Does it matter if it’s popular?

[littlemisssunshine81]

It seems to me that lots of people are on the hunt for that ‘unusual but not too unusual’ name nowadays. Consequently the unusual but not too unusual names have become the most popular, so they aren’t that unusual anymore. When I was at school everyone was called Leanne or Michelle and Steven or David. I don’t see those names coming back that soon into the ‘most popular list’. But does it matter? Would your chosen name being in the top 20 list put you off??

Well that's another rather silly rule imo. My dd2 has a Welsh name for no particular reason other than I just liked it. In any case most of those names you just listed are saints' names, not Irish names.

It’s not a rule, just an observation.
I work in a very deprived area in northern England, and there are far more Irish names like the ones I’ve listed than people with an recent Irish heritage.

It depends where you live I think. There’s a pretty diverse mix of nationalities at my DCs’ school and I don’t know any Islas or Isabel(la)s. In fact I just checked out of curiosity - only 3 boys and 3 girls in the reception year of 90 children have names in the top 10 for 2017. There are only two duplicate pairs across the year.

A name in the top 20 would probably put me off it as I would feel as though people may assosiate a popular name with certain traits so it may influence their perception of my DC. Also as cliche as it sounds I'd like my child to stand out and not be 1 of several in a class. X

I wonder which current trendy names will be the Sharon, Karen, Stephen and Kevin of the 1970s?

I think they'll be the ones which are popular now but which I can't really think of any/many current people aged 20-60 with those names.

So looking at the top end of the (english) girls chart I think Ava, Isla and Poppy will maybe date quite badly even though they're proper names as they've had a real surge and don't exist much if you look back 20+ years, whereas Charlotte and Emily are pretty impossible to pinpoint. I don't think Sienna, Willow or Harper will stand the test of time very well either.

I think Ava, Isla and Poppy will be OK, as they are well known, old names.

The ones that will be the Sharons and Kevins are names Nevaeh, Jayden, Demi that were none existent 30 years ago. I've heard of people having a great grandma called Poppy, but not Nevaeh

Whereas names like Quentin will be the StJohns or Timothys of old - wet posh names that people associate with toffs

Only if it matters to you OP

It mattered to me because my name was popular when I was at school - I still remember being utterly humiliated in a mix-up that would be way too identifying to post.

As a result, my DC have names outside of the top 100 that I deliberately chose because they are not used that often. Both "known" names, just not popular.

I'd agree with you on the Jayden/Demi etc - I think there also needs to be a certain volume of a name for it to really date to a particular time too. So Nevaeh is only 121 at the moment. Is that high enough to make it the generation definer the way your Sharon, Tracy, Darren, etc were? Not sure

The ONS has 10 yearly data on the top 100 names actually (just found it) - obviously it'll miss some brief peaks and troughs but 1964 Karen was number 3, Tracey was 6 (and 11 for Tracy) whilst Sharon was 9. So pretty high up

link here for any name geeks

it was normal to be surrounded by siobhans/ helen/ Teresa/ Mary’s as you say they were just names but I don’t realky understand why someone without Irish connection would use them.

The only one of those names that’s particularly Irish is Siobhan.

And Mary - while it’s unfashionable in England at the minute, for centuries it was the most popular girls name in England. There’s plenty of famous Mary’s in English history. As there are in many other countries with a Christian heritage.

I'm not sure I'd call names like Ava, Isla and Poppy older than names like Quentin, Sebastian or Edward....

IIRC flower names (e.g. Poppy) were a Victorian trend.

I think there do tend to be name cycles. Emma, Sarah, Helen, Christopher, David, Robert were all more popular in my youth than today, but they'll probably come back when they sound fresh to parents naming their children. Other names do seem just to appear and disappear- there are the equivalents of Karen and Sharon on previous generations too, though it often surprises me the number of mothballed names that people do choose to bring back. I know two Walters, for example

I love that spreadsheet! #namegeek

When people talk about the ‘Tracey’s/Kevin’s’ of the future I often find they don’t mean names that date you, they mean names that imply you are ‘lower class’ or common.

If you look at some of the older names that are popular now like Lily and Florence, they are high up at the top at he start of the 1900s, slowly drop down then start to rise again in the grandchildren/great grandchildren’s generation. These names won’t be the ‘Tracey’s/Kevins’, as they are well known and follow cyclical trends over generations. I don’t think it’s necessarily to do with popularity, more what sociological factors are associated with a name, I.e who the name is popular with. So Tracey/Kevin/Sharon became popular with those from a lower socioeconomic status and became associated with this, which is why they we’re paridied as the ‘Fat Slags’ in the Viz comics.

So the names that will become the Tracey’s are the ones in that same group. I would say that in the current era people from a lower socioeconomic status are disproportionately interested in ‘Unique’ names, and these names will be marked out as the Tracey’s and Sharon’s. so Harper-Blue, Demi-Lee, these are the ones that adults of a middle class background roll their eyes at, and the ones that will be pariodied and associated with undesirability. It’s interesting, as it’s almost a complete u-turn from the 1960s!

Tarquin is a name that has been parkdied at the other end of the spectrum, and I think it’s still true that similar names (e.g from Greek mythology) are seen as try hard and pretentious, so that hasn’t changed

Obviously popularity doesn't bother many people or the top ten would be a lot more volatile than it is with people dropping popular names like stones.

There's definitely a socioeconomic element to it; Susan was the top name for 1954 and 1964 (and presumably a lot of years in between) yet it's nowhere close to having the same kind of associations as Tracy IMO. Yet the behaviour of the names is relatively similar after the 60s:

Susan
1934 - nowhere
1944 - 7th
1954 - 1st
1964 - 1st
1974 - 25th
1984 - 81st
1994 - not in top 100

Tracey/Tracy
1954 - nowhere
1964 - 6/11 (so likely a similar volume to Susan overall)
1974 - 26/27
1984 - 75
1994 - nowhere

Susan did rise more gradually which I think makes a bit of a difference.

It does bother me. I don’t care for ‘unique’ (made up) names and am very much a fan of traditional ‘real’ names. However, I don’t want my DC to be one of five with that name in their year group and tbh not many of the top ten names really do it for me.

Do the French still have to use a name from the saints? I presume not as it is now multicultural. A small draconian part of me would like it to be illegal to name your child Jorja rather than Georgia.

My friend has an unusual name and all three of her children have 'popular' classic names. She said having an unusual name has been a pita her entire life and didn't want the same for her kids.

My dd has a popular name, I had no clue that it was popular when she was born but have no regrets it's a lovely name.

I think it depends what the popular name is. If it's one that you like and your dc won't resent you for the rest of their lives then go for it. But use the normal spelling - spare them a lifetime of having to explain/spell on every form, job application/telephone conversation etc. Just because mum and dad were so 'out there' they decided that Jaymes, Emeelya, Daysee etc. I've seen these and far worse were a good idea
The worst one I've seen recently is Goerge. This is a totally British family with no overseas or family connections with this spelling of the name (and I know them very very well). So just to be twats, they've lumbered their ds with a lifetime of saying yes my name is George but it's spelt goerge. Ffs why would you do that to a kid?

There's a big difference between unusual (as in weird) and unpopular(as in normal name that isn't fashionable right now)!

I'd much rather have an unpopular name (normal name outside top 100 or 500) than either a super fashionable nor a strange unusual name.

In other words, the opposite of popular is not unusual/weird but just not trendy!

And weird spellings belong in the unusual/weird category! Not in the normal but not popular one.

The top boys' name (more popular than the top girls' name) was used for 6,259 boys in 2017, out of 348,071 boys registered. So 1 in 55 boys was given that name (Oliver).

If your child is in a class of 30.
The class is made of 15 boys and 15 girls.
Your child is a boy, with the most popular boys' name.
There are 14 other boys.
So there's a 14/55 chance that one (or more) of the other boys will be called Oliver.
That goes down to 1 in 4.

So if you call your son the MOST popular name for the year, 3/4 of the time there won't be another boy with the same name in his class.

(this all assumes that names are distributed evenly around the country, which they aren't, but never mind)

(I'm a bit tired so I hope I did the right maths but I think it's a simple one)

Last year's England + Wales data
www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/livebirths/bulletins/babynamesenglandandwales/2017

But Oliver won't only meet Oliver's born in the same year as him, but all those 6000 born each year for the past 10 years or so.

Yeah, but, so what?
Oliver doesn't have any culturally negative connotations. It's classless, so he'll meet some posh Olivers, some average and some not very posh. People know how to spell it, and you can't easily guess what Oliver's background will be like, e.g. parents jobs. If you saw an Oliver Smith on a job application, you wouldn't be able to infer much, apart from they are likely to be British. If a famous person called Oliver does something negative, so what there are loads of Olivers.

The same things do not apply to little Candida/Blaiden-Jae/Acorn