To think this class-obsessed country uses DC's names to change theirs?

[GinDaddy]

I live in the South of England, I'm heading towards middle age, so this gives you some context before my OP, which is..

AIBU to think people are giving their DCs "posh" or "aspirational" names as status signifiers? (Which ironically immediately marks them out to me as such?)

I realise there's always been fashionable and unfashionable names since time immemorial. But what I'm talking about is the slew of names which I would previously only expect to hear on Made In Chelsea or Guy Pelly's guest list at Boujis.

Arabella. Annabelle. Isabelle. Amelia. Jasper. Oscar. Oliver (to be inevitably commuted immediately to Ollie in faux-braying tones). Hugo. Theo. Leo. Harry (not even bothering to use the proper Harold, just going straight to the diminutive because well, it sounds right).

It's just a bit odd really. People can and will call their child what they like, but why are so many folk (and it's always the same folk, the ones who are project managers, who love myWaitrose and head tilting, whose teeth chatter when grandparents offer DC a Kinder Surprise) enamoured with these names?

Can someone actually explain this to me? No one has ownership of names, but I cannot believe that some people aren't using this as some sort of social signifier. 15 years ago not everyone was called Ollie or Theo. I didn't know a load of Arabellas or Amelias, I knew a few but that was commensurate with the environment.

AIBU to think the popularity of these names comes from their associate social status?

@FagAsh

Thank you and thanks to a PP who explained this - I didn't realise it had been analysed in this book.

Goes to show then that I'm not barking up some random tree here..

I don’t think it has anything to do with class or class based aspirations but more that these are very popular names at the moment, popular because they are lovely. I’m very certain people name their children names they love not what names might make others think they’re ‘upper class’.

TBF I have a very posh handle and hated it so much and how it fed into people's preconceived ideas that I specifically chose very classic names for my own dc and neither have been mentioned so far on the thread.

@gindaddy nope sorry love; my family / myself / my kid all have WC type names. No Arabella's here. Maybe I should have myself one, everyone should have an aspiration!

Also yes. You are goady. And probably called Tracey. Or Ottillie. Who knows

You say there is nothing wrong with it, but your op is clearly sneering, even saying it's the same type, project managers who love Waitrose and whose teeth apparently chatter at the thought of their kids having a kinder egg.

So you do think there is something wrong with it. But you know you can't admit it, because of the reaction you'd get and just how snobby it would make you sound.

@atomicblonde30

I think "Suzanne" is a lovely sounding name. I also think "Michelle" has a nice ring to it.

You tell me how many kids are now being called those, and how many kids would be denied those names because they sound like 1980s names and not as "classy" as the others mentioned.

We will have thousands of classrooms with Izzys, Ollies, Hazzas, Belles, it's going to be just like uni was for me, but instead it'll be everywhere. It's just funny, I'm just saying it as I see it.

Yabu to think people are suddenly doing this.

People have always had different parameters when deciding names. I wanted names that wouldn’t date and already had a shortened version. Other friends went for grandparents. Some may want them to have a name that sounds ‘posher’.

Just make sure if you do meet any of these people put them firmly in their place! There is nothing worse than us working class folk thinking above our station.

What’s wrong with it though?
Having a name that helps you get on in life. I mean tbh that’s ok. People are judged by their names. So wanting to give your child one that is acceptable if they want to become a barrister for example isn’t anything new.

I think it's fair to address that in a post. It doesn't make me class obsessed to notice something that's obvious.

It's not obvious to most people. You've listed a load of names that have been around for years, and that I don't think have any class connotations.

@Bluntness100

I'm not worried about reaction. I knew certain types who are really prevalent on here, the head-tilt sort, will be piling in whether or not I say X or Y to supplement my original post.

I stand by what I said. I don't think it was insulting or goady.

Aren’t those names better than people naming their children after cars, “Bentley,Mercedes” etc or names typically associated with strippers?

@aroundtheworldyet

Do you know how difficult it is to pass the Bar?

There's going to be a lot of kids who have aspirational barrister names but are actually baristas, due to the statistics etc.

I know Arabela! She had a cool ring. Her sister Xenie wasn't as nice. Royal family.

What exactly is a head tilt sort?

@Forallyouknow

No, it isn't any better - because avoiding names associated with cars and strippers, would still be obsessing about class, just from the other end of the spectrum.

I know what you mean but I can’t agree about the name Harry. Harry is a name that suits all ages and all classes. Also, it’s been a standalone name for a very long time - see photo.

I think all the names that are mentioned do have class connotations
I went to a boarding school - there really were not any Gary’s and Sharon’s. And if you had that name you would have stood out.

That is a bad thing. But it’s the way it is.

If you'd listed names like Tarquin on Persephone then maybe you might have the beginnings of a vague point.

But there is no guarantee that will always be the case. I remember as child in 60s, my friend and I thinking the name Chloe, hilariously posh. If you had told us it would one day be as common as Linda or Susan, we wouldn’t have believed you!

I agree Suzanne is a lovely sounding name. But no if I had a baby I would not name her that.

Is it not just that some people (myself included) tend to choose more classic names, like many of your examples? I wouldn’t necessarily call these names, aspirational or upper class, just not overly fashionable.

To flip your question OP, what would you think of ‘upper class’ families who chose a more momentarily fashionable name such as Bailey as someone mentioned upthread?

Yes Chloe used to be a very posh name.

@Bluntness100

Google "Mumsnet head tilt", the definition has been discussed to death on here as you very well know already.

@karencantobe

Why would you rule out such a name out of interest?

There's going to be a lot of kids who have aspirational barrister names but are actually baristas, due to the statistics etc

Ah. Now I get you. If you think your kid could be a barista you should give them a working class name. Again, can you tell us what they are?

However, if you're middle or upper class and your kid is a barista, it's ok to call them a middle class name, as dictated by you, because, what, how were rhe parenrs to know?

Actually I sort of see what the OP means. Most people I know would give their children names that might be thought of as “aspirational” and one of the most cutting criticisms of the names that come up on the baby names board is that they are “not very aspirational”.