View Message

This is a reply within a larger thread: view the whole thread

That's because...
in reply to a message by Lily8
Madison and Mackenzie mean "Son of..." This argument would be valid for any name that doesn't mean that.
Archived Thread - replies disabled
vote up1

Replies

I dunnoI have been thinking about this and realizing that any argument I have on this subject is disturbingly groundless.David: beloved
Albert: noble and bright
Peter: stoneNothing inherently feminine or masculine about them except for common use. What about these names on girls?
vote up1
It would bother me to see those names on girls too. But at least you have the legitimate argument of a gender-neutral meaning. There's nothing gender-neutral about a name meaning son of someone though. So those names in particular bother me to see on girls.
vote up1