Wednesday, August 19, 2009

More on names, gender, and generations

I was browsing around on the Internet and found this article which says that giving a boy an unusual name is a bad thing. I also found this blog in which a grandfather-to-be also suggests not naming a boy something unusual.

I'm not sure of the age of either of the persons who wrote the above, but I have a feeling that they're most likely Boomers (and if not then not more than a few years on either side from being one). Remember the last couple of my blog posts which mentioned how Boomers appear the biggest supporters of gender double-standards? The same thing applies here; if someone suggests using an unusual name for a girl but steering away from one for a boy chances are he/she is a Boomer (or possibly early Xer).

ETA: Although traditionally boys have overall been given more conventional and less creative names, it seems that Boomers and those around the same area in terms of cohort have been more blatantly divergent on how boys and girls are named then previously (e.g. how G.I.s named their children).

1 comment:

  1. While I tend to favour unusual names for both genders, I do notice that many people pick unusual names for daughters and then stick with William or Jack for their sons. I do think there is something to be said for this, actually, which perhaps these parents are taking into consideration - boys tend to mature later than girls, and while the teenage years can be full of self-consciousness for both genders, in my experience many boys aren't totally comfortable in social situations until they are around 16+, or at least much less so than girls. Having to repeat their name, explain it et cetera, could cause yet more embarassment when all they want to do is blend in.