View Message

I don't like Hunter for a woman, but I am able to understand its appeal, I think. The idea of a hunter evokes resourcefulness and a tension between cooperation with nature and dependence on it - which are appealing connotations regardless of the name's gender, and have a particular appeal as a female name (although it's not my style, I'd rather it be a male name). It is surnamey enough that I don't like it for girls. But I think Hunter has a quality of "blue-state-redneck, or red-state-hippy? not even playing that game" quality that makes it interesting and different from the Carsons and Paytons and Rileys and Harpers.

---

Harper on the other hand just makes me think of harpies, and "harping on" (complaining), and the producers of blandly pleasant background tinklings, so I don't care for that on either sex. If it's either, though, it's feminine... it's just so negative, like Tempest or Piper it seems so petty and diminutive. Aw, she's a Harper, so kewt and sweet - and it's a surname so at the same time, she's a good ol' bubba. Nms.

yup, 100% on your side about Hunter. Definitely a boys name; no doubt.

---

Harper on the other hand is just an awful name for either gender. It just sounds so harsh and gah! I just don't understand the appeal over it. I think it should have just remained as a surname