New Post
Search
HelpRe: Don't call me Shirley...
in reply to a message by Joiya
Well, I have a personal association that makes it hard to judge objectively. Shirley is my sister-in-law's name. She's a basically well-meaning but brash, loud, tactless person with an annoying accent. My parents couldn't stand her and my sisters and I always made fun of her accent. Last year she was a real jerk to me over Facebook and unfriended me because she's an idiot. I always point to her as proof that any idiot can go get a college education.
I guess if I could separate the name from her I'd judge it dated, frumpy because it is (although my sister-in-law Shirley is not and never has been frumpy, she's in her early sixties now and was attractive when younger and still is attractive for her age), but if I try really hard to separate it from its datedness I can see some prettiness.
My sister-in-law was born in 1953, and I always thought she had a dated name even for her age, but now I see that Shirley was still number 29 in 1953, although it had peaked in the 30s. Live and learn.
I guess if I could separate the name from her I'd judge it dated, frumpy because it is (although my sister-in-law Shirley is not and never has been frumpy, she's in her early sixties now and was attractive when younger and still is attractive for her age), but if I try really hard to separate it from its datedness I can see some prettiness.
My sister-in-law was born in 1953, and I always thought she had a dated name even for her age, but now I see that Shirley was still number 29 in 1953, although it had peaked in the 30s. Live and learn.
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
I keep remembering this girl I went to school with. Early 90s and the class was full of Ashley, Megan and Heathers... and along comes Loretta. Loretta? My name (Heidi) was not so common in a good way, but poor Loretta could never seem to get past her frumpy name.
I don't want to name some kid and have them end up with Loretta of the 90s predicament. Loretta is pretty in and of itself, but it just did NOT fit the times. It was past antique-chic and right into dusty.
SO, I guess your post makes me wonder if you are the majority (who still associates Shirley with relics) or if I am (who thinks it is a shiney old gem just waiting for a bit of polish)?
I don't want to name some kid and have them end up with Loretta of the 90s predicament. Loretta is pretty in and of itself, but it just did NOT fit the times. It was past antique-chic and right into dusty.
SO, I guess your post makes me wonder if you are the majority (who still associates Shirley with relics) or if I am (who thinks it is a shiney old gem just waiting for a bit of polish)?
1
I am older (54) so the women who were named Shirley when it was at its peak in the 1930s were in their forties by the time I was a teenager. Most of them are dead now, I'm sure. But the name did stay in the top 100 through 1963, so there are still plenty of older women around named Shirley---older, but not dead yet. That's what makes me think I'm still in the majority. Shirley could well come to be seen as a shiney old gem by the majority, but, if that happens, I don't think it will be for another 30 to 40 years.
1