I’m so glad a non-name nerd writer took this issue on. I particularly liked the last line: “Want to be edgy? Name your son [name]Victoria[/name].”
http://powderroom.jezebel.com/a-girl-must-give-a-man-a-name-471778004
I’m very, very sympathetic, but she didn’t actually say anything or make any arguments, which is too bad.
“Now let’s think of a name that was historically given to girl babies that we now give our boys. I’ll wait… … yeah, I got nothing, either.
So is what’s happening when we name our girl’s boy’s names? Is it really a subversion of gendered names? Or is it perpetuating the concept that being male is an upgrade?”
I would call that an argument, even though it’s rather passively worded.
I’m going to have to agree with [name]Blade[/name] here - The author is not explaining anything, more just musing over a question that has been tossed around Nameberry for years, without getting at any real answers other than “we should give our boys names that are traditionally for the girls.”
I’m not trying to be rude, it just wasn’t an explanation of anything.
There are also some great points being made in the comments – for instance, that we name aspirationally: “So you’re going to name your little girl [name]Hunter[/name] so she can be a rough-and-tumble girl before you name your boy [name]Victoria[/name] because, well, what’s aspirational about being a woman.” Girls can aspire to qualities gendered male, but qualities gendered female are inherently undesirable, especially for boys.
I think the argument is very clear. Being male is more desirable than being female, as demonstrated by parents willingness to give their daughters boy names, and unwillingness to their sons girl names. There was another thread on this subject a few weeks ago. Thanks for sharing.
Yes, exactly this.
I admit i have a current girl name combo of [name]Holly[/name] [name]Maxwell[/name] that i love… I know i am crazy and many people would frown. I totally get the argument though
And i am pretty sure [name]Lindsay[/name] was traditionally a girls name that can now be used on boys? correct me if i am wrong. 
This is a good point.
I think the point here is that a combination like [name]Holly[/name] [name]Maxwell[/name] wouldn’t be seen as “crazy”, because it’s culturally acceptable and trendy to give girls boys’ names. There’s nothing unique or wacky about it. A BOY named [name]Holly[/name], on the other hand, would be truly unusual – not to mention far more subversive.
The idea/concept is there and she sort of gives a framework for an argument but doesn’t follow through, makes suggestions, but doesn’t go into detail.
It’s a little like a quick brainstorm of initial thoughts about a subject/topic, that will turn into a full essay. It reminds me a bit of a University tutorial discussion. Needs fleshing out.
[name]Edit[/name]: lol, what i wrote sounds like something said tutorial leader would give as feedback!
Except the writer didn’t actually say that, she wanted you to say it for her.
To be honest I loathe this writing style, which probably doesn’t help matters. It’s faux-colloquial, like you’re two besties having a chat, and the author can’t be bothered to put all her brilliant thoughts into a cohesive, formal, serious post/piece (but if she buckled down and did it, it would be awesome, you can be assured). I think it shows a lot of timidity, like “it’s better not to try, than to try and fail.”
I liked the intro and the snark, especially the lady bit cookies, but she immediately diverted into staving off detractors and then everything fell flat. The readers ended up drawing conclusions and inferring her points, and I’ll restate, she never bothered to make any real arguments, even though I think we can all get her thesis and probably agree with it.
Yes! This. Exactly.
That is true!
Frankly, I’m mostly thrilled to see a discussion of gender imbalances in naming on a feminist website. I do wish the author had gone more into related issues, for instance, the tradition of giving girls male family names, or feminizations of male family names. Why do you want to pass along Grandpa [name]Charles[/name]'s name to your daughter and not Grandma [name]Pearl[/name]'s name to your son?
[name]Bear[/name] in mind that this writer is a commenter, not a featured author, and her piece was meant to open up a discussion in the comments – which, once again, I would urge everyone to read. A lot of good points are being brought up.
We had a hilarious tv show here called ‘Red Dwarf’ which is now a cult classic. There was a male character in that called Holly. He was a really really dim computer avatar. Everyone just accepted it as his name. I suppose it should have been weird but it wasn’t.
THIS^^
Nameberry is obsessed with Girl names, so much more fun than boys. However, the rest of world history and the world currently disagrees. Girls have always been less desirable than boys, less respected. less powerful.
I do Not believe people who like boys names on girls think less of girls. Its just a trend, nothing to take too seriously. But it is an eye opener to the reality of history.
I love this discussion and am so glad that this is something we’re talking about. I agree with so much of this. It’s acceptable to give a girl a male name, but not to give a boy a female name, and we all know why. And I’m really glad it’s being talked about. [name]Even[/name] if I felt like there was a lot more to say and that the write of the article should’ve said it. That doesn’t make the point any less true.
My grandfather is 85 and his name is [name]Marion[/name]. He was named after his grandfather. He’s always gone by his middle name. I’ve never heard anyone other than my grandma refer to him as [name]Marion[/name]. He just mention this weekend how he’s never been proud of or much cared for his name, because it’s a girls name. In my mind it’s a unisex name, but I’ve grown up around both male and female [name]Marion[/name]/[name]Marian[/name]'s. I love looking at these sorts of things. I just wonder what we should do with this information. Name boys [name]Victoria[/name], [name]Isabella[/name], and [name]Chloe[/name]? Not name girls [name]Bailey[/name] or [name]Reese[/name] or [name]Taylor[/name] or [name]Lane[/name]?
I’m in a similar quandry! From my list I would absolutely give the name [name]Marlowe[/name] to a boy or a girl, but when I think of naming a boy [name]Holly[/name] (which I actually like the idea of after mentioning it above!) my mind just balks. I’m a flaming feminist queer person and half of my friends are trans or gender divergent or drag queens or use neutral gender pronouns, none of which phases me, but a son named [name]Holly[/name], or [name]Matilda[/name], or [name]Jane[/name]? I don’t know. Part of me wishes I were brave enough to do it, but I certainly don’t want to use my kid as a social experiment. That’s a therapy bill I really don’t want to foot.
1 Like