View Message

I keep seeing 'rage hell' now lol.
But it's an attractive classic name with some strength to it and I like it a lot, and I've liked all the Rachels I've met. One of my 3xgreat-grandmothers was also a Rachel (or possibly a Rachael: her records use both spellings) & various subsequent family members have had it as a middle name, where it was quite nice and unexpected.

I love it. Even though I like Rachael better, I would use Rachel just for simplicity sake.

It's all right. It was so popular in my generation and the one before it that it just seems bland to me now.

I like Rachel. I think I prefer Rachael, though.

---

The only thing that puts me off is that the chances of a Rachel becoming known as Ray are 99.99% and rising.

I really like it

I've always liked Raquel but never really noticed Rachel.

---

A masculine name I get the same sort of vibe from is Joshua.

Rachel is a really lovely solid name, but Rachel from Friends kind of ruined it for me. I hate her character and it overpowers all my positive associations.

---

I think it's got a really sweet sound. Pretty, but not flowery.

---

Definitely a classic name.

I like it, for the sound and look written out.

---

Plus my association with Rachels is extremely positive. All the ones I’ve known are smart and strong.

This message was edited 5/3/2018, 6:30 PM

The name is okay, but it sounds kind of ugly to me, probably because of a neighbor named Rachel I used to have who was a completely awful person as well as annoying and I just don't like the sound of it.

Love it! It’s a beautiful, understated classic that works on any type of woman.

---

I also love it with the Hebrew pronunciation (with a hard ch).

There's something about it that has taken it off of my list before, although I added it back again recently. Maybe bc it's not "fresh" enough for me? I have contradictory feelings about it.

This message was edited 5/3/2018, 4:16 PM

I love it, it's the best name in the world. Only if it's spelled Rachael, though. ;)

It's a classic. It fits in a "professional" environment. It's also still visible on kids. Nothing really "objectionable" about it... I just don't like it. I don't understand how the "aitch" sound could be perceived as attractive - and I don't even think Rachel, the original (English) spelling, looks complete. I actually think Rachael looks better, though the sound still isn't attractive, imo.

---

The Latin Rahel, however, is pretty.

This message was edited 5/3/2018, 3:24 PM

I love Rachel. I love the sound and the way the harsher RAYCH is balanced out by a softer el, I love the vibe I get from it, I love that it reminds me of a beautiful deep forestry green color, I even find the meaning rather charming. I’d consider irl, even, if not for the fact that it will surely be considered a “mom name” at that point. Oh well. A middle name, maybe.

I don't dislike it, but there are quite a few Biblical names I like more. It does have some charm, but it's a little harsh.

It's a solid classic, but a dated one. I would put it in a similar category as Deborah, Stephanie, Amanda or Rebecca, all dated classics, but dated to different decades. Deborah is very 60s, Stephanie and Amanda are 80s and Rachel has a very strong 90s feel to me which is when it peaked, even though it was certainly common before the 90s as well. I also think of Rachel from Friends. I find the sound a bit harsh as well, but overall it's perfectly fine. I just feel like it's more a name of my own generation and feel that it's a bit tired due to overuse.

It's my own name, so I don't dislike it. But I know several and it feels unexciting as a first name. It does feel fresher as a middle name (and is a very good alternative to Rae which is very common as a MN).