The Unisex Defense

I've heard a lot of arguments lately about unisex naming. But what truly is unisex? The definition of unisex is:

1. Designed for or suitable to both sexes: unisex clothing; unisex hairstyles.
2. Not distinguished or distinguishable on the basis of sex; androgynous in appearance: cultivated a unisex look.

Are names truly unisex then? Can one be? To me most people that argue for unisex name usages have not sited the androgynous qualities of a name, but rather the effeminate qualities of a traditional masculine boys name now used mostly on little baby girls. There is never (that I have seen) the flip side argument for a traditional girls name to be used on a boy instead. The passionate unisex name lover will argue till they are blue in the face that their precious little snowflake should have whatever name she [the mother] deems worthy of her daughter, and that because such-in-such name has been used mostly on little girls lately, it's 'unisex and worthy for their own daughters'.

Look, I get it. Every parent wants to find the perfect name for their child, and each of us have our own little list of favorites and maybe even less common, rare, or random names that we love no matter what anyone else thinks. Obviously this would include some boys names that someone might find appealing for their daughter, instead of their son. Some names we hear mostly on girls, even though they are traditional boys names, so we become accustomed to defining them in a more feminine way rather than masculine.

For instance: The name Ashley. I know it's traditionally masculine, I understand and know the history and etymology of this name. It's still popular for boys in some countries, in fact. Yet the American mentality has deemed this name now unsuitable for boys because it's so widely used on little girls. Even I can understand the association being considered: Feminine. Yet, the fact remains that this name was, and will always be a masculine name, now popular on girls too. Just because a name becomes popular on girls, doesn't mean that is all the sudden changes it's history or etymology or some how devalues it's masculine roots. You cannot erase the past, and the same can be said of baby names. The past (history) of a name will be eternal. No matter the popularity or gender the name is preferred on, it will still have it's historical roots.

There will always be traditionalists when it comes to naming, who resist the boys names on girls trend with everything in their being. Likewise, there will always be those who will be out looking for the newest trend. Using boys names for girls is only ONE of a myriad of trends lately.

So where do I stand on the whole thing?:

I am a traditionalist most of the time, but I have to say the arguments I see justifying the use of traditional boys names on girls leaves me completely unsatisfied. The logic used to make this trend 'legit' is hypocritical at it's best, and utterly ridiculous at it's worst.

Some people I've seen are more reasonable with their opinions and explanations of why they chose to use a boys name for a girl. When someone is just honest about it and states: "Yes, we realize it's a boys name, but I love it, and want to use it on my little princess anyways and I don't care what you think about it either", I think: Okay- I don't agree, BUT THANK YOU for at least being honest. It's JUST your preference, it's not some 'cause' you are trying to shove down people's throats. Good, use it, love it...whatever. At least they said what was true. They know it's a boys name (traditionally)...they just don't care. That's a VALID reason to use a name. Honestly it is. I don't have my head so far up my own ass that I cannot understand that sometimes the love of a name out weighs *anything* that anyone else has to say about it.

What gets my blood boiling about it, are the arguments full of nothing but conjecture. Theses would be the following:

1. "It's used on girls mostly now, so it's not masculine anymore"

- says who? has the name changed it's meaning all the sudden? it's etymology? Has the whole world embraced this thinking or is this a lame attempt on the namers part to justify using the name to themselves? If you truly love it, use it and don't explain it to me or anyone else....what's the point?

2. "It sounds too girly for a boy nowadays"

- when was the memo put out that the second someone found a name 'feminine in sound' it suddenly was deemed "feminine"? and what about any boys with the name that have already been born, and carry the name? are they now effeminate? This argument makes me annoyed more than any other. It's literally bashing ANY parent that chooses this name for their boys and/or insults the boys already named this. the feminine or masculine qualities associated to the SOUND of a name is purely subjective, the history and etymology of a name, is NOT subjective, it's based in origin, usage history, and facts.

3. "Anyone naming their son this nowadays, the son would be teased"

- Why? Just because you deem it unworthy? OR perhaps it's just you grabbing for any validation in your choice of a name. I personally would never want to use a name for my daughter that could possibly be thought of as 'tease worthy" for ANY sex. To use this reasoning as a way to justify your choices for a girl rather than a boy is such a huge insult to any boy with that name. You're saying, your child is more entitled to the name because of her gender. Wake up people, this is called sexism.

4. "It's unisex so I can use it if I want"

- The funny thing about this reason is that most of these people all for unisex names will then turn around and deem said "unisex" name inappropriate for boys, but not for girls. That's not unisex then. That's name hijacking. Turning a traditionally masculine name into a name usable for feminine use while at the same time, making it inappropriate for the opposite sex it originated on, is NOT making the name unisex, it's separating the usage from the original sex and then making it's usage on the traditional sex 'shameful'.

I am so tired of hearing people using these excuses to justify their choice for a name that is traditionally masculine, for feminine use. You never hear people arguing for the use of a traditional feminine name for the use on the opposite sex. It's sexism at it's best.

My conclusions:
If you're all hell bent on naming your little sweetpea princess daughter: Madison Riley Doodlebug McGee....Please don't get your panties in a twist over anyone wanting to use the same names for their boys. If you're going to use the "unisex" defense, then use it properly. To defend the use of a name you deem unisex is to defend ANY usage of the name regardless of gender. If you cannot do that, if you associate a traditionally masculine name with girls only, then DO NOT use this 'unisex' excuse to defend your choices, because you're not truly for 'unisex' names then, you are for the use of boys names on girls. Unisex goes both ways. Period.

-Jae (MW&M)