View Message

I think it's a nice set.

I like Hannah and Leah. I think Emma is better than Gemma for this set.

Really dull. Gemma is ugly!

They all end the same but are different enough that it doesn't matter. I love Leah, the others are okay. Overall, the set is not what I was expecting. It's not necessarily bad, it's just bland.

I like them all. Leah is my favorite of the three. Definitely wouldn't have them together as sisters, though -- I don't like when sibling names are that much alike (same syllables, same meter, all end in schwa).

I love the names Hannah and Leah; both are such classy and spunky names. Gemma is just an alright name in my book...and I would've chosen a different name for a sister. Maybe Rachel or Mary instead of Gemma.

I agree that Gemma doesn't seem to fit. Sarah is the name I would put with Leah and Hannah. I would like that set. All good names. Not as boring right now, to me, as they would have been 25 years ago.

---

I actually like Gemma more than I like Leah and Hannah, though. I'd give Gemma sisters Nicola and Fiona (or Lydia).

All nice, although Gemma is different to the others

I LOVE Gemma! The other two are boring, especially Hannah.

Leah & Gemma are very nice to me (I won't argue they can't be called boring), but I'm not a fan of Hannah.

My favourite is Hannah and I think it's lovely. Leah is a fine name too. Gemma isn't my cup of tea but it's not horrible.

---

What's boring for some people is beautiful to others.

Leah is okay. Hannah is duller than dishwater. Gemma doesn't fit the old-Testament vibe the other two have set up, and it's very British to me.

It's not surprising. Not terribly interesting, but not boring, in my opinion. The title of your post made it sound like the names were more old-fashioned, which would have been exciting -- it's so interesting to hear old names on young people.