Why are boys names so popular to use on girls?
It's dumb. Everytime I hear/see a girl called Ryan or Taylor I want to slap myself on the face. Or their parents. I don't understand why it's so "cool" and "cute" and "unique" to have girls with masculine names. Seriously, WHY? Since when is it okay for a girl to be called Jamie but for a boy to be called, let's say, Sophie, is idiotic and a disgrace? I personally dislike any unisex names. With so many people putting traditional boys names on girls (a good example: Ariel.), it won't be long before we have little female Charlies, Toms and Johns running around. And what names will be good for boys THEN?
" Also, the fact is that girls can pull off names that are used on boys, because there's such a think as tomboys, where as, even with all the multiculturism, guys are still afraid of coming out as gay. Evelyn and Meredith will never be able to convince anyone they like boobs."
^ Shouldn't we as a society work to get rid of those stereotypes then? Instead of encouraging them? Either all names should be 100% unisex so no-one would feel "gay" or forced to feel "masculine" because of their parents' poor decision-making skills. That, or boys names should remain as boys (females can be upset by feeling like they must behave like "tomboys" too! my friend is like that and she is planning on changing her name next year :/). Besides, if we have tomboys, let's have tomgirls too. I always wanted a little boy called Rachel. What, that's gay? Too bad, I think "Taylor" is a lesbian name but I don't see anyone complaining v__v
@ ♥ℇℓℓe ϻαrᎥe♥:
I don't think you understand my point. Those were just random examples. It's not about being traditional as much as it is about our society being so sexist. I repeat, why are modern boy names being used for girls more often and the other way around is bad and stupid? Why do people look at a name like Vivian and say it's a "good name for girls but not boys"? Why can a girl be called Ryan when its meaning is "little king" but a boy can't be named Rachel because the meaning is female sheep? This is sexist, don't you think? If we lived the way we did 100 years ago, we'd still be calling each other "Descendant of Williams" because of a famous William in our family but that is not my point. Do you understand what I'm trying to say?
- MughainLv 77 years agoBest Answer
Because people lack originality. They think that it's 'cool' and 'super unique' when, really, it's sad, pathetic and incredibly disrespectful to boys (whose names are being robbed off them), girls (who'll be teased and likely encounter problems in their lives), and other cultures (since it's America, primarily, that is importing foreign names such as Aubrey, Avery, Rowan etc. and slapping them on girls).
The funny thing is, the people who support boy names on girls are going to get the shock of their lives when they inevitably name their future sons something unquestionably manly such as Noah, Edward, Joseph, James or Michael - only to discover that their perfect manly name has been converted to unisex and is deemed as too 'girly' for boys; just like every other half-decent boy name at this point. They'll regret their misplaced support, but by then it will be too late...
All boy names will be taken over by girls in the next 10 to 20 years, be deemed as 'too girly and feminine' and, then what? What will they have left that will be usable?
I wouldn't have much of a problem with this thrice-damned trend if boys could actually have some girl names in fair trade. In short - if you're going to name your daughter Emerson, then be damn sure to name your son Arabella in the name of gender-equality.
Edit: I love your stereotype argument and I completely agree! Not just with names but with personalities! I want my future daughters to be strong, confident, intelligent and independent people who care less about their looks and more about life in general. And I want my future sons to be sweet, gentle, cultured and sophisticated. I wouldn't mind if they all had long hair (like in the old days) and I would love for them to join ballet classes and horse-riding lessons! I don't think it's fair that girls can get scabby knees and be tomboys while boys CAN'T be whoever the hell they want to be!
- ♥ℇℓℓe ϻαrᎥe♥Lv 47 years ago
Ryan and Taylor are surnames. Jamie is a nickname for Jamison, which also happens to be a surname. Noticing a pattern here?
It drives me insane whenever people call names which were originally surnames or place names [for example, Ariel] masculine.
If you were truly as traditional as you think you are, you wouldn't even consider naming your kid a random surname in the first place. Back 100 or so years ago, people would name a child Ryan or Taylor solely because it was a surname that the family wanted to pass on as a first name. People would give these surnames-as-forenames to both boys AND YES girls [although these names were more popular on boys, hence the reason as to why so many people think that these names were originally boys' names only]. It wasn't until recent years that people have been giving their children random surnames [that have no relation to the baby or his or her family] as first names.
I just read the thing about Rachel at the bottom. Rachel has always been a female forename, and literally means "female sheep".
---- EDIT ----
I was just using those random examples to help prove my point, since they were just right in front of me. What I was trying to say is that a lot of the names that a few select people consider to be masculine [while everyone else considers them to be unisex], always have, in fact, been unisex. Sure, Ryan literally means "little king", but back whenever people began using surnames as first names what it meant to them was "I'm related to the Ryan family". That may not mean the same thing to people today, but that's just how it was first used, and how it started being used on girls.
People look at a name like Vivian and say it's a "good name for girls but not boys" because it has basically died out as a boy's name, so it has been considered by the rest of society to be a girl's name for several years now.
Okay what I'm basically trying to say is that unisex names are considered unisex for a reason. There is a reason as to why Ryan is unisex, and why John or Rachel isn't. It's has nothing to do with sexism.Source(s): my great grandmother's name was Madison.
- 7 years ago
I can see both points of view on this, however, I have to agree that it is being done quite OFTEN and it is kinda sad because there are so many beautiful girl names out there. I can understand if you want to name them after someone, or you have a special connection to a name and might not have another chance to use it (like if you always wanted to honor a Ryan but can only have one child and it ended up being a girl...) But for so many people to use unisex and boy names on girls It's going to get confusing when their name is on a piece of paper whether it's a girl or boy. I personally wouldn't want a name that boys also have lol. Especially since most the names used on girls and boys are kinda ugly in my opinion...:x
- 7 years ago
Why does it matter? Personally, if I like a name and it fits my child, then guess what?I'm naming my baby what I want to. If that means that I name my daughter Riley, Raine, Avry, or whatever, then so be it. There are some names that are so ridiculously feminine (Shannon, Crystal, Lynn) or masculine (Frank, Joseph, Michael) that they should never be used for the opposite sex. But if the name is gentle enough to go either way, parents should be allowed to use them however they please. If you don't want your baby to have a unisex name, then stay away from them. God forbid your son turns gay because his name is Spencer and a girl can have that name too. Give me a break. And who decided what is feminine/masculine? Half the names we use are not even English names from our culture. For example, Ariel was originally a boy's name. But, because of the sound, it was used for a red haired mermaid. Stop judging, just name your kids what you want. Worry about yourself. Now a days people are sooooo judgmental about names.Source(s): Personal opinion.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Mummy of 2Lv 77 years ago
A Tomgirl already has a name, it's called a Sissy.
Ariel is a girls name, as in The Little Mermaid released in 1989, so if Ariel used to be a boys name then it's not a new thing to switch names, also I bet you wouldn't like the name Kim on a boy, even though it was a boys name originally, I do agree with names like Ryan not being used on girls, but don't see any problem with unisex names.
- Anonymous7 years ago
Does it matter? Not being funny but a names a name & if the parents like it then they do :)
I respect your opinion though x
- Anonymous7 years ago
Walt Disney put Ariel on a girl. I don't care what history or tradition dictates about names and gender. If I think it sounds manly and represents what I want my son to represent, he'll get that name. If I think it sounds feminine, if I think it would just be far too pansy on a boy, and I really like it, girl it is! Also, the fact is that girls can pull off names that are used on boys, because there's such a think as tomboys, where as, even with all the multiculturism, guys are still afraid of coming out as gay. Evelyn and Meredith will never be able to convince anyone they like boobs.
- 7 years ago
Okay, there are female Charlie's now. It's short for Charlotte... And in a way I agree. I don't know why it's so popular lately. Some of them are cute though. I think of Taylor as more of a girl name than a boy name honestly. It's nothing to get upset over though lol
- linhLv 47 years ago
Taylor is a pretty balanced name - it has two meanings, both girl and boy related. That's probably why, the meanings of the names is the reason why they use boy names on girls.
- YahsmxLv 47 years ago
LOOOOL I feel ya bro
I think they've already started naming boys gurly names I mean the name Ezra or Avery sound rlly girly right