Ugh. George was our frontrunner. What would you do?

So my dilemma : We are due with [name]Baby[/name] #2 in [name]January[/name] and are not finding out the gender before the birthday. We have a 2 year old little boy who we call “[name]Henry[/name] [name]Oliver[/name]”. We love the traditional names (obviously) and I don’t really care about a more popular name - especially for boys.

We are set on our girls name BUT for a boy we had picked [name]George[/name] [name]Frederick[/name] as our name and now I don’t know if I want to have the same first name as the [name]Royal[/name] prince.

[name]Even[/name] though I don’t care about the popularity issue I just don’t like the idea that we ‘directly’ copied the royal couple – even if we didn’t as we had this name picked for a while.

If anyone has opinions on these three items I would really love to hear what you all think:

  1. Should we stick with [name]George[/name] as a first name or seriously reconsider?
  2. [name]Do[/name] you like [name]George[/name] or is it a bad choice with the recent not so popular ‘[name]George[/name] [name]Bush[/name]’ and ‘[name]George[/name] Zimmerman’ in US culture…
  3. If we do reconsider - what boy names would you pick as a nice sibset with “[name]Henry[/name] [name]Oliver[/name]”.

Thank you!

I like [name]George[/name], and it doesn’t necessarily remind me of [name]Bush[/name] or Zimmerman. It has too much history for modern associations to really stick in my mind too much. [name]George[/name] is on my own list. For what it’s worth, I wouldn’t pair [name]George[/name] with [name]Frederick[/name] because the Weasley twins in [name]Harry[/name] [name]Potter[/name] are named [name]Fred[/name] and [name]George[/name]. Not sure if it would bother you, but I grew up reading the series so it’s something I would always think about.

With that said: If it is bothering you as much as it sounds like it is, then I would consider picking another name.


[name]One[/name] of the best things about bestowing a classic, timeless name like [name]George[/name] on a child is that there are literally hundreds of possible namesakes. The [name]Prince[/name] of Cambridge, [name]Bush[/name], and Zimmerman are just three of a plethora of associations. I think it’s beyond silly that people are taking [name]George[/name] off of their list because of the prince. It’s a wonderful, underused name (in the US at least) that absolutely deserves a popularity boost - assuming that the little prince’s birth even influences the name’s popularity in [name]America[/name]. The idea that you could be seen as “copying” the royal couple is absurd. It’s [name]George[/name], not [name]Peregrine[/name] or [name]Caradoc[/name]. All that said, [name]George[/name] [name]Frederick[/name] is so dashing. It’s the perfect name for a brother to [name]Henry[/name] [name]Oliver[/name].

I believe that if you truly love a name, you should use it! [name]Henry[/name] and [name]George[/name] would be a darling sibset to encounter! While there may be some negative associations with [name]George[/name], there are some great ones too ([name]George[/name] [name]Clooney[/name], [name]George[/name] [name]Washington[/name])! Like a PP mentioned, [name]George[/name] has so much depth and history that it is not tied to any one person.

When you hear of a 30-some year old named [name]William[/name], do you think of the [name]Prince[/name]? Probably not.

To be honest, I’d just stick with [name]George[/name]. It’s a lovely name and, as others have mentioned, it’s not that unusual that people would automatically assume you were naming him after the new prince. I think [name]George[/name] [name]Frederick[/name] is wonderful :slight_smile:

If you really don’t want [name]George[/name] as a first you could always swap and have [name]Frederick[/name] [name]George[/name] instead, which is also perfectly wonderful, and use could always use [name]Freddy[/name] as a nn if you wished. Another suggestion is [name]Charles[/name] [name]Frederick[/name], a combo which I’ve always thought was perfect.

I agree with pp’s, [name]George[/name] is a handsome, substantial name with many positive associations. If I met a little [name]George[/name] I wouldn’t assume you were copying anyone, just reviving a classic name.

[name]George[/name] is one of the most basic names in existence. If [name]John[/name] wasn’t tainted by McCain and [name]Mary[/name] wasn’t ruined by Typhoid, [name]George[/name] is definitely not going to become unusable either.

aje88 : My husband just said the exact same thing…

Thanks everyone for all the notes!

[name]George[/name] is nice, but how about [name]Hudson[/name] [name]Brock[/name]? Flows with brother and not too popular! :slight_smile:

Why not [name]Frederick[/name] [name]George[/name]? Gorgeous! A wee [name]Freddie[/name]! [name]Love[/name] it.


[name]George[/name] is still on our list, despite the newly named prince. If you love it, you should use it.

[name]LOVE[/name] [name]George[/name], keep it :wink:

I really like this option too.

I think it’d be pretty cool to share a name with the prince of [name]England[/name]. I’d be all over that. It won’t bother HIM, it won’t particularly bother those AROUND you, so use it anyway. You might get, ‘Oh, like the prince?’ and you can either say ‘Kind of’ or ‘It’s after blah blah blah’ or ‘No, we’ve always loved the name [name]George[/name], so we used it.’

If you live in [name]America[/name], you could always be snarky about it: ‘No, we named him after [name]George[/name] [name]Washington[/name]!’

[name]George[/name], like [name]William[/name], [name]Catherine[/name], and [name]Elizabeth[/name], have been so well and widely used throughout history that the [name]Royal[/name] Family are not what I think of when I hear their names, even though I see them in the news all the time now.

First off, I love your son’s name. Secondly, I love [name]George[/name] [name]Frederick[/name]. In a little while, the fuss about the royal baby will go away, so I wouldn’t worry.

I think you should go with [name]George[/name]. I love the name [name]George[/name]. A name is a name so I think you could name him anything youd like. [name]Just[/name] because the royal family named their baby [name]George[/name] doesnt mean you can`t name your little boy [name]George[/name]. I also think [name]Henry[/name] and [name]George[/name] would be absolutely adorable!!

but… just in case…
I would do…

[name]George[/name] is too classic to be associated with any one person, no matter how famous or infamous they are. There are plenty of other [name]Georges[/name] in history your little [name]George[/name] could be “named after” ([name]George[/name] [name]Washington[/name], [name]George[/name] [name]Clooney[/name], [name]George[/name] [name]Harrison[/name], Curious [name]George[/name] (LOL!), etc.) I don’t think people will automatically assume you chose it because of the new prince. Or, if they do, it will only be for a little while - it’s not an association he’s going to be carrying around his whole life. If you’re really concerned about it, though, you could always just flip the name around - [name]Frederick[/name] [name]George[/name] sounds just a good to my ear as [name]George[/name] [name]Frederick[/name] (although it may depend on how it flows with your last name).

Think of it this way, your whole life you may be explaining to people how you picked your son’s name, and your story can either be

“Well we wanted to name him [name]George[/name], but then [name]Kate[/name] Middleton named her baby [name]George[/name], so we switched to _____”


“We just really loved [name]George[/name]. It was a little weird when [name]Kate[/name] Middleton ended up using it too just a few months before our [name]George[/name] was born, but that’s life I guess”

Which story is going to make you feel embarrassed about how much you care about what celebrities do? Personally, I’d much rather tell the second one.

And I’ve never met a 30 year old [name]William[/name] and wondered if his mom was obsessed with [name]Diana[/name].