To name our son (who will be born in 2019) John?

[evilosgr]

Apparently it's an unreasonable choice in this day and age?? I thought it was sweet. He could become Johnny if it needs to be "cuter" while he is little.

Our other choice was just Finn.

It’s a boring, overused name. So is Matthew, Mark and Luke and most of the popular saint names. But that’s just my opinion.

It’s a good solid name. I think Christoper and Steven/Stephen are due a revival too. I wish we had called DS (5) a more solid name like Christopher, Joseph or Dominic instead of what he was actually called (along the Finlay/Finley/fionnlagh lines)

It's fine. Just funny to hear a child being referred to as 'John'. It's one of those names that you grow into.

If your families have connections to other cultures maybe there's a version of John you'd like use? Sion, Sean, Giovanni, Ian, Jan, etc?

I absolutely love the name John. Such a good, solid, upstanding name. Classic but underused in this day & age. Go for it OP.

DS would have been John if our last name didn't begin with a J - it sounded too alliterative. I've always loved it! And like PPs have said, you could always use Jack.

Agree with many PP's.
Good solid name you can't go wrong with, although I'm not so keen on Johnny.

I'm also waiting for a revival of Christopher, Anthony and Derek as I think they're all fab names, too.

We have a Jonny. He has not been teased about the jonny/condom link. Do people still say that?

Choose John - it’s a lovely name. I say that as DM to a Finley (Finn). I increasingly despise his name now tbh, even though it is/was perfect for him because it’s become so bloody ubiquitous!

Yeah John is a bit weird for a baby, but apart from that I quite like it and it's better than Finn which, as others have said, will date quickly.

On the subject of funny names for kids, I once met an 18 month old little boy called Phil and he was toddling round with his parents saying 'Phil, Phil' and it just didn't sound right at all, but he was very cute!

Not sure why John is 'a bit weird for a baby'. Every adult John was a baby once.

John is a lovely name.
It's much nicer than Finn (which will date in the same way 'Darren' did after the '80s IMHO) 

So many of the Bible/ saints' names will return despite a current drop in popularity because they aren't heavily associated with one particular generation. (This is why I found DSs easy to name than the lists incase they were girls)

Traditional but currently less popular Johns, Simons, Pauls etc don't have the cliché baggage of out of fashion names like Kevin or Wayne because people have known a wider social spread of people with those names and aren't easily typecast. (Th fashion names will swing round into fashion when their generation is very elderly and sentiment replaces stereotypes as has happened with Alfie, Arthur etc) The traditional names have been of reduced popularity long enough that they sound refreshing, and there's enough diversity of names that you won't be replicating a class list of David x4, John x2, James x2, Mark x2 (plus Tim, Tom, Paul, Peter...) (my class, born early 80s but could have been any generation before then!)

Go for John. Classic and not as likely to have a duplicate in the class as many "unusual" names.

Who says it’s unreaaonable?! Quite a few Johns at my DS’s school.

John is a good choice. If you were worried about boring and overused, then you'd need to be wary of Charlie, Ollie etc names.

Some Biblical names have been popular recently.which weren't in the past. In my class at school there were lots of Davids, Michaels, Philips, but no Thomas, Caleb, Jonah, Noah or Joel so even Biblical names come and go.

I think it is pretty original actually. Not many young John's about anymore and it's a nice name.

I love John. Strong and simple, Johnny is cute and Jack is also possible as a nickname
Finn is much more trendy and I think will be the Gary of 2038...