John - too bleh?

I’ve been really liking [name]John[/name] lately, but feel like it’s the [name]Mary[/name] of the male name world. Like [name]Mary[/name], although I personally have never met one under the age of 40, it seems to have this forever stigma that it’s boring and overused. I tend to like names that are a little quirky yet familiar but not popular. Therefore, I’m a little concerned about liking [name]John[/name] and the vibe it gives off since it’s quite different from most of my top names.

So, what are your thoughts on [name]John[/name]?

Can’t go wrong with [name]John[/name]. It’s timeless and ages well. You could jazz it up with a quirky and/or unique middle name! :slight_smile:

[name]John[/name] is perennially classic. You can’t go wrong with it. It’s a great, solid choice. I agree with [name]Lizzie[/name], jazz it up with a quirky nickname.

[name]John[/name] is classic! It’s strong and masculine without being over the top. It’s definitely usable.

Looking at the names on your signature…I like [name]John[/name] [name]Sebastian[/name] and [name]John[/name] [name]Ronan[/name]. :slight_smile:

I like [name]John[/name]. I like the flexibility/charmingness of [name]Jack[/name] and [name]Johnny[/name] as nicknames. I like how it grounds a quirky middle name.

Personally I like [name]Jonathan[/name] a little bit more, but there’s nothing wrong with [name]John[/name] and it’s the more truly timeless of the two. Also, “[name]Johnathan[/name]” would make me extremely angry and with [name]Jonathan[/name] that happens a lot, as many people have internalized “there’s an h in [name]John[/name].”

My problem is, I could never have a [name]John[/name] and a [name]Jane[/name].

[name]John[/name] is my 92 year old granddad, my uncle is also a [name]John[/name] (who freakily shares the same birthday with granddad minus the year, lol), [name]Jonathan[/name] is my cousin and [name]Jean[/name] is my mum, so I’m very fond of [name]John[/name] in all formats :slight_smile: It’s timeless.

Agreed. [name]John[/name] is timeless. Also, it isn’t so frequently used that every classroom will have five of them in the next decade, which is nice. I actually really love this name. Great nickname potential, plus you can always pair it with a less familiar middle name.

I kind of like [name]John[/name] because it’s boring and overused. It’s been worn by so many different people over the centuries that it feels like a name that could fit anyone. It doesn’t project a certain image or have too much of its own personality, it’s a blank canvas for the child it’s bestowed upon to make their own. Plus, [name]Johnny[/name] is an adorable nickname for a little boy!

I didn’t used to like [name]John[/name] at all but then this one hockey player really made me change my tune and now I like it quite a bit. I think it’s handsome, but the right combo helps.
Something like [name]John[/name] [name]David[/name] doesn’t do anything for me, but I get a fluttery heart over [name]John[/name] [name]Francis[/name] or [name]John[/name] [name]Simon[/name].

To me [name]John[/name] is a perfect male name. It is so classic and never goes out of style like the 60’s [name]Jack[/name]. You can’t go wrong with [name]John[/name].

[name]John[/name] is a great name. It’d be on my list for sure except my [name]BIL[/name] named his son [name]John[/name] already. He’s 7. I also can think of one child named [name]John[/name] I know through church otherwise I don’t know too many Johns. I think the handsome nickname [name]Johnny[/name] helps it from being too blah.

[name]Love[/name] [name]John[/name] combo names like [name]John[/name] [name]Eliot[/name], [name]John[/name] [name]Callum[/name], [name]John[/name] [name]Liam[/name], etc.

I think [name]John[/name] is an excellent “filler” first name. I’d use it (or [name]William[/name] or [name]James[/name]) if for some reason I can’t use my favorites as the fn
ex) [name]John[/name] [name]Ashley[/name] or [name]John[/name] [name]Adair[/name] or [name]John[/name] [name]Hugo[/name].

I know a few young Johns that go exclusively by their uncommon mn. Their first name is just a more “appropriate” filler to go ahead of the name the parents really loved. I like [name]John[/name] because it’s bland enough to not overshadow the mn. But if he grows up and decides he doesn’t want to go by his mn, he has the charming classic [name]John[/name]/[name]Jack[/name] to fall back on

I think [name]John[/name] is fabulous. But if you feel it’s “too bleh” you could always go with the french variant [name]Jean[/name] pronounced very similar to [name]John[/name].

However, I do feel [name]John[/name] is a great name on it’s own but you could always make it fancy with a different middle name that unusual
(smith is just a made up name I felt was appropriate to demonstrate my point)

[name]John[/name] [name]Pierre[/name] [name]Claude[/name] [name]Smith[/name]
[name]John[/name] [name]Charles[/name] [name]Oliver[/name] [name]Smith[/name]
[name]John[/name] [name]William[/name] [name]Kirk[/name] [name]Smith[/name]
[name]John[/name] [name]Braxton[/name] [name]Smith[/name]
[name]John[/name] [name]Sebastian[/name] [name]Milo[/name] [name]Smith[/name]
[name]John[/name] [name]Milo[/name] [name]Sebastian[/name] [name]Smith[/name]

The double middle name might make you feel it’s more interesting…? Idk. Anyway, I love [name]John[/name]. Great choice. x

[name]John[/name] is excellent. All of the young Johns I know go by their middle name, so it isn’t seeing much everyday use at all right now. I completely agree about pairing [name]John[/name] with a quirky, unusual middle name. You can go all out in the middle spot and [name]John[/name] will make it work.

It’s a classic for a reason - it’s a great name! I’d pair it with a quirky middle name to add a bit of fun, you can do that with the classics a lot more easily than some of the more out-there first names :slight_smile:

[name]Nora[/name] and [name]John[/name] sound wonderful as siblings too.

I actually love [name]John[/name]. If/when i have a boy he’ll be Yochanan.

[name]John[/name] is classic and fine. I especially like it paired with something less popular but masculine like [name]John[/name] [name]Valentine[/name](I actually like the name [name]Valentine[/name] for a boy), [name]John[/name] [name]Brooks[/name] or [name]John[/name] [name]Stellan[/name].
If your last name is not [name]Smith[/name], I say use it!

[name]John[/name] is a VERY versatile name. It’s timeless and will never go out of style. And if you concerned about the name being dated, I know a 12 year old boy named [name]John[/name], and a baby named [name]John[/name]. I don’t think popularity is an issue.

[name]John[/name] is a great name! My friend has a [name]John[/name], hes 3. He suits the name perfectly and you can’t really go wrong with [name]John[/name] - it will suit all ages! He gets nicknamed [name]Johnny[/name] which is so cute.