View Message

The Most Boring Names, Ever
Here are some babies recently born to friends of mine:Makenna
Bailey (girl)
Jordyn (girl)
Mason
ChloeThe babies are adorable, but my GOD are their names boring as dirt. No one seems to have any imagination these days, at least not when it comes to naming kids. To me, these names all morph together in a sea of barfy mediocrity. UGH.Anyway, I just wanted to get that off my chest. What do you think of these names? Hmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Archived Thread - replies disabled
vote up1

Replies

I consider Mason the most boring... does not appeal to me. I prefer Jason which is only slightly less boring.Makenna i dislike. I don't like the Kenna.Chloe is my cousins name and, her name is boring especially with the middle name Rae.Bailey and Jordyn are to much like surnames.
vote up1
Julie/Julia/Giulia. Everyone and their uncle around me seems to be naming their daughters some version of this.
vote up1
Julia's been common for a while now, right? I know three around my age (late 20s-early 30s). Julie is common too.
vote up1
Agree. Super boring. I don't like any of them. Jordyn and Bailey are especially bad. Bailey just seems like a dog's name to me. Jordyn is more of a masculine name to me, and they just had to add that unnecessary Y didn't they?
vote up1
I find these names particularly boring:Lee/Leigh
Lynn(e)
Jack
Liam
Emma
Cole
Ty (as a full name)
Bo
Beth
Jay (as a full name)
May/Mae
Any middle names considered "filler" (i.e. Marie, Anne, Rose, Grace, Mae, John, Lee, Ray)
vote up1
Wow, those all sound very dated to me. They're all names of kids who were 3 or 4 years older than me in high school.My friends who are having babies have generally been choosing pretty classic names.
vote up1
I don't like any of those names. Chloe is OK, though. The rest are ugly.Boring Swedish names: Ann, Anna (my own middle name), Maria, Johan, Per, Peter, Pia, Lisa, Karin, Lotta, Sara.
Boring English names: Ann, Anna, Mary, Jane, John, Jill, Jordan, Kate, Susan, Lynn.
vote up1
I like Chloe! The others ... not so much.I find Ryan, Bruce, Jason, Justin and Gary profoundly boring on boys and men (with apologies to my wonderful nephew, who has two of them).For girls: quite a few, ranging from the eternally blah (Brenda) to the once-popular (Carol, Sandra, Lauren, Lisa) and then the current fluff (Taylor, Tayla, all the Kates and Cates, all Macs and other lnfns).
vote up1
John
vote up1
I... like Chloe...*dodges fruit*
vote up1
*dodges with you, because she also likes Chloe*
vote up1
I rather see boring names than bad ones. I like Jordan (this spelling only).
vote up1
Ha. I'd say people have more imagination than ever when it comes to naming kids. Maybe too much imagination, even, and that's how we get endless listicles about "Super rare baby names no one else will have!" These names in particular are boring though. A little out of style, too - with no other information I'd expect this to be a list of 12 year olds, not new babies.
vote up1
I don't like any of them. I agree, they're quite bland, and I'm not a fan of "trendy" names.
vote up1
Chloe is boring (my sister considered it 20 years ago, and it was boring then!) but okay.
I'd happily drop-kick the rest of them off a cliff. Yeuch.
vote up1
A very pale sea, by the sound of it.
vote up1
I like Bailey and Jordan/Jordyn on boys and Makenna on a girl. Mason and Chloe are names I'd like to avoid. These names don't look boring to me; names like James and Mary would be very boring, in my honest opinion.
vote up1
Mason - Rank 4/2016, Mayson Rank 843/2016, Mazon/Mazzon not listed/2016Chloe - Rank 20/2016, Khloe Rank 125/2016, Cloe not listed/2016-Rank 913/2008, Kloe not listed/2016-Rank 965/2010Bailey - Rank 116/2016, Bailee Rank 587/2016, Baylee Rank 492/2016Jordyn - Rank 146/2016, Jordan Rank 287/2016, Jourdain not listed/2016Makenna - Rank 319/2016, Makayla Rank 165/2016, Makenzie Rank 244/2016
Mckenna Rank 251/2016 Mckayla not listed/2016 Mckenzie Rank 165/2016
Mackenna not listed/2016 Mackayla not listed/2016 Mackenzie Rank 84/2016
Don't like either of them, except of the stylish Jourdain & a "very" tiny little bit KhloeP.S.: Apart from that all these names in Germany are totally uncommon & not used to, so I can't really say more about this.
vote up1
What's funny is they probably think the names are very interesting!!!
vote up1
It's probably a generational thing. They're over 35, I'd guess. I grew up with plenty of Chloes, McKennas, and Jordyns so they just seem like "normal names" to me.
vote up1
Two of them are in their mid-30's. The others are in their mid-20's.
vote up1
I like all of these? I don't find them boring. Modern, yes, but not boring.
vote up1
I've never seen Makenna or Jordyn used here (Jordan was popular in the 90s and early 00s though), so I guess they're kind of unusual to me. Don't like either of them, although I don't *hate* Jordan on a boy. Bailey is more popular for boys here but is already getting a bit dated. Mason and Chloe are just boring.
vote up1
Wouldn't get a second look, agree they're very generic for these days. I don't like any of them, but can't hate them greatly either.I wanted to comment though because this reminded me of a comment I saw in a facebook thread the other day, one of those sponsored ads for a scarymommy article about some baby names so unique no one else will have them. One guy commented and said babies these days are all named such weird and different things, if you really want to be unique name your son "John." He'll be the only one in his class, imagine that? lol
vote up1
It's true! I'm 18 years old and have only ever known 2 Jonathan's my age, who both didn't even go by John (one went by a nickname - Sheldon, and the other just Jonathan). I've also only ever known 1 Mary my age.
vote up1
That reminds me of a news article I just read. It was about an 8-year-old boy named George. I doubt there will be any other Georges in his class! And I can't help but think that such a stuffy name as George is adorable on a kid.
vote up1
Hi RDNZL !!!!Makenna: I agree with who said that it strange and quite silly to give a daughter a name that means "son of ...". Infact I dislike it.Bailey: On a boy it could be ok but on a girl is horrible.Jordyn: Why is trendy to ruin names with such a horrible variant? Jordan in my opinion is masculine but on a girl is much much better than this new stuff.Mason: surnameyChloe: it would be ok (but not fine) but it is too overused imo.
vote up1
I've seen quite a few little Masons in my area, even, and it's 98.%French-speaking.
Mason is a surname! (I know, of course, that you know). But perhaps people where I live don't know, they've just heard the name. Oddly(sarcasm here) , I see no new-borns named Bellavance, or Daigle, or Pelletier. (all very common surnames where I live.)
vote up1
I like Mason, but not the others.
vote up1
Not really a fan of any, especially Makenna and Jordyn. The rest...I don't think they're horrible, but I'd certainly never choose them when I have so many other possibilities.
vote up1
No, I don't think they're horrible, either. I just think they're bland. Like plain toast, or something. :P
vote up1
I can't agree with you when it comes to Mason, I really like the name but I can see what you're talking about with the other four.Makenna- I can't warm to it. It comes from Mckenna which is the Gaelic name for "son of Cionaodh". It's never made sense to me why someone would name the girl something that means "son of".Bailey- I don't like it, I prefer it on a boy and even then I don't like it.Jordyn- I don't like it, adding the Y makes it worse.Chloe- I've never liked it. It's too popular and I don't like the sound. I agree with you, it's boring.

This message was edited 10/18/2017, 1:26 PM

vote up1
"Makenna- I can't warm to it. It comes from Mckenna which is the Gaelic name for "son of Cionaodh". It's never made sense to me why someone would name the girl something that means 'son of'"I see this argument invoked all the time wrt names like Makenna and Mackenzie and Madison and I think it's the silliest thing! These names aren't really my style but I never see it applied elsewhere, people wondering why anyone would name their blond fair-skinned baby Cole, or their very-assuredly-not-royal baby Sarah. Most people don't think meanings have to actually "fit" the person with the name. Most people barely care about name meanings in the first place! Not attacking you specifically, because like I said I see this all the time, it just annoys me.
vote up1
I don't think naming a daughter a name that means "son of" is the same as naming a fair skinned/haired child a name that means "dark". I know not everyone cares about the meaning of their name, but most kids are at one point at least curious about their own. I don't know, I'd just genuinely be kind of disappointed if I learned the meaning of my name meant "son of" someone, the same why I'd be pretty disappointed if my mother had named me Dylan or Tyler.
vote up1
How is it different though? Anyway, lots of names have bad/underwhelming meanings. Charlotte might mean man. Andrea definitely means man. I rarely see people decry their usage on these grounds. The majority of people value sound/style over meanings at this point. Of course, a Madison could easily grow up to dislike the sound/style of her name, but that risk is present with any name.It just tends to be an inconsistent criticism, is what I'm saying. One that comes about because of a bias against unisex names, in my opinion. And I dislike the amount of bias against unisex names.
vote up1
I have no issue with unisex names, for example Riley is one of my favorite names for both, but my main issue with Mc names is that growing up in Scotland I've always known that Mc surnames mean "son of". I completely see your point about names like Charlotte but to me names like Jackson, McKenzie, etc... on a girl are a bit silly as they blatantly mean "son of". I have no issue with people naming their children this, I just don't like the names. I completely see your point but this is just my take on it.
vote up1
I like Chloe... but agree with you on the rest. And though I think Chloe is sweet, it's not what I'd call exciting either. So I don't really disagree with you on that one.
vote up1
I hate Makenna.I don't have the words to describe how much I hate Bailey. It's bad for a boy and even worse for a girl. A friend of ours named her baby girl Bailey a couple of years ago. I am just dumbfounded. I cannot wrap my mind around why anyone thinks Bailey is in any way a good or nice or pretty or spiffy or beautiful or classy or think-of-any-positive -quality-for-a-girls'-name-that-you-can name for a girl.Jordyn -- well, it's not as bad as Bailey, but it's unfeminine and ugly as well.Mason ---- God I hate Mason. I just hate it so much. An example of a letter making a big difference, because I like Jason, although Jason was very overused and I am somewhat tired of it.Chloe -- I don't hate it, but it's a little cloying. I think Zoe is much better, not that Zoe is now an original choice, either.I'm with you on what people are naming their kids these days. At least 75% of the time, I think the names are awful, especially the girls' names. I suppose you can write it off, in my case, of my taste not changing with the times...maybe. But my taste actually has changed since I was young. I do like names I didn't back then, names such as Hazel and Mabel. I dunno. I am just so glad that my granddaughter is not going to be named something like Kinzley or Bailey or Mackenna or Riley or Addison. Yes, Lucy is popular, and Lucille is rising, but they are still in a different league than these monstrosities.
vote up1
ita Bailey
QuoteI don't have the words to describe how much I hate Bailey. It's bad for a boy and even worse for a girl. A friend of ours named her baby girl Bailey a couple of years ago. I am just dumbfounded. I cannot wrap my mind around why anyone thinks Bailey is in any way a good or nice or pretty or spiffy or beautiful or classy or think-of-any-positive -quality-for-a-girls'-name-that-you-can name for a girl.
Amen.I don't mind Makenna, Jordyn, Chloe, or Mason. I can sort of understand why they would have appeal to some people. But, Bailey? For a girl? It would require a total disconnection from every association I can think of, as well as every unconscious association, with the name Bailey. It's like they're extraterrestrials. It reminds me of Ford Prefect in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy ...This friend of his had first arrived on the planet Earth some fifteen Earth years previously, and he had worked hard to blend himself into Earth society – with, it must be said, some success. ... He had made one careless blunder, though, because he had skimped a bit on his preparatory research. The information he had gathered had led him to choose the name ‘Ford Prefect’ as being nicely inconspicuous

This message was edited 10/18/2017, 10:54 AM

vote up1
These names seem very dated, to me. The people using them are around my age, so I think they're sticking with names they heard and liked in the late 90's/early 00's, but aren't most of these on the way out? I wouldn't know, because I don't know popularity, and stuff. I could be wrong.
vote up1
Yes, they were/are all popular, and all except Mason look to be headed downward, although Chloe hasn't headed downward as much as the other three. So yes, they're boring, and except for Mason and Chloe, dated. I was addressing a different issue than you were --- even if they were never popular, I'd think them all, except Chloe, horrid.
vote up1