View Message

I like it, it’s a classic. I’d use Cristina myself.

It’s too dated to me, and I think Christiana is the more classic form. I’d consider Christiana, where I definitely wouldn’t consider Christina.

Christina is really pretty. It has a gentle feel to it and sounds unabashedly feminine without being too frilly. The name could be used to honor one of my family members, so I would definitely consider it as a middle name.

It's pretty, but I don't really like it. It just has that a generically feminine feel without any pizzazz. It is probably my least favorite name from in that family. I do think it makes the best full name for "Christie" if people feel one is necessary.

its ok

I wouldn't catergorize it as being one of my favorites, but I do think it's practical and decent. I have an older sister with this name, only hers is spelled with a 'K' (Kristina) which personally I prefer. Perhaps because I grew up being more used to that paticular variant. /:

I prefer it to Christine, but only because I don't like many -ine or -een names at all. Not being a Christian myself, and not expecting my children to become such, I wouldn't use it. There is an outside possibility, if I lived on a relatively underpopulated planet with excellent medical and childcare facilities, that I might have used Christiana as a mn, as I had two great-grandmothers with that name, but not in this life and not here.

When I can force myself to look at it objectively, it's not awful. It's not ugly. But that's about as kind as I can be to it. I'm just really tired of all "Chris" names. I don't like the meaning, which isn't usually an issue for me, but the meaning of Christina is more obvious to English speakers than most other names. And although I don't find Christina ugly, I don't find it beautiful either.

It's one of my favorites. I wouldn't mind using it, and I wouldn't mind being called it.