How boring are Chloe, Megan and Sarah?

[Snowbell99]

Just wondering. These are the three names I love that were super common in the 90s.

What do you think of them? What kind of image do they give you? And are they really that boring?

Chloe - was one of my favourite girls name when I was young. Not keen anymore. It's a bit boring.
Sarah - the name of the most miserable sod in my class at school.
Megan - shut up, Meg

Sarah is timeless and elegant. Chloe and Megan, nice names but definitely of their time.

Sarah is like Elizabeth - classic, verging into safe. Megan always strikes me as agricultural- nothing elegant about it.

Sarah in the 80s and 90s was way too common but now it's quite unusual. Same with chloe . Still lots of meghans about though so I wouldn't be keen on it

Sarah is very classic, so not really dated, lovely name.

Chloe I think is a bit wet, and getting quite popular.

Nothing wrong with Megan but it's a bit meh, and the M Markel association will be a pain I think.

I only know one Chloe and one Megan, both lower primary age, nice classic names.

I actually think they are not boring at all these days - I don't know any under 5s with any of those names. So they'd probably be the only one in their class. Sarah is my favourite.

I know a lot of Chloes of all ages. Very common still. Megan has dropped off a little but I still know a few teenagers. I nearly called my 2 year old daughter Sarah, but chickened out. I wish I'd have used it now.

I really like Chloe

I used to really like Megan but not since Markle

I like Sarah it seems refreshing now. I like it shortened to Sadie too

I love Chloe - not boring at all.

Lovely names. Especially Sarah.

😂 really laughing at this thread, my name is one of these! Pleased to hear some like it!

I'm a Sarah. If I block out how overused it was for women of my age, I actually really like the sound of it. But it has completely failed in its primary purpose of identifying me at school from other children, since there were always a couple of us in each year group! I've even been landed with Louise as a middle name and I can tell you that with no fear of being outed, such is it's overuse
But for a baby being named now, I think it's a nice name. Chloe and Megan are also pretty.
For me, the truly terrible names are the ones which are hyphenated with May or Rose and the old lady revival names (Lilly etc).

I like them all.

I think Sarah is lovely. Chloe is a little dated but I like the sound of it. I love Megan. I like the spelling Meghan.

Very boring, especially dull old Sarah. Megan is very 2000s (along with Lauren) and quite hard-sounding and not particularly attractive. Chloe is the only one probably due for a comeback as it was common in the 80s.

I think it depends on surname. Short goes well with long but not with short. Like Sarah Brown is boring but Sarah Manzotti is cool.

I have a Megan - now Meg 😊 She's left school now so yes, definitely of the 2000s. It wasn't anywhere near our first choice but it suited her and still does. Definitely not wet 😆

I have two daughters, and in six years of toddler groups/nursery/primary school, I've only met one young Chloe. And zero Megans or Sarahs! So there's a good chance they'd stand out in their peer group amongst all the Ellies and Avas.

Of the three I think I like Sarah best, then Megan, then Chloe.

Sarah is classic & classy

Chloe is French & pretty

Meghan just makes me think Markle.

I would put Sarah in to a different bracket as it’s timeless. It’s classy and if I heard a baby called Sarah I would think it lovely.

@HoliHormonalTigerlilly

Sarah is classic & classy

Chloe is French & pretty

Meghan just makes me think Markle.

Meghan is also a bit witchy. Imo.

I like that. Megan is my favourite.

Much much better than the so called modern or unusual names you see on here!!! People forget that these children have to go through life with the names they are given. Classic is classic for a reason.

I think I they are very 90s!