New Post
Search
Help
ArchivesRe: The name Mackenzie
in reply to a message by Ivayla
While I agree that this post doesn't belong on the fact board, I also agree with the original poster about the change of names in modern times. I personally have no issue with 'unisex' names as a concept; names come from somewhere and hey, various last names originated from first names so why not the other way around? I think certain names originally intended for boys sound fine on girls. As long as we don't go overboard with Little Miss Thomas and her best friend, Little Miss Samuel. EEK!. I honestly think it depends on the name but I do understand objections to Mackenzie as a female name (although I like it myself). Really, many people don't want certain names to be overtaken by the girls. I get that; I adore Ashley and Kelly for boys but I'd shy away from them, thanks to girls being given those names.
I hope that rant made sense...
I hope that rant made sense...
1
Replies
Perhaps the point is that Tamsin/Thomasina and Samantha/Samella are there to fill the gap? But since Mackenzie is a ln and the practice of using a (family, or socially superior)ln as a fn traditionally applied to boys, people find their expectations raised and then exploded. Never comfortable! What fascinates me is that, when fewer given names were in circulation - one or two centuries ago - people seemed pretty happy to use them over and over. Now, with many more names available than ever before, suddenly it's not enough. Consumerism, perhaps?
1
I love the last line of your post. Consumerism, perhaps? - I have never thought of that. I'm finishing a Consumption & Gender class right now and I think that you're definitely on to something.
1