11–20 of 159 posts
So what caused that very short spike in "Jaime" as a girls name? Looks like it might have occurred right around 1960.
So what caused that very short spike in "Jaime" as a girls name? Looks like it might have occurred right around 1960.
And this data suggests the spike is around the date of that show: https://www.babycenter.com/baby-names-jaime-8765.htm
This is also a list of the stupidest names in US History. The reason nobody can figure out whether "Ashtin" is a girl's or boy's name is because it's not a name. Same for "Tristyn" and most of the rest of this brain damage.
I don't know whether it's a problem with my browser or the website, but the font rendering is really bad for this site.
The heights are wonky. Specifically for d, r, and u, and w.
Seems to work fine on other platforms.
This is also a list of the stupidest names in US History. The reason nobody can figure out whether "Ashtin" is a girl's or boy's name is because it's not a name. Same for "Tristyn" and most of the rest of this brain damage.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tristan
Their examples were Ashtin and Tristyn, and if I had to guess I don't think they'd object as strongly or at all to Ashton or Tristan.
But that's just my read of their comment.
It predates the US, but the name switch that has astonished me the most is "Anne" which was unambiguously masculine and is now so unambiguously feminine that it looks strange to see it used for a male in a historical context.
This really feels like it should be measuring the area under the curve, at the very least. Measuring "peak to peak" seems silly.
So what caused that very short spike in "Jaime" as a girls name? Looks like it might have occurred right around 1960.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaime_Sommers_(The_Bionic_Wo... And this data suggests the spike is around the date of that show: https://www.babycenter.com/baby-names-jaime-8765.htm
It predates the US, but the name switch that has astonished me the most is "Anne" which was unambiguously masculine and is now so unambiguously feminine that it looks strange to see it used for a male in a historical context.