for themselves and choose a name they like, not just follow the crowd.
vote up1
Whoa."Pack mentality"? Parents choose names, by and large, based on what they like. Not so their kids will be popular or cool. Nor so their kids will fit in with the rich white crowd... or appear to be bluebloods ... or show off how well-educated they are .. or whatever else it could be that motivates people to like traditional, or well-used, or used by the well-to-do names. I mean, people just pick a name they like, and they think about whether their kid will be rejected based on the name -- and they base their judgment on whether or not they themselves, or their peers (people they relate to) would reject it. Beyond that, they can't truly know how it "fits in."Parents who choose "dated" or non-trendy names in general are just as conformist, if not more so, in their own way, as parents who prefer trendy names.What you perceive as a pack mentality is, I think, just the tendency of people in different subcultures to simultaneously like the same pool of names. There's a Makayla & Jaiden subculture who probably all thought they were original, just like they think it's somehow original to name a girl Tyler or Taylor. And there's also a subculture that chooses names from what they think of as more high-brow culture: the names used by their great great grandparents, or names of famous people from antique times, or names from literature, etc... they suffer trends too! I came here a couple years ago thinking I was the only one who could like a name like Violet. Ha! It's already been used by a celebrity and folks here just LURVE it. We're all under the same influences, and what comes out as our "taste" can look a lot like deliberate efforts to conform.Both kinds of naming could cynically be seen as mere striving to impress those in one's own group... that doesn't apply more to the trendies than it does to the traditionalists.- chazda, defensively because I can't think of a single name that doesn't appear to follow someone's trend nor bow to someone else's standard of good enough. Except the ones that make most all people (including me) say, "Please don't inflict that on a child." Which include both too-dated and too-trendy names.

This message was edited 2/22/2006, 6:19 PM

vote up1
I just have to comment on the above, because Cheryl is an invented name; it's just a name that was invented 100 years ago instead of a decade ago. I don't have any reliable records of women named Cheryl before about 1900, and it was a big booming trendy name in the 1940s, coming out of nowhere to be extremely popular. People who named their daughters Cheryl in the 1940s and 1950s could have been just as easily accused of having a "pack mentality" and giving their daughter a "trendy" name as people today who name their daughters Madison, Kaylee, Mackenzie, or Destiny are.If you now accept Cheryl as being a perfectly good though "dated" name, the chances are that 70 years from now most people will have exactly the same feelings about presently popular recent inventions such as Jaden, Caden, Makayla, Makenna, etc.
vote up1
definantly trendy!
vote up1
n/t
vote up1
It depends on the name!I'm sure most little girls would rather be named Madison then Mildred or Bertha!But a dated name that just sounds a little old fashioned, like Ethel or Darold - that's much better then a trendy you-neek spelling name like Jaymez or Scotlyn!

This message was edited 2/22/2006, 7:27 AM

vote up1
I think trendy is much worse. 'Dated' names are always in style for me. :) Give me a Mabel or a Walter over a Jacob or Sarah any day!
_______________________
vote up1
Dated is worseTrendy will probably become dated, but not if it stays consistently popular. Sometimes it does.Meanwhile, a dated name will always be out of sync.I try to avoid either, though._____________________________________________________________________Elinor
vote up1
Depends, as usual, on the name itself. Although in general, I prefer "dated" names and don't care for "trendy" names.A few dated names whose moldiness I would hesitate to attach to a child born now, despite loving or liking the names myself:Mildred
Virgil
Cluna
Claud
Olive
Cecil
Maud
Clarence
Beverly
Bruce
Ethel
Opal
Trendy names can be okay, too - some new usages and variations, I can picture aging really well and especially, fitting in really well. Like, they sound young, fresh, and hip - especially to the person's peers, but not too lame and tawdry and faddish to those, say, 10 years older, who'll have a lot of influence on that person and his/her success. Here are a few examples of names I think I'd rather be called than the above, if I were born today:Quinn f
Gage
Alyssa
Caden m
Mackenzie f (yes, I think most - not all - girls born today, given the choice, would easily pick Mackenzie over Mildred or Maud or Myrtle, and feel better about it her whole life. Excuse me. Although I personally prefer Maud. And probably, pressed to choose one or the other as my daughter's name, I'd be stuck in the mud and I'd pick Mildred or Maud.)
Zane
Cole
Hailey f
Tyler m
Sydney f
Ashley f
Ashlyn f
Ashton m
Kayla
Austin m
Shelby f
Rain f
River m
Rio e
- chazda

This message was edited 2/21/2006, 11:11 PM

vote up1
Yes, trendy is much worse. I define trendy as "here-today-gone-tomorrow." I do not include classic names that are popular. Trendy, to me, is shallow and near-sighted.Dated, to me, is a classic name that is no longer popular. These names are, for the most part, classics. Sometimes, for me, the fact that a name is dated actually adds to its appeal. I love the juxtaposition of an "old lady" name on a young child. It reminds me that the 80 year old Violet was once a baby and it makes me smile. So yes, trendy is much worse than dated.
vote up1
Dated . . .. . . at least it shows that you can think for yourself.Plus, what Elemmennope said.
ChrisellAll we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us. - J.R.R. Tolkien.
vote up1
Trendy today is dated tomorrowI'd rather go with a name that feels dated these days, so that when it cycles back around my child is ahead of the times and already has a cool name!Todays McKeighlyn/Jaidyn/etc are going to be tomorrows ugly old person names.
vote up1
Yep . . .
vote up1
ditto*
“It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.”
~Mark Twain
vote up1
What you said. :-)
Miranda
Image hosting by PhotobucketProud adopter of 15 punctuation marks; see my profile for their names.
vote up1
Good Point.Image hosting by Photobucket
vote up1