this idiot thread is an outcome of the silly NEW-NAME phenomenon of the 1960s.
I remember it well. It hit the black population REALLY HARD------and even spawned a huge spate of "MEREDITHS" amongst whites. My dad died about
one year before my son was born. -------I did it the EASY WAY----and just named
him----simple-----THE SAME NAME AS DAD-------so damned "old fashioned"
that my lousy sister-in-law LAUGHED with malignant derision (HAH!!!) She
named her kid in accordance with RESEARCH that revealed baby names
MOST SUCCESSFUL IN SCHOOL. My nephew got NAMED FOR KINDERGARTEN SUCCESS. -------whilst every other black kid got LAMONT
or JAMAL (for girls LATOYA---my mom got so confused that she asked
the mother of LATOYA ----"how is Toyota doing"?)
Okay, let's look at that.
Names have changed a lot. True, you have your wonderful basics, like "Joseph" (an awesome name), James, Michael, Mary, etc.
But then you look at some of the goofy names of Presidents from the 19th century.
Does anyone name their kid "Rutherford" anymore? Or "Grover"? Or "Chester". Or "Ulysses"
Now the main reason for the rise of these names after the 1960's was that the standard names were seen as part of white oppression, and giving kids more Africa-centric names was seen as empowering. Instead, it's had the opposite effect.
They did a study in the mid-oughts where they showed that applicants with names like "Greg" and "Emily" got call backs on their resumes and people with names like "Jamal" and "Lakisha" didn't.
Not sure if the same study could be replicate today, because with LinkedIn, we know what everyone looks like.