Personally, I wouldn’t use [name]Kingsley[/name] for a girl. I too see it as being a masculine name, and it also reminds me of (male) novelist [name]Kingsley[/name] [name]Amis[/name]. Instead, I would just use [name]King[/name] as a middle name.
I do agree that [name]Kingsley[/name] with the “ley” is a little on trend. I tend to prefer the unadulterated versions of family names. IE: If your grandmothers name was [name]Elisabeth[/name] you should name your daughter [name]Elisabeth[/name] (at least on the Birth Certificate) and not [name]Betsy[/name] because you like it better. [name]Betsy[/name] is a great nn. This goes for me equally with sir-names.
So… If [name]King[/name] is a family name why not keep it as a middle name?
[name]Elisabeth[/name] [name]King[/name] [name]Johnson[/name] sounds nice (or whatever your ln and your fn of choice are). I mean in this context it is clear that the middle name is a family name and used because of that connection - but it’s not like [name]King[/name] doesn’t have a nice regal ring to it.
[name]Nor[/name] did I in l honesty,I was just trying to point out the pitfalls of using Internet forums if you’re sensitive. I for one like how honest people will be!