Throwback Thursday from September 2015
Oh, Baby, Baby, Baby
I WAS JUST LOOKING AT THE LIST of the most popular names for newborn babies in 2014. For 2015 I assume we won’t know for a while what names will make the Top Ten.
When I first saw the list of girl’s names I was struck by how “traditional” and even 19th century many of them seemed.
Sophia? Emma? Emily?
I guess the trend of recent years for “new” names or names that had a more nontraditional flair has waned at last.
I know of two families that have daughters named “Brooklyn.” Personally, I would no sooner name my child Brooklyn than I would name her East St. Louis or Beaver Falls (The town where I grew up).
Names like Sophia, Emma and Emily carry elegance about with them. They conjure up a gentler, and more polite, time. When I hear Brooklyn I think of black and while newsreel footage of crowded streets and Ebbet’s Field – Home of the Brooklyn Dodgers. I can almost smell the cigar smoke and perspiration. (I’m gonna hear about this – I just know it.)
Here is the complete Top Ten List of Girl’s Names for 2014, courtesy of BabyCenter.com.
There’s not a Brooklyn or an East St. Louis among them.
I recall that a few years ago the name “Madison” was a very popular choice for both boys and girls. There are a number of names that do double duty, but the only reason this sticks out in my memory is that once, during an interview with some sportscaster, Giants’ Pitcher Madison Bumgarner mentioned that he once had a date with a girl who was also named Madison Bumgarner. He claimed that they were not related, but he grew up in a small town in North Carolina. I’m just saying…
Doubling up on both names just raises eyebrows and visions of children running around with extra thumbs.
All of these girl’s names are incredibly better than what Inventor and Aircraft Designer, Bill Lear (The Lear Jet) did to his daughter. He saddled his baby girl with the first name of “Shanda.”
10 Most Popular boy’s Names for 2014
The one thing that leaps out at me about this list of boy’s names is that several of them are, what I would consider to be, last names or family names.
Nos. 1, 4, 6, and 10 are not first names.
Take no. 1 for example.
Let’s assume, for the sake of discussion, that little Jackson’s last name is “Thomas.” Years from now he will be asked to fill out some forms for a job or for some government program and they will ask that he do so “Last name first.” He will dutifully fill in the blanks with “Thomas, Jackson.”
I freaking guarantee that the clerk who is processing his paperwork will see that and think that Jackson is an illiterate fool and trashcan his application. He will not get the job, become disheartened, fall in with a bad crowd, and descend into a life of crime and despair. All because his parents got cute with his name.
Numbers 4, 6, and 10 – I’m sorry to say, but you’re screwed.
And number 8 – “Caden?” That’s not a name. It sounds like a dental term. “I’m sorry; Jackson, but you have a bad case of Caden. It’s going to be painful and expensive.”
Of course, as was the case with the girl’s names – it could be worse.
I do know of a young boy here in Terre Haute (That’s French for, “My first name is Pierre.”) who has the legal first name of “Buckshot.”
Is that a crime statistic in the making, or what? Why not just name the kid, “The Defendant.”
I do believe that parents should be able to name their kids as they like, but if you’re going to give your child a stupid name, I think that the clerk authorizing birth certificates should be legally empowered to take Daddy and Mommy out back and slap them silly upside the head.