'Dated' names

[ConstanceL]

I often see on threads that people say don't use such and such name as it won't date well. But does it really matter if names are of their time? My (real) name was popular in the 80s, but not any more. But when I was little it was a popular name for little girls, and now I am heading towards middle age it is a name that many late 30s women have.

We are thinking about names for our next DC and I really like the name Aurelia, but I searched threads and a few people said 'it won't date well'. So I guess my question is, does that really matter? I've never had a problem with my 'dated' name - has anyone else?

@thisgardenlife, those could come back. Beryl, Maureen and Brian first

I think beryl will be back soon...

Doubt it. If it was going to come back it would have done so by now. Same as with Cecil and Gladys. Some older names just don't have mass appeal.

I never thought Ivy would stage a comeback so I daren't take a guess on Beryl.

@Dillydollydingdong

I was reading the other day about a woman who wants to name her twins Walter and Agnes when they're born. Wally and Aggie? Who would want to lumber innocent babies with names like that?

Both names are already being used and have been for a bit.

I teach a 5y Aggie and have taught a Walter, who'd be about 9y now,

There's no such thing as 'dated' names.

Names, like everything else, go in and out of fashion, and no-one can predict when they will come around again. What you think is dated this year, could become fashionable next year.

A name becomes popular simply because lots of people use it. If too many people use it and it becomes common then it falls out of fashion.

When I was at school we had about seven 'Susans' in our class. Now you rarely hear of a child being called Susan but we all know a Sue or a Suzy.

My older brother was a Michael but there were so many Michaels in his class he started being known by his middle name George and that has stuck. You rarely hear of a child being called Michael but we all know a Mike, a Mick, or a Micky.

Michael and Susan may be 'dated' but they are perfectly fine names.

Who cares if a name is dated or not. Just choose names that you like or that mean something to you and your child will grow in to them.

And by the way to @Dillydollydingdong, there's absolutely nothing wrong with Walter or Agnes.

@maddy68

Susan Tracey Adele Claire Sharon Gary Nigel

I’m 57.... I went to primary school with all of these😀

@thisgardenlife

Names I think have dated beyond repair (though they could come back any time):

Beryl
Stacey
Tracey
Sharon
Maureen
Wayne
Brian

Agree apart from Stacey...I know a Stacey who’s 31 and also one who is 27

I have a very classic name and I love it, though it is shortened for everyday use.

One of my DC had both a Brian and a Wayne in her primary school. They would be about 20 now.

I guess dated names are in some ways better than names that are cute on a baby would won't be good on an adult, for example I know of someone who called their son Buddy Gene which I thought was quite cruel, but others may disagree. Names are such a subjective and sometimes emotive subject!

I like Brian, it has a simple elegance to it. Much like Frank or Bridget. I think those sort of sharp, snappy, ‘hard’ sounding names will be the next trend - the antithesis to the current fussy, vowel heavy, twee, flowing names that at super popular now.

I think Brian may come back. Though B names have not been popular for a while though Beatrice made a comeback with the Victoriana names.

@SummaLuvin

I like Brian, it has a simple elegance to it. Much like Frank or Bridget. I think those sort of sharp, snappy, ‘hard’ sounding names will be the next trend - the antithesis to the current fussy, vowel heavy, twee, flowing names that at super popular now.

I feel the same about the name Colin, but when I suggested it for DS it was treated as a joke!

I feel much the same about Eric. It’s a brilliant name!

My DD is Louisa. I'm actually wondering if it will have a revival with it apparently being a very popular character in the latest Disney film as a strong female character.

Louisa is a lovely name too.

I dislike my dated name. It's not a classic name that happened to be very popular during a certain period, which I feel is the main difference.

So Laura, Claire, Sarah, Rebecca, Louise, Rachel may be considered "80s/90s names", yet are classic IMO. Ditto Margaret, Susan, Deborah for the 50s/60s. Or Chloe, Jessica, Sophie, Isobel, Lily for the 2000s.

[quote lhirault]@Comedycook As someone approaching 60 (and with a very dated 60s name) I can assure you that Maureen is more likely to be in her mid 70s than 60. It would have been considered very old fashioned when I was born (early 60s). [/quote]
And @NotAnotherHelen - my old college friendship group is still going strong. There is Maureen (yes!) Liz, Helen, Juliet and me.

I think if you want to avoid names that will date, from Edna to Kayden, you can't do better than go Biblical or Shakespearean.

Biblical names do become dated but a core of them either stay current or a form of the name will. My contemporaries had NT names but now boys have OT names

John went out of favour but Jack became popular.
Mary went out but Marie became popular
etc

I'd say Royal family and Shakespeare is a fairly safe guide

@KirstenBlest

Biblical names do become dated but a core of them either stay current or a form of the name will. My contemporaries had NT names but now boys have OT names

John went out of favour but Jack became popular.
Mary went out but Marie became popular
etc

I'd say Royal family and Shakespeare is a fairly safe guide

Don't know about the royal family - Mia, Savannah, Sienna, Isla, Archie, Louis all seem very 'now' and trendy to me!

My first and middle name have both been mentioned, and I didn't have to scroll very far 🙈
I hate my name, I don't know what my mum was thinking. I actually get embarrassed to say it aloud!

I like my name but it does signal to people what age I likely am. Annoyingly as well I was just at the end of the trend so most women with the name are about 10 years older.

@ConstanceL, they are minor royals. I meant kings and queens and their children, not great grand-children. Harry Sussex and Andrew York's children can be excluded for this purpose

Even looking at the Monarch/next in line and their kids there is no guarantee of timelessness, they choose classic names, but that's not the same thing.

William and Harry (Henry) - both timeless, maybe not Harry, but Henry is.
Charles, Anne, Edward, and Andrew - Edward timeless, the other three dated.
Elizabeth, Margaret - Elizabeth timeless, Margaret is dated.