I'm obsessed with names. It's a pretty common affliction for us literary/artsy types. I spend a lot of time looking at name blogs and websites looking for new treasures, either for future projects or for future kids. A while ago I was watching a name
enthusiast's video blog and someone asked her what she thought of the name Rosetta. She said she didn't like it because "it wasn't cute." Months later and this still puts a really bad taste in my mouth, and not only because I love Rosetta and think it sounds beautiful and scholarly. Why does a girl's name have to be cute?
My parents named me Christina, and as soon as I was able to develop an opinion, I hated it. And keep in mind that my parents were planning to calling me
Christy before I was born which would have been even worse. For most of my life I went by Tina, which seemed like the strongest available option due to the association with Tina Turner.
When I was a little girl everyone made a big deal out of my cuteness. Nice people said I looked cute, but I was a shy girl and I didn't want to be looked at. My parents would
mimic how I waited and ask for things politely and laugh and say how cute I was. But I did not like to be laughed at, or taken as a joke.
My mother used to tell me, "Well, your father and I looked around and saw that all of the good looking babies were named Christina, and we wanted a cute little girl, so that's what we picked. We didn't really think that hard about it." (This wasn't really the whole truth. One of those little baby girls was very important to my mother. But by the time she told me that, the damage was already done.) My parents never stopped to think that their little girl might be more macabre, quiet, and introspective than their vision of what a "Christina" was supposed to be. Or, for that matter, not Christian!
On top of that, I noticed that many adults said, "Oh, that's cute," in a belittling way. As in, "The liberals think we can settle this peacefully? That's cute." That's a mixed message to give to a girl. As a result, I equated "cute" with "weak," or "inadequate," at a very young age. And I always wanted to be listened to and respected. But
Christinas aren't respected.
Christinas are cute. The adults in my life kept pushing that word, and that name, on me to show me who they thought I was, which was totally at odds with who I wanted to become.
And here's were the big
light bulb went on. Maybe that's why a lot of people are giving their daughters boy's names and surnames today. Don't get me wrong, I know that there are some...um...unenlightened parents that name their daughters Barkley because it "sounds ultra-feminine." But for others, maybe it's lack of femininity is the point. After all, my generation is the one that's having kids right now. And the top 100 for the year I was born was full of
cutsy names. Jessica and Jennifer, and it's accomplices Jessie and Jenny, are
cutsy. Elisabeth isn't
cutsy, but Lizzie and Beth are. Stephanie, Tiffany, Jamie, Brittney, Amy, Ashley, Kelly, Katie...all cute. Maybe some of them are like me. Maybe they
truly think that a girl named Emerson is more respected than a girl named Sophie or Abigail.
Sadly, they might be right.
I like girls names that a feminine, but still have a serious weight to them. Most people tell me that they sound like they could be witches.
Mehitabel, Desdemona,
Fiore,
Ravenna. And my slow metamorphosis into Isadora, possibly legally.
Cute is good for an infant. But your daughter will be cute, or
want to be cute, for only a short period of time. No one expects sons to be cute forever, so why expect that from the daughters? The problem, though, of avoiding "cute" is that what's "cute" is subjective and changing all the time. By the time I start having kids, would Paloma be too
cutsy?