What do you think of “Nature” being used as a name? I think it’s lovely! While it may seem obscure many similar names like [name_m]Forest[/name_m], [name_m]Garden[/name_m], and [name_m]Sky[/name_m] are becoming more common. What gender do you prefer it on? I prefer it on girls.
I’d only use it as a middle, just because it feels sort of off as a first. I think it would work equally well for either gender, but I tend to think that most nature names are gender neutral anyways.
1 Like
This is one I have conflicted feelings about, and not the kind that are easy to explain! 
On one hand, I like the idea of it—the word evokes beautiful images of genuine peace and lush greenery—yet on the other hand, it does not quite feel like a name, unlike [name_m]Forest[/name_m], or [name_m]Rowan[/name_m], or [name_f]Daisy[/name_f], i.e., less “general” nature names? Perhaps the word is simply too commonly used in conversation for me to see it as anything else; though I do think I would shamelessly enjoy it on a fictional character, haha.
While writing this, I checked what the Nameberry database had to say about [name_m]Nature[/name_m], and apparently it has been on the rise in recent years, particularly for girls? That is interesting! Meeting someone named this would probably make me rethink my position.
In any case, I think I would slightly prefer it for a boy, if only because I tend to favour masculine names with a serene feel. 
1 Like
I find it a little general for a word name, personally, and as [name_f]Wendy[/name_f] says it’s more likely to come up in conversation than a specific tree, flower, or animal, which makes it feel less name-y. I do however see the appeal of a boy [name_m]Nature[/name_m] nn [name_m]Nat[/name_m]!
2 Likes
Although it’s a lovely word, I personally think [name_m]Nature[/name_m] does not belong on a birth certificate. It would be incredibly odd to wear and the “Mother Nature” jokes would be endless. I’ expect the parent of someone named [name_m]Nature[/name_m] to be a hippie/tiny-house-living/bathes-in-the-river/practices-unschooling type person. AKA: would personally question the parents’ sanity.
I do love [name_m]Nature[/name_m] - as in, hiking and parks and plant and animals, etc, but I wouldn’t be able to take [name_m]Nature[/name_m] seriously as someone’s actual name. At least there’s [name_m]Nat[/name_m] as a nickname.
Perhaps try searching for names that mean nature?
2 Likes
I think of “nature calls” and “human nature”. It feels too literal, and maybe not entirely positive. I think I’d be confused for a second if someone introduced themselves as [name_m]Nature[/name_m], I might even mishear it for [name_f]Rachel[/name_f]?
I might prefer other broader-scope nature names, for first or middle spots, like [name_f]Snow[/name_f], [name_m]Woods[/name_m], [name_f]Valley[/name_f], [name_m]Sky[/name_m], or [name_m]Forrest[/name_m]
3 Likes
I think [name_m]Nature[/name_m] has a pleasant sound and a nice meaning, but to me it feels more like a word than an established name. I can imagine it working as a middle name, though I’d find it quite bold as a first name.
As for gender, I’d probably see it as genuinely unisex, although if I had to choose, I slightly prefer it on a girl. I think names like [name_m]Forest[/name_m], [name_m]Sky[/name_m], [name_m]River[/name_m], and [name_f]Willow[/name_f] feel more naturally wearable because they’ve already built some naming history and are a bit more specific, whereas [name_m]Nature[/name_m] still feels very uncommon.