Baby Names
Edit to add: This thread is to open-up discussion. I don't say I dislike every trend in names. I just note them.
When you name your child the name should be for your child for life not some name you think is a cute accessory for you now or what you wanted as a child or any other alternative except a name that your child will be proud to have as an adult because that's what you are raising them to be. Also, unless your child becomes famous (Guess what? Your child probably won't become famous.) about only 5% of the people they know will every see the "cool" alternative spelling you choose for your child. But, 100% of their future potential employers will see the ridiculous alternative spelling you chose for your child, and that's not the way they will want to stand out in an interview.
On the off-chance that your child actually does become the rock star you're hoping they become they can always change their name or use a nickname. Robert Zimmerman, Jim Osterberg, and Paul Hewson would probably agree. Who? That's Bob Dylan, Iggy Pop, and Bono. Regular names didn't stop them, nor did it stop The Beatles: John, Paul, George, and Richard (Ringo), nor REM: Bill, Mike, Michael, and Peter.
My opinion of these names do not nccessarily reflect my opinions of the mothers on the show, so far:
Amzie: Is that really her name? Please tell me that's a nickname. It's a nickname, not a name. No one needs to reply, "They have the right to name their child whatever they want." Yes, I know that. But for people who are so concerned with image they can expect us to pick apart what they've chosen. It's a ridiculous name for an adult, and children grow up to be adults.
Ledger: Is this supposed to be in honour of Heath Ledger? Is this possibly a surname? Otherwise, why would you name your child after a book in which you keep financial records?
McKinley: A surname as given name. Fine, but is this one of your family names? I find it odd and pretentious this new trend of using surnames for given names when the surname is not one of your own family names.
Addison: A very popular name of late. Sorry, but it just makes me think of the disease.
Dylan, Andrew, Jordan: Some less trnedy names. Dylan and Andrew, especially. (Andrew was even on my short list.)
Sommer the dog: It's a dog, not a child. Small dogs are notorious for being feisty. Nicole B. was perfectly just in disinviting Nicole N.to her daughter's birthday party, particularly the way she handled Sommer biting Miranda. It's not Nicole N. and Sommer's day, it's McKinley's day, and Nicole B. didn't need the added stress of worrying about that dog running around endangering the children. A little dog like that bit my child on his face once. He had to have stitches and a tetnus shot. The owner said only, "These things happen." She's as enamoured of her dog as this nut is of hers. It still ticks me off when I see the scar on my son's face even though it's really small. I understand the love of a pet, but it is not a child. Not even close. You really can't understand that until you actually have a child. As far as the name, I'm not sure if it's really a use of a surname or if she decided to get creative with the spelling of "summer," in which case she'll probably do the same with her children who will have to spend the rest of their lives spelling their names to everyone.
So, what do you all think of these names? How about the names of your children and/or their peers? My son is in elementary school, and there's usually only one or two children who have simple names like John or Michael. Otherwise, it's surnames as given names (I'm not sure how many of them are actually family names), "boys names" for girls (I had no idea from the class list who was a girl), and double names for girls like Mary Grace or (using a names from this show, which could be surnames, as well) Mary Addison or Ava Ledger. Otherwise, it's then much older traditional names.
The perfect human being is uninteresting. -Joseph Campbell
{Ignore phone posting errors.}