Are 1980s names due a revival?

[foreverastudent]

Baby naming seemes to go through cycles so now that the 80s were a generation ago are the names of that decade due a revival?

Michael
Jason
David
Matthew
Christopher
Daniel
Robert
Brian
Brandon
Anthony
Ni cholas
Jonathan
Simon

Tiffany
Crystal
Ashley
Rebecca
Melissa
Jennifer
Sarah
Samantha
Stephanie
Laura
Lisa
Lindsay
Karen
Melanie
Stacy
Diana
Natasha

ooh dunno, I think it's the grandparents generation that usually does a cycle (or even great grandparents) some in your list are timeless but Brian and Tiffany? hmm not yet

I think Nicholas is pretty timeless. what about some of the late 80's ones? Kylie, Keely, Kayleigh, Krystal, Kirsty? I had a class with all of those in - they were all 1988 babies! (15 at the time)

No, these names are too fresh in the current parents generation minds/ears. We're looking for 'unusual' names, therefore our grandparents names are making a comeback - Florence, Elisabeth, Arthur, Quentin etc.

But in another 30 years our children will probably name our grandchildren Michael and Melanie .

I like more than half the names on the list and think some of them could be used more again. However we haven't had a 50s/60s/70s name revival yet, have we?

Definitely not the 70's Janets and Lorraines no, but what kind of names are from the 50's? my mum was born in '53, she's a Maureen, that definitely hasn't come back yet! tee hee

I like some of those names. I have considered Matthew, Daniel, Simon of the boys names. With the girls ive considered Laura, Stephanie and Natasha.

No, far too soon for an 80's revival.

50's? maybe. My mother was born in '56 and is a Norma, her sister ('49) is a Sandra. Friends of the similar ages are Jane (x3), Yvonne, Angela, Annette, Jacqueline, Aline, Alexandra.

TBH I think the last round of holders names need to die out before the names become popular again. There are, as always, notable exceptions, but still...

I met a baby Gemma recently which I thought was quite an 80s name. But generally I think 80s names are still considered a bit naff and have too many connotations because we still know people with these names.

I think 50s names would be things like Karen, Susan, Lynn and Carol. I think we're more likely to see a resurgence in 20s and 30s names like Audrey, June, Gladys, Percy, Wilfred, Arnold etc.

Gemma must be getting popular because I've heard of two recently. I also met an Ashley the other day, she is 3.

No, too early I think. These names are still too fresh in our minds.

From your list at our school / friends groups we have the following

David
Matthew
Daniel
Robert
Jonathan

Ashley
Rebecca
Jennifer
Sarah
Stephan ie
Natasha

Like others have said - it is normally names from two generations above that come back - grandparents names.

Mind you, from OP list - some of those I know of under 10s with the name anyway, well boys - Michael, Jonathan, Christopher, Daniel,

Sad but true, there will be some children of the 80s who are grannys/grandpas already!

Everyone says Claire and Katie are 70s names but in my class of 30 (born 1981/1982) there were four Claires, 3 Katies, and 2 Catherines who resolutely refused to be shortened to Katie because of the other three!

There were also 2 Laurens.

From the list you've given there was also an Ashley, a Rebecca, a Lisa, and a Stacey (it was a girl's school btw).

We also have no less than six friends called Tom (all born between 1981 and 1987), which is a nightmare on our phones, and 3 Nicolas, including DH's sister.

I think all these names, actually, are pretty much in use all the time. I don't think they've had time to go totally out of fashion yet, though they're probably not as popular as they were. I reckon they're less likely to be picked by my generation because they are our friends' names, so we know people who are close to us with those names and it would be a bit weird to give them to our children. But not because they're hated like some of the old lady names that are now fashionable once were. Plus I think names are diversifying - immigration, greater access to foreign television shows (including American and Australian shows) and so on mean that a wide variety of names feels like a good thing to many people, and we're less likely to react negatively to something we haven't heard of before.

No - it's way too soon. Why would we consider names our peers have? For the most part, they all say way too commonplace and dated to our ears.

I was given an 'old lady', i.e. my grandmother's name as a baby (I am 36), and it is only now, i.e. another whole generation passing, that it is coming into vogue - it was considered very dated even when I was named (Isobel). It definitely takes more than one generation for the cycle to turn.

I don't think we're even due a 70s revival yet. We're still only moving towards a revival of 50s names (Dorothy, Pamela, Audrey) and then we have the sixties to get through as well (Lesley, Melanie, Jackie).

Well, usually names come in and out cyclically every 90 years.

But I think people can use names from 75 years ago (approx) that sound dated, but they are just a bit ahead of the cycle...

names that are only 30 years old though!??! no I don't think so. I think it's just that some of those names are quite classic. Eg Michael, Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel. I think these names remain inside the top 100 pretty much all the time.

That's interesting 5dollarshake. I was given a more dated version of my name than the version that was being given more commonly at the time. dykwim? don't want to say the name exactly but it would be like

Juliet instead of Julie in the 70s
Alice instead of Alison

I have recently seen my name mentioned on lists with Margaret. My name is occasionally starting to appeal to a certain retro tuned ear....

ps, and I could never get anything with my name on it as a child, but when I went to Winchester cathedral with my parents when I was about 17 I suddenly found tea towels and pens and mugs with my name on them.. ha ha!

In our primary school and the neighbouring one we have ALL of your boys' list barring Brian and Brandon, and ALL of the girls except Crystal, Melissa, Karen and Lisa (wonders if my kids go to school with Lima's).

We also have Paul, Philip, Stephen, Rachel, Helen, Emma, Gemma and Claire (whose mother is Anna. Everyone assumes they misheard and the child is Anna, mother Claire. Hi Anna, if you're on here).

There's a Lisa at my children's school too but the parents are foreign. That sounds mean, like nobody with Englsih as a first language could possibly have chosen Lisa. But I also Know of a robert, a John, a Claire (French mother though).

Some dated names are very nice. Gemma is considered a bit dated in the UK, but it sounds lovely to my ear. (I'm not in the UK). Melanie and Jillian and Lindsay are also pretty.

no not an 80s revival, its too soon
But then again I dont think we are yet ready for a 70s revival either, I am just thinking about all the names i grew up with, like Karen, Claire, Lorraine, Samantha, Alison, sarah, Caroline, Elaine, Nicola and all the rest, and i dont like any of them really, including my own name, but I dont know if it is a proper 70s name or not.

Is that from an American list? Brian is much more normal for younger men in America, and Brandon, Crystal, Tiffany etc. make me think so too.

But no, I don't think any of those names will get any more popular, any time soon.

Plus, if you think about it, if we all ended up giving our children the names we and our peers have, then the same names would be being recycled over and over again, and that obviously doesn't happen - so just goes to show how much longer it takes before names are due a revival.

The names of our parent's generation is even way too dated for most.

vS - I was just the same, I was never able to find anything with my name on. at you eventually finding something at Winchester Cathedral!