Why do the mumsnet community hate popular names?

OP none of those names you listed have “stood the test of time”. Yes, they are well established names but they have all greatly risen in popularity over the last couple of decades which means that unless they stay popular they risk becoming the Karen or Kevin etc of 40 years time. Depends if you want to risk that.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with popularity as such imo - in fact I think there’s more benefits than negatives (such as it being more likely that most people will get the spelling and pronunciation right for a start!, as well as fitting in, getting stuff with their name on etc).

Names that have stayed perennially popular like Elizabeth, William, James, Edward, Alexander, Thomas etc are pretty risk free in regards to them dating so personally I don’t care that there’s a fair chance there will be another one in school (or several in larger schools). Gone are the days when there were 3 in a class, as there’s such a wide spread of names now.

But I don’t want to risk my kids name dating - so personally if I’m lucky enough to have another child I’m planning to go for a name that has always been popular like the ones above (as I did for my first) or a name that has never been quite popular enough to make the Top 100 (or maybe at least only very briefly and below the Top 50). I’d prefer my child had a name that doesn’t link them to a specific time period, when it’s an easy enough thing to avoid.

Nigel, Kenneth and Geoffrey were very popular in the 1950s. They seem old fashioned and dated now.
Ottilie and Quentin don’t have those associations as they were never super fashionable, and so they feel more ‘fresh’ and timeless.

Nigel, Ken and Geoffrey are fine. Better than many of the currently popular names.

I don't like a lot of the popular names because I think they're quite wanky at the minute.

I get that names come and go nobody is naming their child Nigel, Ken or Geoffrey but all the Ottilies and Quentins are a bit much. I get it if you're naming baby for your beloved late grandfather.

But otherwise I think they're probably just doing it to fit in with other people with NW3 aspirations and, frankly, that is a weird thing to inflict on a child. I say that as someone whose name was once very, very popular and now very dated.

While I'm here, I don't understand why people give surnames as a first name. There are plenty of very normal first names out there.

But your child, your choice. 🤷🏼‍♀️

Also the being not just one of several Julies everywhere but one of two Julie Anne Smiths in a school/organisation.

My theory is localised saturation. If a certain name is ten a penny where one lives, it's likely to become dull and uninspired in that person's view, even though it may not be near so popular in another area.

This!

And it’s not only about sharing a name with others in a class but sharing your name with office colleagues and other parts of your life. It’s a pain.

Identity theft is also a problem when having a very common name.

Because names are meant to identify us.

I have an overused 70s name and I hate it. Always having to add my surname or initials, I feel my parents could have tried a little harder to find a more original and memorable name. There are so many names to choose from. SO many lovely normal names that are easy to pronounce and spell outside the top 100.

@Tbrh Because you don't know how many there will be in a class until the child is in the class. Why is it cruel to give a baby a name you love when lots of other people love it too?

One of my siblings gave their baby an underused name. They got comments like 'What sort of name is that?!' and 'Oh, we were planning on calling our baby that'.
The name is very popular now.

Because it's boring? Why would you name your child a name when you know there will be 3 or 4 other with the same name in their class. I actually think it's quite cruel.

Resistance is not futile?

@Ladamesansmerci , what makes a name silly?

I liked many popular names, I just prefer not to use them myself. An alternative spelling of my daughter's name is somewhere around 1600 in the UK (although I don't live in the UK). The spelling we use isn't in the charts at all. We considered Emilia but rejected it because it's a top 10 name where we live. There's now a baby Emilia at my daughter's nursery whereas everyone we meet has never heard my daughter's name before. (It's not a made up name though - it's Ukrainian, chosen because my grandfather was Ukrainian and we thought it would be nice to include something from my family since she has her dad's surname). If we have another I doubt we'll go that unique again - unless we find another Ukrainian name we happen to both love - but most likely not top 100 either.

There is a difference between using a name that has always been well used eg Charlotte, Thomas and using names that appear from nowhere, often celebrity driven eg Sienna, Mila

This is a key point. Popular names are generally popular either because of a trend or because they are classic. The trendy ones will obviously date more than the classic ones. My DD has a popular name, but it’s one with a long history of use and has a lovely sound and meaning. I chose it because I loved it and wasn’t concerned about its popularity (as it happens we’ve only come across one other child with the name at either school or nursery). I also wanted to give her a ‘normal’ first name as she has an extremely unusual surname!

I agree. I think we've well and truly broken the tradition of naming babies after family members and now it's a free for all. You set your child up for life with this special name that will make them the most special /unusual. Except, a name is just a name.

I have one of the most common names from my generation and I don't think life would have been ny different had I been named something 'unique'.

@BoleynMemories13 ,David is popular here too. Some names are regional - the ONS shows the most popular name by area, and I think in some areas, the top name isn't in the top 100.

I think other posters have mentioned this, popular names get attached to certain decades. We all have an idea in our heads as to how old a Sharon, Tracy or Christine is likely to be. Likewise with a Lee, Chris or Mike.
Meanwhile the upper classes use classic names, or family names - I don’t think Boris Johnson’s mum picked his name for example, and the royal family have limited bucket of names to draw from.
So it makes sense that many older mumsnetters who have seen names come and go would choose more timeless names over more trendy names, and recognize that it might give the kid a degree of flexibility in how they present themselves to the world.

Um, I'm definitely Mumsnet community and have been here for about 20 years with name changes. All my children have top 200 names as the criteria was nothing too bizarre, hard to spell, or difficult to pronounce.

You're right that there's a difference between popular and trendy. On the whole popular traditional names are liked (or if disliked it's because the poster thinks they're boring rather than awful). So Thomas, James, Robert, Arthur, Theodore etc are typically liked; Mason, Cooper, Jaxon seen as trendy and daddy. Other names like Arlo, Archie, Albie etc are somewhere in between.

I also agree with the poster upthread who mentioned Freakonomics - there's an interesting chapter in there about name choices. The book's 20 years or do old but the principles haven't changed. I think the psychology of name choices/unspoken reasons why we are drawn to certain names but not others is really interesting!

(BTW it's etc (short for et cetera), not ext 🙂)

I’m not sure I agree. My sense of baby names here is that people like the classic and popular names. Most unusual or rare names are seen as too “out there” and likely to lead to the child being bullied. And there’s often a conflation of rare names with strange spellings of existing names.

It's a personal thing for me , my own name was the number one name for a few years in the 80s/90s . There were always 3/4 of us where ever I'd go and I genuinely hated it. I was in college with another who even had the same middle name too . So I didn't want to do that to my children.

Shock horror, different schools and different areas have kids with different names. They're perhaps out of favour now in predominantly white British areas, but in more multicultural areas they will still feature.

I've taught multiple kids called David and Sarah over the last 15 years or so, and also know a young Victoria and Mark. All 4 names are still widely used, with David still being top 100 popular. It's the most popular boy's name in our school in fact, as it's very popular among both our Eastern European and African communities. It's one of the many reasons I laugh when people try to put others off top 10 names by saying they'll be one of many in school, as nobody would say that about David and yet it's one of the only names we actually do have many of, proving you can never predict such things.

I wouldn't be able to automatically guess the age of anyone with those 4 names, as their usage stretches across generations. The definition of 'classic'.

@YourAmberFawn , it was in response to the post above mine.

Is that you Jimberleigh?