View Message

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

[Opinions] Re: Yet another celeb BA
in reply to a message by Bitey
Like you, I don't like George for a boy to begin with, but for a girl ---- ugh, the poor thing.I know some people will say this has been happening for a long time, but the male names that crossed over to be female names a long time ago were feminine-sounding to begin with, IMO--- Shirley, Hilary, Vivian, Leslie, Ashley, Courtney. George is a whole nother can of worms, as is James and a host of others.I may as well say here that I don't believe that gender is just a construct. I think that there are inherent differences in male and female brains. On average, of course. There always have been and always will be a few men who have brains that skew female and women who have brains that skew male. And some men and women who have brains that skew some the other way, but not dramatically.I like the idea of there being male names and female names and I don't like the idea of living in a world in which names are not considered either.*Ducks rotten vegetables*
Archived Thread - replies disabled
vote up1

Replies

I disagree that gender isn't mostly a social construct, but I agree with you that I'd be very sad to live in a world where all names were unisex. Why? Because there is nothing inherently wrong with being feminine. Or being masculine. This trend of using male names on girls seems to me to be another way of devaluing femininity and devaluing women/girls in general. A woman or girl does not need to be masculine or have a masculine name to have worth. Femininity should be equal to masculinity. And that should remain true whether or not a woman is masculine or a man is feminine. If that makes any sense lol
vote up1
Agree.
vote up1