To not understand how people say the don’t like a name because it will date and then contradict themselves??

[Amandawest447]

an opinion of mine is that it dosent matter if a name will “date”, which is all people seem to say on here. All names date unless it’s a name that was always in the top 100 like Elizabeth. It dosent really make sense for people to say that either because the same people like the “old lady “names that have only recently came back around. Names that are dated now will be stylish again in 10 years. Aibu to not understand why the people who say they don’t like a name that’s popular now because it will date are the same people using a once very dated name??

Tell that to Gary, Tracey and Sharon.

I think sometimes they mean it’s a bit chavvy but don’t want to say that.

They will be back in 10 years… No one would of ever thought names like Elsie and Edith would be back but here we are

I’d assume it applies more to names associated with popular film or TV series at the time e.g. Renesmee, Kahleesi, Dexter etc, which will obviously be noticeably “if a time” in ten years or so.

*of a time

Are Kylie and Jason / Scott and Charlene due a comeback?

I wish people would just use what names they like and stop giving a crap whether they’re popular, dated, old fashioned, chavvy, posh etc. Who cares?!

I don't think 'dating' names matter. People should choose what they like.

However trends are ridiculous in the UK when it comes to naming.

Anyone called Edie, Ava, Isla, etc will be in this category , but it always amuses me how parents feign surprise when they realise oh look, you're not the only one with this naming idea.

They aren't usually back in 10 years though, it's decades. You can tell what decade a person was born in by many names. Or else you at least know that the person is either elderly or in nursery, but unlikely to be a 30 year old for example.

They tend to come back after a few generations, so in between times, yes, they are "easy to date".
DD and I were talking about this today as she was browsing the website of the university she'll be going to and watching vlogs from current students. She showed me one and said "here's one from someone called X" and I commented that I would expect "X" to be in his mid-late thirties. I work with uni students on a summed residential course, and for the last 5 years or so they've been Josh, Charlie, Olivia and Chloe X lots. Before that they were Will and Ben, Georgia and Becca.
You'd know immediately when I was born if I told you my name. Or my friends' names. And as we're mid 60s children, we aren't due a comeback yet.

I think there's a difference between "easy to date" and "dated" and I'd agree that "dated" really just means "was trendy once, isn't now".

The word "Ch*" needs to stop being bandied about though, as racial slurs are unpleasant.

But they were never particularly popular in the UK anyway. Possibly in Australia. But as we're talking mid-late 80s I wouldn't have thought they'd be back yet.

Elizabeth is a dated name. Being popular doesn't stop it being dated.

What about Alan or Edwina?

What do you think makes it dated?

Surely there's a category of 'classic' names which just don't date. I would say Henry as a male name for example. And Elizabeth is definitely in the female 'doesn't date' category.

It's the Ava, Aurelia, Aurora, Arabella, Ellie, Evie, Eva, Isabella, Isla, Lily, Luna, Lyra, Lola, Mia, Maia, May, Mila, Olivia etc...

That's the wave of names that will date in 10-15 years.

Alan is easy to date.

Edwina is a bit of an eclectic example. Has it ever been popular? Top 20?

Elizabeth could be 3, or 96. Or anything in-between.

Alan could be 3. But he's a million times more likely to be 3 year old Elizabeth's grandfather.

It’s not it’s always been used and never been number 1. Names like Olivia, lily are still very old names that have been used for centuries but they have just became more common now. The perfect example of this is the name Emily it wasn’t heard of for a long time but came back and became a number one name in the 90s and 2000s era

Most names will date. Susan and Deborah are classic names, but both very dated. To avoid dating you either have to pick something perennially popular (and if we’re defining that as never leaving the top hundred that only leaves Elizabeth for girls) or something which sits outside of all name trends. Even a name which isn’t top hundred (like Eliana or Atlas) still will probably date as they both fit into other name trends.

Names are generational and as subject to trends as clothes and home decor. And the problem is with anything is that no one knows what will date badly until after it’s happened.

I'm a teacher and the most populated names at the minute seem to be Carter/Harley/Dylan for boys and Lily/Lexie/Amelia for girls...

There seem to be a few traditional names too like "John/Anthony/Jack".

I gave my sons biblical names (Noah and Elijah) but the girls names I loved were Elodie and Esme.

Elizabeth is an old persons name even if you use it for a youngster. The name is dated even if it's popular.

Each to their own I say.

Of course in every generation there are a few names which are especially common/trendy. When I was a child it was chris, Matthew, alex, sarah, laura, louise.

Now its things like Hudson/Harley/Harrison for boys, esme, cara or Cora, amelie for girls.

@girlmom21 I'm pleased to see that everyone else disagrees with you. I think it's quite rude to double-down on calling someone's name 'dated' or 'an old person's name'. I like my name, always have. There are so many variations which can be used; more than 90 in fact, so I feel it can suit any stage of a woman's life.

If someone is getting a lot of opinions that their chosen name will date too easily, it might be that the chosen name is obviously a very recently invented one.

You can like your name and it still be dated...

There are plenty of nice older names.

There's nothing wrong with voicing an opinion. It's not an insult.

99% of names date to some degree. It's no big deal. Sarah and Simon are 'dated' but there's nothing problematic about them as they're both old names. It's the brand new names that might sound cool now that could potentially age badly. Wren for example, quite trendy at the mo, but will it go the way of Tracy? Who knows.

I'd hate to be called Elizabeth though.

Henry was not a child’s name when I was growing up. The birth of Prince Harry popularised Harry but Henry remained very old fashioned.

My kids have one of the grandparent names of the sort referred to here (literally named after one of their great-grandparents), one still slightly old-fashioned but broadly classic and unobjectionable name, and one name that does seem vaguely timeless and which people seem to like. We just called them what we liked but will totally admit that I would never have thought I’d call a child of mine by the great-grandparent name when I was growing up so clearly there was some influence from the trend back to those names.

My own name is very top 10 and has been for quite a while but my mother used to say it was firmly for old ladies when she was growing up.

I don’t get why it matters if your name is dated though? If I’m 40, why would it matter that I have a name that sounds like it’s from the 80s - if I AM from the 80s?!
Once your name is your name, it becomes your identity and I just don’t see that it matters because the time you were born is part of who you are. Having a name that is timeless is not going to prevent you getting old.