I’d love to see more information about [name]Ula[/name]! All it says is “see [name]Uda[/name]” which leads to no further information.
Things like this are more damaging to the integrity of this site more than a horde of trollish posters announcing the births of their pesudo-triplets. As previous posters have already said, the use of the term “limp-wristed” is appalling.
I think the descriptions on this site are meant to be a bit tongue-in-cheek, but, still, sometimes they’re a little offensive. Like when I come across a name I think is nice, look it up, and am pretty much told I’m wrong for liking it. For example, I really like [name]Darcy[/name] for a boy. I know it’s used as a girls name. But the description - “a bit feminine for an American boy” - is off-putting. I felt a bit demoralised when I read it. I had to remind myself that it’s only one person’s opinion of the name.
By the way, I have NO IDEA why the name [name]India[/name] is controversial.
As far as I can tell only Americans think [name]India[/name] is an offensive name. The rest of the world doesn’t care…
While I agree that there is no defence for genuinely homophobic or bigoted name reviews, I would like to offer a word of support for the name entries. A huge part of the reason that I am attracted to Nameberry is because it is the only name site I have found that offers humour and a genuine opinion , not just on a name’s meaning, but on the name itself. This is necessarily subjective, and not everyone is going to agree with a negative review of a name they love. This doesn’t make the review offensive (i.e. stating that a name can be used for both a girl or a boy) - you may disagree, but that is similarily just your subjective opinion.
Methinks the yankees can be a bit sensitive sometimes! LOL
Um, no not necessarily. There’s also the nasty British imperialist/colonialist connotations that make people turn away from it. It has so much baggage that I think is best avoided. It was often used on English girls while [name]Britain[/name] had control over [name]India[/name], to show that their fathers were influential in that “colony”. It also has the feel of a bit of romanticism and “ooh, look how exotic [name]India[/name] is”.
1 Like
Stop. This argument isn’t being started again. Generally we disagree on this on either sides of the pond. Let’s leave it as that. This topic is interesting and I don’t think we should ruin it.
…
Back on topic. I’ve always disagreed with the ‘opinions’ part of the name database. I think meanings, entymology and well known name bearers are fine but any offensive opinions should be stricken from record.
Out of interest, I looked up a few of my favourite names.
[name]Jory[/name]: ‘For a girl.’ ((The only comment… O_o))
Emery: ‘Emery is still strong and viable for a boy, but you might want to consider Emory or Amory or Emerson as a more masculine option for your son.’ ((Why would I need to alter the spelling of a boys name for a boy??))
Sigrid: ‘Forever Scandinavian. Try cute diminutive Siri or more international Ingrid instead.’ ((Nah cheers, I like Sigrid. That’s why I clicked on it.))
Vito: ‘Old World Italian name without much vigour.’
Edit:: This is harder than I thought. Some aren’t even listed: Meirion, Ariella, Aneirin, Cesare, Dickon, Bridie, Aira etc etc
[name]Jameson[/name]:
(Strong new [name]James[/name] varietal, though sometimes shared by girls. A good choice to honor Grandpa [name]Jim[/name]. It is swiftly moving up the charts, jumping from #319 to #210 in the past year alone.)
Really, off to the girls? Probably because [name]James[/name], is also suggested for girls.
[name]Jamesina[/name]:
More grown up than [name]Jamie[/name], but still awkward. Try [name]Jameson[/name]…or [name]James[/name].
Suggesting [name]James[/name] or [name]Jameson[/name] for a girl and hurting the image of a valid female name.
Sylvan:
Has a beautiful meaning, but still carries the image of an old man playing checkers.
I don’t think so.
Limp-wristed? I would also like to see that removed…highly offensive!!
That’s horrible!
And I agree with this.
I’ve never really looked up any names in the nameberry database, I only use behindthename. But there’s obviously some crazy stuff going on!
Nameberry is different than other naming sites, sure. I don’t mind the subjective entries that are just matters of personal taste, be they snarky or not. I don’t have any stats, but it seems like for every “negative” description, you could find ten neutral/glowing descriptions. I’ve defended this site before (or at least tried to, being someone who hates confrontation.)
HOWEVER, I don’t think that’s what the main beef is here, and I agree a lot of these descriptions need to go or be revised. “Limp-wristed,” and all the “sissified” mentions are bad news. Good [name]Lord[/name].
Others that shouldn’t be listed as girls’s names, the whole list of ‘Geezer Names For Girls’:
[name]Arthur[/name]
[name]Barry[/name]
[name]Bert[/name]
[name]Chauncey[/name]
[name]Clarence[/name]
[name]Cyril[/name]
[name]Ernest[/name]
[name]Errol[/name]
[name]Floyd[/name]
[name]Gary[/name]
[name]Howard[/name]
[name]Ira[/name]
[name]Jay[/name]
[name]Jules[/name]
[name]Lawrence[/name]
[name]Lester[/name]
[name]Lloyd[/name]
[name]Lyle[/name]
[name]Marlon[/name]
[name]Marshall[/name]
[name]Marvin[/name]
[name]Maury[/name]
[name]Mel[/name]
[name]Milton[/name]
[name]Monroe[/name]
[name]Morley[/name]
[name]Morris[/name]
[name]Murray[/name]
[name]Neal[/name]
[name]Norris[/name]
[name]Percy[/name]
[name]Perry[/name]
[name]Randolph[/name]
[name]Reggie[/name]
[name]Roscoe[/name]
[name]Roy[/name]
[name]Rudy[/name]
[name]Seth[/name]
[name]Seymour[/name]
[name]Sheldon[/name]
[name]Sidney[/name]
[name]Silas[/name]
[name]Sinclair[/name]
[name]Stanley[/name]
[name]Stuart[/name]
[name]Vernon[/name]
[name]Vincent[/name]
[name]Virgil[/name]
[name]Wallace[/name]
[name]Wendell[/name]
[name]Zeke[/name]
Also, please, for the love of God, stop using the word ‘Hipster’.
This is the reason I wouldn’t ever use [name]India[/name] - It’s a beautiful name but there is nothing sweet about naming your little white baby girl after a nation which her own country oppressed not so long ago.
But then again I’m just very fussy over what’s culturally appropriate etc.
1 Like
Let me just say…we are slowly making our way through the 50,000 names in the database and making a lot of changes!
I’ll say again. Stop. Before this sky rockets out of control again.
Yay 
Looking forward to hearing about them!
This isn’t necessarily offensive, just a little disappointing in how they’ve described [name]Royce[/name] for a boy (Make up your mind: [name]Roy[/name] or [name]Reece[/name], but not both.) but somehow it’s totally appropriate and “cool” for a girl? (Upscale thanks to Rolls, and a contempo way to honor a grandparent [name]Roy[/name] or [name]Joyce[/name].) To me, it’s clearly a boy’s name, especially because the meaning is “son of the king”.
Arrghhh that one has annoyed me too! Tis always a boy name down here and a name in its own right too. I know it can be short for [name]Jo[/name]- names, but it’s been the Cornish form of [name]George[/name] for eons.
Some of these descriptions are awful, but I notice many of the origins are off too. Does the ‘Names We’ve Missed?’ thread ever get checked?!
You know, it’s snarky remarks like this one that make me feel quite unwelcomed on Nameberry at times. Totally unprovoked and not helpful in the least.
Now, back to the TOPIC… when I first started visiting Nameberry years ago one of the first names I searched was [name]Cedric[/name]. At the time, the info provided put me off from the name. However, now that I’m older I am less concerned with other people’s opinions.
To [name]Pam[/name] and [name]Linda[/name]'s credit, they’ve built a great site. I also trust that they’re making changes to the descriptions. I don’t think they knew that some people would take the name descriptions as general consensus (as I did years ago). However, comments like “sissified” and “limp-wristed” MUST be changed… In fact, I’d put [name]Lance[/name] and [name]Cedric[/name] on the priority list. This might sound sensitive to some, but anything directly offending the LGBT community or any ethnic group shouldn’t at all be tolerated. After all, we’re all here to name babies of all different backgrounds.
I would like to raise one question: Are people wanting ONLY general/factual/objective/historical information in the name descriptions? Should words like “handsome” and “exotic” also be taken out, as they are also opinions?
This is a great topic, by the way. I’d like to add [name]Maxine[/name] to the list, although the description doesn’t really offend me: “Playing mah-jongg down at the clubhouse with [name]Bernice[/name] and [name]Thelma[/name].” It’s actually a bit funny to me, but I guess the reason it confuses me is because I don’t see [name]Maxine[/name] as “stale” as [name]Bernice[/name] and [name]Thelma[/name]. I think [name]Maxine[/name] is quite ripe and ready for revival… But that’s just my own opinion.
1 Like
I don’t mind that the descriptions contain some opinion; my primary objection is to the offensive stuff, though I don’t like that there’s also misinformation. (Not to keep harping on [name]Dorian[/name]'s entry, but it’s a prime example of one that contains an authoritatively-delivered falsehood, in that it never went to the girls: not years ago, not now, and not in anyone’s wildest delusions. AGH)
I do think it’s annoying that the opinion portrayed in the descriptions can be very one-sided. [name]Just[/name] because the author doesn’t like a name is no reason to dismiss it out of hand, you know? Comments like “better to leave this one alone” are neither necessary nor appropriate. I can acknowledge the appeal of names that aren’t to my taste and I can see the drawbacks of using even my favorite names; every name has positive and negative qualities, and I’d like to see a little more recognition of this amid all the opinion.