If you met young (under age 4) sisters named [name]Rachel[/name], [name]Amanda[/name], and [name]Stephanie[/name], would you think they were too 80s/90s to be “cute” anymore?
Also, middle name suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
A friend of mine had a baby a few months ago and named her [name]Rachel[/name]. I think these names are ones everyone would know because of past popularity but there aren’t going to be a ton of them in class with her because they aren’t the trendy names anymore. I do think [name]Rachel[/name] is the least dated of the 3, though.
Sorry, but all three seem very dated to me. I’m an 80s baby, so I grew up with many, many Rachels, Amandas, and Stephanies.
[name]Rachel[/name] is the most classic to me, it’s biblical and I know Rachels from their mid-20s down to about 8 or 9 year olds, and I think it’s perfectly wearable. [name]Amanda[/name] and [name]Stephanie[/name] never reached the popularity over here that they did in the States so I don’t particularly see them as dated, I only know one [name]Stephanie[/name] who’s in her early 20s and goes exclusively by [name]Stevie[/name], and no Amandas at all. I like the nn [name]Mandy[/name] though, I think it’s cute.
If you like the name, use it, and don’t worry about it being seen as dated. In actual fact, a baby [name]Stephanie[/name] might actually seem rather fresh in a sea of Amelias, Olivias and Isabellas.
I don’t think there is anything wrong with using those names and I probably wouldn’t think that much of it if I encountered little girls with them. I agree with essjay. My name is [name]Cynthia[/name], which a lot of people will say is dated, but when I was growing up surrounded by Stephenies and Rachels, [name]Cynthia[/name] sounded fresh and pretty. Lol.
[name]Rachel[/name] is definitely the most classic out of the three, I wouldn’t be surprised to meet a baby or little girl [name]Rachel[/name]. I would think, if I met a little [name]Amanda[/name] or [name]Stephanie[/name], that the parents had chosen a dated name. I grew up with and know many, many, many Amandas and Stephanies. They are very 80s/90s names to the tune of [name]Jessica[/name], [name]Ashley[/name], [name]Britney[/name], etc. There’s nothing “wrong” with the names though, I think they’re perfectly fine and cute, just outdated.
[name]Rachel[/name] is lovely and timeless.
[name]Amanda[/name] is dated but not terrible. I really like the nn [name]Mandy[/name]
[name]Stephanie[/name] I really don’t like at all. I know soooo many and they are all in their 20’s and 30’s. And I don’t like any of the nn options.
In my opinion [name]Rachel[/name] is timeless, whereas [name]Stephanie[/name] and [name]Amanda[/name] seem very 1980’s to me. That being said, there is nothing wrong with using a name that is a little dated if you love it.
I’m a 90’s baby, and have met plenty of Rachels, Stephanies, and Amandas my age as well as 80’s babies.
I’m not a fan of [name]Rachel[/name] personally, but I definitely agree that [name]Rachel[/name] is the least dated of the three.
Nothing wrong with any of the names you listed. They’d be a refreshing change from the legion of creative spellings and invented names I come across daily.
I really love [name]Amanda[/name], [name]Rachel[/name] is nice & [name]Stephanie[/name] is nms but I appreciate that it’s a feminine form of [name]Stephen[/name] and it has a classic element.
I think all three together feels a bit dated while one switched out for a modern choice or just one in the sibset feels refreshing.
[name]Amanda[/name] could modernize to [name]Amelia[/name] or [name]Amelie[/name] or [name]Amaya[/name]
[name]Rachel[/name] feels the most modern to me but [name]Ramona[/name] or [name]Raina[/name] are a bit more on trend I guess.
[name]Stephanie[/name] could become [name]Seraphina[/name]. I do love nn [name]Stevie[/name] which makes [name]Stephanie[/name] more appealing. [name]Stephania[/name] feels a bit fresher?
I think you should use all three if you love them but this sibset sounds like they could be 30 instead of 3.
[name]Rachel[/name], [name]Stevie[/name] & [name]Amelia[/name] would be pretty adorable!
I think the better question is will they age well? Right now a 30-year-old [name]Stephanie[/name] sounds normal. [name]Imagine[/name] a [name]Stephanie[/name] 30 years from now? [name]Will[/name] it sound like she was named in 2012? [name]IMO[/name], not necessarily. I think [name]Stephanie[/name], [name]Amanda[/name], & [name]Rachel[/name] are names that are right outside the “classics circle”. They are not too cutesy, but can have a “little girl” nn, will age well with her, she won’t be ashamed to put it on a resume, and it just sounds well, normal.
I [name]LOVE[/name] 80s and 90s names, but I worry about the same thing! [name]Amanda[/name] and [name]Stephanie[/name] are such cool names. [name]One[/name] of my top names is [name]Jamie[/name], but I worry that people will find it boring or dated, and that she herself would grow up feeling like she has a “mom name.”
I like all three. They would be one of the few children in their generation which would be pretty awesome.
I don’t see anything wrong with those names and I think they are pretty. I like [name]Rachel[/name] the most because of the biblical character (despite her shortcomings) and [name]Amanda[/name] is also very pretty. [name]Stephanie[/name] is also pretty, but it never appealed to me and I don’t know why.
As for liking names that are viewed as being dated, I think if you like a name use it. It doesn’t matter if the name is dated. I like tons of names that are considered dated and would use them any day. Plus tons of names that are considered dated aren’t to me because they are classics like the name [name]Rachel[/name].
[name]Rachel[/name]'s classic to me, [name]Amanda[/name] can still be used and feel fitting, but [name]Stephanie[/name] was never cute to me, and feels very 80s.
As a sibset it’s very 90/80s feeling to me.
Personally, I don’t like any of them. They sound sound so dated to me, and I grew up with so many Rachels, Amandas, and Stephanies that the names don’t even sound cute anymore.
I love all three and don’t think they sound dated at all. Right now [name]Rachel[/name], [name]Amanda[/name] and [name]Stephanie[/name] are unique and I would use any of them!
rachel is a little less dated than the other 2.
My mother grew up in the 60s as a [name]Vera[/name], and she definitely didn’t meet anyone else her age with her name. and she hated it! it was a mom name at that point, not a ‘forward’ name- one that’s unusual, but one you’re not going to share with your friends’ moms.
These are fine names. But I grew up in the 80s & 90s, I know several Rachels, Amandas and Stephanies. (i’m in my late 20s)
I don’t want to be negative, i just think it’s too soon to revive them.