Final Essay
Xaida Hernandez
12/14/2021
Idea
In this essay, I will be exploring the “X-ification” of both male and female names and its trends, along with seeing if the “X-ification” of names is more popular with one gender versus the other. To do this, I will be taking the names beginning with an X from the Social Security Administration database that are variations of popular male and female names (such as Xabriel being a further variation of Gabriel or Xophia being a variation of Sophia).
Which Names Do We Want?
## -- Attaching packages --------------------------------------- tidyverse 1.3.1 --## v ggplot2 3.3.5 v purrr 0.3.4
## v tibble 3.1.4 v dplyr 1.0.7
## v tidyr 1.1.3 v stringr 1.4.0
## v readr 2.0.1 v forcats 0.5.1## -- Conflicts ------------------------------------------ tidyverse_conflicts() --
## x dplyr::filter() masks stats::filter()
## x dplyr::lag() masks stats::lag()## [1] "Xenia" "Xandra" "Xiomara" "Xochitl" "Xandria"
## [6] "Xavier" "Xochilt" "Xanthe" "Xan" "Ximena"
## [11] "Xina" "Xylina" "Xochil" "Xaviera" "Xaveria"
## [16] "Xuan" "Xee" "Xai" "Xanthia" "Xue"
## [21] "Xia" "Xong" "Xica" "Xavia" "Xiao"
## [26] "Xinia" "Xochilth" "Xianna" "Xiara" "Xiana"
## [31] "Xuxa" "Xanadu" "Xitlaly" "Xitlali" "Xotchil"
## [36] "Xena" "Xana" "Xitlalic" "Xzandria" "Xylia"
## [41] "Xandrea" "Xzavia" "Xiola" "Xela" "Xenya"
## [46] "Xitlalli" "Xochithl" "Xaria" "Xenna" "Xoe"
## [51] "Xian" "Xitlally" "Xin" "Xania" "Xyla"
## [56] "Xcaret" "Xing" "Xareni" "Xaviana" "Xya"
## [61] "Xavianna" "Xiadani" "Xzaria" "Xariah" "Ximenna"
## [66] "Xitllali" "Xitlalith" "Xaia" "Xiclali" "Xitlalit"
## [71] "Xen" "Xion" "Xara" "Xiamara" "Xayla"
## [76] "Xander" "Xithlaly" "Xeniah" "Xolani" "Xaniya"
## [81] "Xiclaly" "Xoie" "Xitlalie" "Xally" "Xinyi"
## [86] "Xiomari" "Xoey" "Xola" "Xyomara" "Xarianna"
## [91] "Xaviea" "Xiomary" "Xiya" "Xienna" "Xariyah"
## [96] "Xelha" "Xyon" "Xaira" "Xiomayra" "Xylah"
## [101] "Xaniyah" "Xyanna" "Xymena" "Xailey" "Xamara"
## [106] "Xaniah" "Xeniya" "Xochi" "Xiani" "Xaviona"
## [111] "Xiyah" "Xinyu" "Xyliah" "Xylie" "Xophia"
## [116] "Xyana" "Xalia" "Xamiyah" "Xinyan" "Xoi"
## [121] "Xaida" "Xavi" "Xiomy" "Xyion" "Xylee"
## [126] "Xaylee" "Xyra" "Xuri" "Xendaya" "Xyriah"
## [131] "Xairexis" "Xzariah" "Xinyue" "Xi" "Xinran"
## [136] "Xareny" "Xaylie" "Xea" "Xeniyah" "Xinrui"
## [141] "Xyliana" "Xaela" "Xaelah" "Xirena" "Xochiquetzal"
## [146] "Xamira" "Xarielys" "Xariya" "Xiah" "Xiaoxi"
## [151] "Xayah" "Xaila" "Xahria" "Xenovia" "Xella"
## [156] "Ximmena" "Xaiya" "Xyleena" "Xael" "Xahlia"
## [161] "Xailee" "Xintong" "Xamora" "Xaylah" "Xerenity"
## [166] "Ximara" "Ximora" "Xiyue"## [1] "Xavier" "Xenophon" "Xan" "Xerxes" "Xzavier" "Xaiver"
## [7] "Xiong" "Xeng" "Xong" "Xou" "Xai" "Xue"
## [13] "Xang" "Xavion" "Xuan" "Xavian" "Xaver" "Xaviar"
## [19] "Xavien" "Xu" "Xavior" "Xavius" "Xylon" "Xavious"
## [25] "Xao" "Xeryus" "Xachary" "Xander" "Xazier" "Xxavier"
## [31] "Xzavia" "Xavia" "Xzavior" "Xzavius" "Xiao" "Xaviel"
## [37] "Xaivier" "Xzavion" "Xzavious" "Xane" "Xian" "Xsavier"
## [43] "Xayvion" "Xzavian" "Xzayvier" "Xion" "Xabier" "Xavyer"
## [49] "Xiaver" "Xzavien" "Xzavyer" "Xing" "Xzaviar" "Xadrian"
## [55] "Xen" "Xiang" "Xjavier" "Xzaveon" "Xsavior" "Xaden"
## [61] "Xayvier" "Xzander" "Xin" "Xzayvion" "Xande" "Xaveon"
## [67] "Xzaiver" "Xandyr" "Xzorion" "Xanthus" "Xaiden" "Xaven"
## [73] "Xyler" "Xandar" "Xavi" "Xzarion" "Xazavier" "Xzaivier"
## [79] "Xayden" "Xhaiden" "Xylan" "Xyon" "Xaeden" "Xanden"
## [85] "Xiomar" "Xalen" "Xain" "Xayne" "Xoaquin" "Xamir"
## [91] "Xizavier" "Xzadrian" "Xyion" "Xabian" "Xandir" "Xsavion"
## [97] "Xavy" "Xabi" "Xanti" "Xyaire" "Xaidyn" "Xaine"
## [103] "Xylar" "Xzaevion" "Xael" "Xzayden" "Xzayvian" "Xannon"
## [109] "Xaivion" "Xaniel" "Xzayvien" "Xabriel" "Xachery" "Xaedyn"
## [115] "Xadyn" "Xyan" "Xzaiden" "Xhavier" "Xylen" "Xylus"
## [121] "Xaviour" "Xaylen" "Ximena" "Xaire" "Xannder" "Xadiel"
## [127] "Xaydin" "Xeno" "Xenos" "Xi" "Xylas" "Xayn"
## [133] "Xayvien" "Xenon" "Xylo" "Xade" "Xoel" "Xolani"This gives me all of the names beginning with X from the database. Out of all of them, I have decided to use Xophia, Xylie, Xailey, Xoe, Xaria, and Xandra for female names and Xavier, Xabriel, Xuan, and Xane.
For now, I will start with the female names. My first example will be “-ophia”.
“-ophia”
## name gender count year total perc
## 118 Sophia F 138 1880 90994 0.1516583511
## 2131 Sophia F 122 1881 91953 0.1326764760
## 4051 Sophia F 179 1882 107847 0.1659758732
## 6191 Sophia F 159 1883 112319 0.1415610894
## 8281 Sophia F 170 1884 129019 0.1317635387
## 10577 Sophia F 185 1885 133055 0.1390402465
## 12865 Sophia F 218 1886 144533 0.1508306062
## 15266 Sophia F 192 1887 145981 0.1315239654
## 17638 Sophia F 251 1888 178622 0.1405202047
## 20292 Sophia F 251 1889 178366 0.1407218865
## 22887 Sophia F 245 1890 190376 0.1286926924
## 25591 Sophia F 220 1891 185480 0.1186111710
## 28260 Sophia F 241 1892 212339 0.1134977559
## 31178 Sophia F 247 1893 212905 0.1160141847
## 34006 Sophia F 276 1894 222921 0.1238106773
## 36955 Sophia F 259 1895 233627 0.1108604742
## 40000 Sophia F 278 1896 237918 0.1168469809
## 43095 Sophia F 278 1897 234200 0.1187019641
## 46148 Sophia F 240 1898 258769 0.0927468128
## 49403 Sophia F 238 1899 233023 0.1021358407
## 52462 Sophia F 259 1900 299798 0.0863915036
## 56182 Sophia F 221 1901 239345 0.0923353318
## 59328 Sophia F 256 1902 264076 0.0969417895
## 62709 Sophia F 213 1903 261971 0.0813067095
## 66096 Sophia F 230 1904 275363 0.0835261092
## 69657 Sophia F 237 1905 291619 0.0812704248
## 73308 Sophia F 247 1906 295302 0.0836431856
## 76945 Sophia F 265 1907 318566 0.0831852740
## 80898 Sophia F 276 1908 334314 0.0825571170
## 84935 Sophia F 256 1909 347230 0.0737263485
## 89177 Sophia F 271 1910 396505 0.0683471835
## 93807 Sophia F 272 1911 418309 0.0650237026
## 98661 Sophia F 397 1912 558121 0.0711315288
## 105019 Sophia F 429 1913 624547 0.0686897864
## 111984 Sophia F 548 1914 761580 0.0719556711
## 119947 Sophia F 692 1915 983865 0.0703348529
## 129309 Sophia F 697 1916 1044341 0.0667406527
## 139008 Sophia F 698 1917 1081275 0.0645534207
## 148942 Sophia F 629 1918 1157638 0.0543347748
## 159345 Sophia F 604 1919 1130130 0.0534451789
## 169732 Sophia F 545 1920 1198290 0.0454814778
## 180508 Sophia F 489 1921 1233060 0.0396574376
## 191397 Sophia F 391 1922 1200983 0.0325566640
## 202164 Sophia F 369 1923 1206381 0.0305873518
## 212830 Sophia F 357 1924 1248889 0.0285854067
## 223739 Sophia F 288 1925 1217390 0.0236571682
## 234414 Sophia F 234 1926 1185399 0.0197401887
## 244878 Sophia F 240 1927 1192388 0.0201276766
## 255331 Sophia F 195 1928 1153253 0.0169086922
## 265522 Sophia F 169 1929 1116529 0.0151361944
## 275370 Sophia F 152 1930 1125917 0.0135001070
## 285180 Sophia F 133 1931 1064651 0.0124923567
## 294476 Sophia F 132 1932 1067096 0.0123700211
## 303934 Sophia F 103 1933 1007851 0.0102197646
## 312948 Sophia F 107 1934 1044145 0.0102476189
## 322136 Sophia F 101 1935 1048509 0.0096327261
## 331186 Sophia F 98 1936 1040343 0.0094199701
## 340078 Sophia F 104 1937 1063947 0.0097749230
## 349090 Sophia F 88 1938 1103371 0.0079755585
## 358073 Sophia F 99 1939 1096594 0.0090279538
## 366985 Sophia F 105 1940 1143413 0.0091830336
## 375946 Sophia F 107 1941 1208004 0.0088575866
## 385209 Sophia F 81 1942 1350627 0.0059972146
## 394537 Sophia F 104 1943 1395192 0.0074541712
## 403936 Sophia F 104 1944 1327161 0.0078362761
## 413072 Sophia F 103 1945 1307028 0.0078804739
## 422161 Sophia F 107 1946 1571238 0.0068099168
## 431913 Sophia F 108 1947 1772683 0.0060924598
## 442268 Sophia F 112 1948 1697810 0.0065967334
## 452459 Sophia F 123 1949 1710852 0.0071894004
## 462796 Sophia F 109 1950 1713065 0.0063628642
## 472959 Sophia F 153 1951 1800862 0.0084959314
## 483595 Sophia F 110 1952 1854401 0.0059318346
## 494168 Sophia F 130 1953 1881365 0.0069098766
## 505106 Sophia F 112 1954 1941805 0.0057678294
## 515944 Sophia F 152 1955 1954935 0.0077751946
## 527200 Sophia F 121 1956 2007703 0.0060267878
## 538349 Sophia F 188 1957 2044311 0.0091962524
## 549841 Sophia F 227 1958 2010963 0.0112881241
## 561300 Sophia F 277 1959 2023035 0.0136922989
## 573094 Sophia F 262 1960 2022010 0.0129574038
## 584939 Sophia F 324 1961 2017637 0.0160583891
## 597012 Sophia F 486 1962 1966553 0.0247132928
## 609209 Sophia F 524 1963 1927306 0.0271882099
## 621517 Sophia F 471 1964 1894774 0.0248578458
## 633877 Sophia F 508 1965 1765043 0.0287811685
## 645791 Sophia F 588 1966 1691917 0.0347534779
## 657932 Sophia F 602 1967 1650873 0.0364655549
## 670356 Sophia F 547 1968 1640208 0.0333494289
## 683283 Sophia F 594 1969 1686959 0.0352112885
## 697050 Sophia F 580 1970 1748145 0.0331780259
## 711811 Sophia F 593 1971 1663554 0.0356465735
## 727128 Sophia F 484 1972 1521119 0.0318186809
## 742562 Sophia F 455 1973 1458162 0.0312036660
## 758284 Sophia F 386 1974 1467406 0.0263049217
## 774548 Sophia F 381 1975 1457775 0.0261357205
## 791503 Sophia F 366 1976 1465130 0.0249807184
## 808855 Sophia F 434 1977 1533114 0.0283083972
## 827051 Sophia F 409 1978 1531824 0.0267001953
## 845231 Sophia F 491 1979 1605241 0.0305873075
## 864210 Sophia F 641 1980 1660236 0.0386089688
## 883507 Sophia F 1233 1981 1667829 0.0739284423
## 902995 Sophia F 1160 1982 1693175 0.0685103430
## 922675 Sophia F 1197 1983 1670481 0.0716560081
## 942107 Sophia F 1083 1984 1683496 0.0643304172
## 961613 Sophia F 1100 1985 1720530 0.0639337878
## 981708 Sophia F 1059 1986 1715229 0.0617410270
## 1002358 Sophia F 1123 1987 1738317 0.0646027163
## 1023752 Sophia F 1165 1988 1780397 0.0654348440
## 1046147 Sophia F 1059 1989 1843317 0.0574507803
## 1069919 Sophia F 1123 1990 1898135 0.0591633366
## 1094611 Sophia F 1260 1991 1874716 0.0672101801
## 1119704 Sophia F 1353 1992 1843567 0.0733903351
## 1145116 Sophia F 1498 1993 1808705 0.0828216873
## 1171071 Sophia F 1613 1994 1785366 0.0903456210
## 1197051 Sophia F 1763 1995 1758236 0.1002709534
## 1223088 Sophia F 2513 1996 1752643 0.1433834500
## 1249480 Sophia F 3638 1997 1740316 0.2090424957
## 1276429 Sophia F 4306 1998 1766494 0.2437596731
## 1304311 Sophia F 5423 1999 1773275 0.3058183305
## 1321198 Zophia F 5 1999 1773275 0.0002819642
## 1332852 Sophia F 6563 2000 1815295 0.3615390336
## 1350452 Zophia F 5 2000 1815295 0.0002754373
## 1362619 Sophia F 7161 2001 1799834 0.3978700258
## 1380546 Zophia F 5 2001 1799834 0.0002778034
## 1392883 Sophia F 8664 2002 1795973 0.4824125975
## 1408276 Zophia F 6 2002 1795973 0.0003340807
## 1423440 Sophia F 9684 2003 1826173 0.5302892990
## 1430992 Zophia F 15 2003 1826173 0.0008213899
## 1454620 Sophia F 10915 2004 1835091 0.5947933917
## 1470685 Zophia F 6 2004 1835091 0.0003269593
## 1486665 Sophia F 12671 2005 1846525 0.6862078770
## 1496769 Zophia F 11 2005 1846525 0.0005957136
## 1519211 Sophia F 13501 2006 1899824 0.7106447755
## 1529096 Zophia F 12 2006 1899824 0.0006316375
## 1553296 Sophia F 17024 2007 1921053 0.8861806520
## 1558804 Zophia F 26 2007 1921053 0.0013534244
## 1588258 Sophia F 16084 2008 1889069 0.8514246965
## 1595984 Zophia F 17 2008 1889069 0.0008999142
## 1623334 Sophia F 16944 2009 1835062 0.9233475490
## 1629636 Zophia F 22 2009 1835062 0.0011988696
## 1658041 Sophia F 20643 2010 1775345 1.1627599143
## 1661606 Zophia F 45 2010 1775345 0.0025347186
## 1692113 Sophia F 21842 2011 1756592 1.2434304608
## 1695603 Zophia F 46 2011 1756592 0.0026187071
## 1705393 Xophia F 8 2011 1756592 0.0004554273
## 1726021 Sophia F 22313 2012 1758171 1.2691029485
## 1729725 Zophia F 43 2012 1758171 0.0024457234
## 1739417 Xophia F 8 2012 1758171 0.0004550183
## 1759768 Sophia F 21223 2013 1751320 1.2118287920
## 1763129 Zophia F 48 2013 1751320 0.0027407898
## 1793052 Sophia F 18609 2014 1782350 1.0440710298
## 1796587 Zophia F 45 2014 1782350 0.0025247566
## 1826295 Sophia F 17417 2015 1780453 0.9782341910
## 1829875 Zophia F 44 2015 1780453 0.0024712812
## 1845241 Xophia F 5 2015 1780453 0.0002808274
## 1859417 Sophia F 16128 2016 1766212 0.9131406649
## 1863647 Zophia F 35 2016 1766212 0.0019816421
## 1892428 Sophia F 14883 2017 1719138 0.8657245666
## 1897103 Zophia F 30 2017 1719138 0.0017450606
## 1925018 Sophia F 13928 2018 1686961 0.8256266742
## 1929339 Zophia F 33 2018 1686961 0.0019561804## name gender count year total perc
## 1705393 Xophia F 8 2011 1756592 0.0004554273
## 1739417 Xophia F 8 2012 1758171 0.0004550183
## 1845241 Xophia F 5 2015 1780453 0.0002808274In the first table, it provides all the names that end in -ophia. The first recorded name (since 1880) that ends in -ophia is Sophia. Its first variation is Zophia, first emerging in 1999 with just 5 babies having that name. The X-ification of that name is not noted in the database until 2011 where 8 babies were born with that name. Now that I have all the names that end in -ophia, I want to take a look at the trends.
Despite Zophia following a similar trend to Sophia (although it is significantly smaller), Xophia does not follow those trends at all. It seems to fade from existence as quickly as it popped in.
With the previous code, I can now replace “-ophia” with the other names I have chosen, which are: “-ylie” “-ailey” “-oe” and “-aria.”
“-ylie”
The first names to end in “-ylie” were Mylie and Wylie back in 1924. Not so surprisingly enough, Kylie begins to take over in 1970. As for the name Xylie, it did not appear until 2010. 
Xylie seems to abruptly appear for a short period of time. The X-ification of the names Mylie and Wylie was clearly not super popular while Kylie and Rylie took over.
“-ailey”
The first name to end with this is Bailey, which first appears in the Social Security Administration database in 1916. Xailey only appears once in 2008 with the bare minimum number of babies to be registered in the database. Just like with Xylie, this name is also unpopular compared to the other variations. 
Many of the names tend to trend together, such as Bailey, Hailey, Kailey, and arguably Cailey. What these names have in common, though, is that they have letters that are used most often in first names.
“-oe”
Zoe and Joe are both the first “female” names recorded in the database that end in “-oe” in 1880, 23 girls being named Zoe and only 5 being named Joe. Xoe does not appear until 1997 and stays in the database pretty consistently through the end of the provided data in the database. 
## “-aria”
The first appearance of a name ending in this is Maria in 1880, along with it being the majority of cases in which a name ends with “-aria.” Xaria did not appear in the database until 1996. 
## “-andra”
The first appearance of a name ending in “-andra” is in 1904 with the name Sandra. Just like many of the previous examples, Sandra makes the majority of names ending in “-andra.” Xandra does not appear until 1948, not appearing for nearly another decade and fluctuates in terms of being documented in the database. 
Male Names: “-avier”
The first appearance of a name ending in “-avier” is around 1886, which is surprisingly Xavier. Unlike a majority of the previous female examples, the X version of this name is the original one. 
“-abriel”
The first appearance of a name ending in this is in 1880 (Gabriel). The first variant is Jabriel and the X-ified version doesn’t appear until 2012. This is very similar to the trends found in the female X-ified names. 
“-uan”
Juan is the first name that appears (and remains the most popular since 1880) ending in “-uan.” Xuan actually did not appear until 1977. 
“-ane”
The first name to end in “-ane” is Lane (1881) but is followed by Vane in 1892. Xane does not appear until 1997, which is also somewhat similar to the previous female trends. 
“-ylan”
The first name that ends in “-ylan” to appear in the database is Hylan (I have never heard this name before in my life) in 1923 and followed by Mylan and Dylan. Xylan did not appear until 2006. 
Thoughts
As I looked at the female graphs and the years in which the X-ified name appeared, a general observation came to mind. Many of the names until the 1990s and 2000s (the only exception being Xandra, which appears in 1948). Along with this, the X version of a name tends to not appear until after the Z version makes its rounds.
Looking at the male graphs, only three of the names I chose started showing up after the late 1990s (Xabriel, Xane, and Xylan). Similar to the female names, the Z version appeared before the X version was documented.
Continuation
Despite the outliers for both, it seems as though the X-ification of names is more popular within the female population versus the male population considering how often the X variation appears (1996, 1997, 2008, 2010, and 2011) compared to the male ones (1977, 1997, 2006, and 2012). This could be a result of wanting to continue traditional male names or keeping the original spelling instead of experimenting whereas female names tend to have more creativity and risk taking in the naming process, resulting in unique names.
Analysis
This trend of female names having a more noticeable trend of having a rarer, more unique name compared to boys can be found even outside the X-ification of names. According to Bell and Lieberson, compared to girls, boys were actually “far more likely” to be named after their kin. This can be attributed to men being considered the “symbolic carriers of the temporal continuity of the family” to maintain their “more traditional” names (Rossi 1965). The lack of matriarchal naming has allowed “diversity [to be] greater in choices” of women versus men (Barry III, Harper 2014). However, in not assigning women traditional family names and giving it to men instead, families are implying that women have a less important role in terms of upholding tradition since they cannot pass on the family name. This, of course, is limited to patriarchal societies along with disregarding individuals who choose to keep their own last name when married.
At the core of names, male and female names have different etymological origins. Girls’ names tend to be more French in origin and influence, along with being more likely to have absolutely “no historical-name roots at all” (Bell, Lieberson 1992). In fact, many of the popular girls’ names are either “pet names” or “diminutive” that are changed to be recognized as more formal names or are even invented on the spot (Bell, Lieberson 1992). In terms of naming trends regarding spelling, girl names often end in a “schwa-like” sound, such as Layla. In contrast, boys’ names have multiple cultural origins, a few being Hebrew, Greek, and English, which supports the traditionality of their names. Also, a majority of male names end in a consonant sound instead of a “schwa-like” sound like female names, the only exception being names that end in n which are mostly equally found in male and female names.
As for the X-ification of names, this trend of creating a unique name could possibly be attributed to a rise in individualism. Since our naming practices are embedded with our core cultural values, these distinctive names indicate a “desire to stand out” compared to traditional, generic names (Twenge et al. 2010). The process and very act of naming a child reflects that time’s cultural and social influences from the lense of the parents. With the data from the Social Security Administration that was analyzed earlier, there has been a decline in children receiving common names after 1950 (Twenge et al. 2010). This indicates how parents in the United States are focusing more on the furtherance of individuality using their children as a vessel for it. This can be a “behavioral indicator of the increase in the emphasis on individualism and uniqueness” in the United States (Twenge et al. 2010). Parents pride themselves on their child’s individuality that comes from their unconventional name.
Another possible reason as to why there has been a decline in common names for over half a century is that modern generations of parents are now becoming comfortable with giving their children names that better reflect their ethnic heritage and reject generations of assimilation. The theory of assimilation suggests that “immigrant groups will become ‘Americanized,’” leading to them “leav[ing] their cultural markers behind” the more time they spend in the United States (Sue, Telles 2007). By rejecting assimilation, which can be typically seen through the process of giving names that are considered more “American” in this situation, these families are depicting “group distinctiveness” and not technically individualism; however, they both have “considerable conceptual overlap” (Twenge et al. 2010). This rejection of “Americanized” or even Anglicized names can be found throughout all ethnic groups. For instance, there was a rise of Islamic and more traditional African names during the Civil Rights Movement during the 1960s. There has also been a rise in Latines giving their children Hispanic names instead of Anglicized variations of it.
A final reason that is limited mainly to the most recent generation of parents is social media. There has been this need for people to maintain some type of individuality and way to shine across different social media platforms. People have also begun to turn to followers to help name their children by giving suggestions which opens the floor to creating multiple variations of one name such as McKinlee. Of course, we cannot forget the parents who also name their children after fantasy characters whose names did not exist before they were published.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the X-ification of names can be attributed to a rise in popularity of individualism within the United States, along with other factors. Despite the increasing amount of unconventional and unique male names, female names continue to dominate the rise of individuality due to having more space to experiment and express. This, of course, can be tied back to patriarchal ideologies where men are expected to carry the family name since they are typically the ones who keep their last name compared to women. This alleviates any burden that men typically have compared to women and provides space for women to have non-familial names. Another very important factor to consider is the race of an individual or couple, along with immigration status or even how many generations have passed since their family first emigrated to the United States. Earlier generations had to face extreme prejudices compared to modern ones to assimilate, leading to American or Anglicized names. However, current generations do not face that same kind of pressure, thus allowing them to explore non-American names, which means either more ethnic names, older familial names that are no longer in circulation, or just choosing non-white names. This, of course, results in a rise of unique names.
Bibliography
Barry III, Herbert, and Aylene S. Harper. “Unisex Names for Babies Born in Pennsylvania 1990–2010.” Names 62, no. 1 (2014): 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1179/0027773813z.00000000060.
Lieberson, Stanley, and Eleanor O. Bell. “Children’s First Names: An Empirical Study of Social Taste.” American Journal of Sociology 98, no. 3 (1992): 511–54. https://doi.org/10.1086/230048.
Rossi, Alice S. “Naming Children in Middle-Class Families.” American Sociological Review 30, no. 4 (1965): 499. https://doi.org/10.2307/2091340.
Sue, Christina A., and Edward E. Telles. “Assimilation and Gender in Naming.” American Journal of Sociology 112, no. 5 (2007): 1383–1415. https://doi.org/10.1086/511801.
Twenge, Jean M., Emodish M. Abebe, and W. Keith Campbell. “Fitting in or Standing out: Trends in American Parents’ Choices for Children’s Names, 1880–2007.” Social Psychological and Personality Science 1, no. 1 (2010): 19–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550609349515.