So we are thinking a lot about adoption, which is just like thinking about having a baby and it's fun and I like the thoughts.
And so we think about baby names (and we have some doozies), but when you think about baby names, you consider every person you talk to as a possible donor. And so I thought of this good question to ask you.
I work retail, and there are about 75 people who work at my store: there are about 6 boys, whose names are Patrick, Jason, Nik, Nicholas, Marc, Sean. Two Nicks out of 6. So, the rest are girls (I called the boys 'boys,' so it's not demeaning to call them 'girls').
Here is my question:
How many of the 69 women who work with me are named the following?:
Jennifer (Jen, Jenny):
Tiffany:
Lauren:
Jessica:
Lindsay (ey):
Sara (h):
Jamie:
So, just for fun I'll tell you that for one of these names, the answer is zero, but the rest have at least one...which is the least you can have without crossing in to negatives... which I don't.
One more question:
Do you think that the mothers who named these names--keep in mind, I'm married to a Lindsay and I think it's the most wonderful name in the English language--did that mother think she was being unique, and then lots of other moms were equally unique, or was she striving to have her new baby fit right in from the get-sgo...and then, which is better?
How far out is too far?
Apple? (Gwenyth)
Moxie Crimefighter? (Penn from Penn and Teller)
And, finally, when have you seen it done right? The right balance of oneness without alienating the child. Or am I thinking too much about this?