OBERYN_ said:
I didn't read the full article because I'm sure it's written by an idiot who interviewed morons. I read the bolded parts, though - an invaluable quality of members posting articles on this forum.
What I did see was a "claiming" of gender neutral names. However, I didn't see a lot of championing the naming of boys Brittany or Kimberly or Megan. Instead, it was boys' names being given to girls. This is just another instance of something so seemingly simple and meaningless yet incapable of remaining masculine. The message is becoming clear, nothing can be associated with only maleness; save violence, aggression, savagery, perversion, corruption, and deception.
This seems to be the way of how they're creating "gender neutral names": take questionable boys' names and give them to girls, thereby forcing society at large to get used to the fact that "huh, so I guess this name is also given to girls then? ok I see".
This has already happened to names like Hunter, Taylor, Carter etc. It's ridiculous, how are you calling a girl Hunter, Sawyer, Jordan, Terry or Emerson?! At this point in time the names get so wacky that it's like reading a bad sci-fi novel and what goofy names some nerd thinks up. I bet at some point in life, when a girl gets adressed with "Soo, Sawyer Johnson then. Ok Mr. Johnson, we're all set" she'll scream out "IT'S MRS. JOHNSON, DON'T PRESUME TO KNOW MY GENDER FROM MY NAME YOU BIGOT! UUUUGH I HATE IT WHEN PEOPLE MISGENDER ME"
The English language is doomed with its names, it's time to dig around in the past or go East for proper male names: Ragnarr, Vladislav, Dimitri, Ivor, Zoran, James, Castor, Max