The thing is that society is generally harder on boys with girl names than they are with girls with boy names, which makes me hesitant to give you a clear and emphatic yes as an answer.
The thing with most of these “boy” names that were stolen by the girls is that they all follow a similar pattern. They were moderately popular for boys at one point, but then fell out of use, and then somehow, they were revived, but for girls. They were also never stunningly popular for boys, like say classic names like [name_m]John[/name_m] or [name_u]James[/name_u] were. Take [name_u]Addison[/name_u] for example. The highest it ever was for boys was 439 during the 1880’s. It went dormant around the 1930’s and sort of revived for boys during the 1980’s. It didn’t even make the girl’s top 1000 until the 90’s. [name_u]Madison[/name_u] follows a similar pattern. As does [name_u]Ashley[/name_u], and [name_u]Allison[/name_u], and [name_u]Lindsay[/name_u], and [name_u]Whitney[/name_u].
And then there are the names that were unisex back in the day, but weren’t completely unused for girls. The highest rating [name_f]Shirley[/name_f] for a boy ever attained was an average of 395 in the 1920’s, whereas [name_f]Shirley[/name_f] for a girl was #17 in the 1920’s. [name_u]Meredith[/name_u] at its peak for boys was 685 in the 1910s, but [name_u]Meredith[/name_u] as a girl’s name was also starting to become more popular during the 1910’s. After that, [name_u]Meredith[/name_u] kept going up for girls, but it tapered off for boys roughly during the 1940’s. [name_u]Kimberly[/name_u] was briefly on the top 1000 for males during the 50’s-70’s, but it’s always been exceedingly more popular for females. Next is [name_u]Evelyn[/name_u], where it briefly made the boy’s list in the 1900s at 951, but it has always, always been more popular for girls. In the 1900s, it was #38 for girls. So names like these weren’t technically what I would call stolen or commandeered. It just makes me want to rake my hands down my face whenever people try to paint it like they were always exclusively male and the girls stole them. There’s nothing to take back.
I got my numbers for here, by the way. It takes on a very US-centric view of the name timeline, but it’s still a good resource: Pregnancy, Parenting, Lifestyle, Beauty: Tips & Advice | mom.com
My ranting aside, you can’t exactly control naming patterns or the way society at large will perceive the name you choose for your child. While I do agree that society is becoming more tolerant of odd name choices, I think it depends on a lot more factors than just reclaiming a name that may or may not have been very popular for boys at a far flung point in the past. Also some names, especially recently trendy ones have only recently started to tilt toward girls. [name_u]Rowan[/name_u] for example has frequently been neck and neck for boys and girls, with it being in the 200s for the former and in the 300s for a girl currently. So it’s actually more popular for boys right now, which is a surprise when the NB description says it might have traditionally been an exclusively feminine name. So take that for what you will, but maybe that’s evidence names can be tilted in favour for boys. Masculine names like [name_u]James[/name_u] and [name_u]Aidan[/name_u], which people have oh so trendily started to bestow upon girls have never even entered the top 1000 for females, so just because one celebrity names their girl [name_m]Wyatt[/name_m] or [name_u]James[/name_u] or [name_m]Maxwell[/name_m] and we hear about it doesn’t mean that the whole world is making the same decision. My theory is that we hear about it, think it’s unusual, so therefore it’s more likely to stick in our minds afterward, even though the numbers say that for every female James, there are dozens more Emmas.
All in all, if you want to make a statement and you really love these names on a boy, I say go for it (I actually have a crush on [name_u]Addison[/name_u] for a boy right now!). One child’s name is barely a drop of water in the huge ocean of children that are born in the same year and will be born in the years surrounding. The trends that are popular at the time will determine how your child is treated. A boy named Jadon 100 years ago would have been a rarity, even though the name is biblical, but today there are hundreds of Jadens and Jaydens and Jaidens, and it’s not unusual at all. If the name means something to you and you love it, then that’s what matters the most. There are also plenty of softer sounding boy names out there that get overlooked as well. I’ve been told [name_u]Asa[/name_u] sounds feminine, but it’s not going to stop me from using it if I want to.
I feel like this came off as a lot harsher than intended, so just know I’m not deliberately trying to sound mean!
