View Message

Rachel was quite popular in the 90s - at least, in my neck of the woods. I think it got even more popular later in the decade due to the "Friends" association. I just looked it up and saw that it fell out of the Top 100 a few years ago, so I do think it's on its way to becoming dated. I doubt it'll be my generation's Jennifer (the famous Rachel Green's *real* name), but still... it will probably be a "nursing home name" come 2055.

---

I usually don't like "variant" names, probably because I'm a sucker for catering to authority and wouldn't want to inconvenience my child with an "unusual" spelling that they'd have to correct all the time. However... for some reason, I prefer Rachael to Rachel. Even though it doesn't actually make any linguistic sense - considering the spelling is influenced by Michael, Rachael should be pronounced more like Raquel than Rachel - I just think Rachael looks better than Rachel.

---

Come to think of it, I actually prefer Raquel to Rachel / Rachael. The actual sound of Rachel is quite harsh. It's a more sophisticated name choice than a lot of others out there (it's not as stale as many of the other "classics"), but let's be real, that "aitch" sound is not very attractive.

---

Rebecca, I prefer to all three above. It's a gorgeous name to look at, and pleasant to say (imo). But a nickname is almost inevitable, most likely either Becca or Becky, and I don't have the best history with people who go by Becky...

This message was edited 5/30/2017, 9:24 AM

In my previous response, I forgot to mention my views on Rachael, as a spelling. I don't like it, never did. Rachel is classic and beautiful, and doesn't need alternative spellings. Rachael looks unattractive, as if it is Rachel turning into Raphael, but not quite getting there. Rachel isn't dated, but Rachael is.

Love it and would use it. I prefer Rachel (to answer your last two questions).

I love Rachel. I honestly prefer Rachael because it seems more complete, but I would use Rachel as a first name just for simplicity sake. Yes I think it's dated to the '80's/'90's, but not dated as bad as something like Brittany.

It's okay. A little harsh. I see no need for the Rachael spelling. It's on its way to being dated. I have no strong associations with it.

---

I love Rebecca and prefer it by far to Rachel. However, when my daughter was born, I decided not to name her Rebecca due to the fact that at that time Rebecca was very popular, and I've never regretted it.

I don't think it's particularly dated. It's classic enough to overcome the extent to which it is anyway.

---

I have warm associations with this name (my best friend from middle and high school), but it still is underwhelming to me.

---

I do like it more than Rebecca.

---

I really don't like the spelling Rachael. I want to pronounce the ch with a hard K like Michael.

I love Rachel. I consider it classic, not dated. Rebecca is lovely, too. I currently prefer Rachel, of the two. Both have Daphne du Maurier connections, although not sure that those characters are entirely positive associations - but I think Daphne did select both names because of their beauty.

Yawn

---

It's a decent name that got overused, pretty much like Sarah which tbh I think sounds nicer. So does Rebecca, and it's slighlty less overused.

I prefer Rachael to Rachel. I pronounce them the same way.

---

I think the people who would have used Rach(a)el will still do so; it's sufficiently classic for that.

---

What I dislike about it is the way it morphs into Ray.

---

I prefer Rebecca, partly I suppose because I prefer its nns.