Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Fun With SSA Data!

Kerry Howley | 2.8.2005 3:51 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

PJ Doland points to Martin Wattenberg's interactive visualization of the SSA's baby name database, which tracks how trendy your (or your baby's) name has been over the past century.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Protecting Kids

Kerry Howley is author of Bottoms Up and the Devil Laughs: A Journey Through the Deep State.

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (27)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. PintofStout   21 years ago

    Wheew! You had me scared there for a minute. I think my eyes started to glaze over.

  2. Matt F   21 years ago

    Obviously not a comprehensive database - I can't find "Bort."

  3. trainwreck   21 years ago

    Wow.

    My dad's name, Cletus, wasn't very popular after 1960.

    On the other hand nobody was named Jamal until the late 1960's.

    There's a whole lotta stuff going on in there.

  4. Brian   21 years ago

    That is very cool. Confirms what I always suspected: there was a Brian Glut in 1970, which happens to be the year I was born.

  5. E. Steven   21 years ago

    It's funny, every name I could type in of my friends and relatives seems to have peaked at around the time they were born. Sheesh, what a bunch of conformists.

    Also, it's also interesting to plug in names of celebrities to see what, if any, impact they had on people naming their kids after them. For instance, Elvis seems to be a more popular name now than in the 50's and Dylan? Forget about it. Everyone's naming their kid Dylan now.

  6. Jason Ligon   21 years ago

    I had the 3rd most common name in America during the '70s. Interesting thing about we Jasons is that, unlike the broadly distriubted Michael, people got tired of us after the '70s. Better to burn out than fade away! Or something ...

  7. joe   21 years ago

    Jason, we must be about the same age.

    In a Western Civ class I had in college, the professor noted that there were 3 Jasons in the 20 person class and commented, "All these Jasons, we're going to get fleeced."

    "Fleeced." Get it? Tap tap tap. Is thing on?

  8. Jason Ligon   21 years ago

    ""Fleeced." Get it? Tap tap tap. Is thing on?"

    Argh! Or not.

    Get it ... Arghornot?

    The years surrounding 1973 produced some fine comedic talent, if nothing else ...

  9. Martin   21 years ago

    Big surprise that my own name enjoyed a spike in popularity in 1960s although it was, apparently, even more popular back around 1900.

    Also interesting. The name Denzel doesn't pop uuntil about 1990- I wonder why? And its reall funny to type in the current trend names like Payton - people think the are so original.

  10. E. Steven   21 years ago

    It's also funny to note the fortunes of names with political implications. Adolph appears to have been a somewhat popular name during the early part of the century, then plummets off the list in the 40's.

    Reagan and Kennedy seem to have both skyrocketed in popularity as names in the last twenty years, whereas Clinton peaked in the 80's [what was that due to, the popularity of Parliament?]. As for the current Prez, sorry to say, George seems to have been on a downward slope since 1900 and, not surprising, nobody has ever named their kid Bush.

  11. Matt   21 years ago

    "Kathryn" (my daughter's name) has an odd showing. Three different spikes in popularity. Owing to what, I don't know. "Cameron" (my son) has only recently begun to get sort of popular. Not a one to be found before 1940, big climbs in both the 80s and 90s.

    Interesting diversion.

  12. aaron   21 years ago

    The political ones are funny. Check out Karl. I'm sure someone somewhere has named their kid Bush. After all, there are even multiple kids named ESPN.

  13. Brien   21 years ago

    I find the redrawing of the graphs calming, but was remiss to find a distinct lack of Bort.

  14. Devin McCullen   21 years ago

    Here's another pop-culture trend that I noticed awhile back; check out Xander, Willow, and Anya, although, curiously, not Buffy.

  15. Nikos A. Leverenz   21 years ago

    No Nikos to be found... thankfully. On second thought, that makes me much easier to track...

  16. Stevo Darkly   21 years ago

    THIS IS SO ... FREAKIN' ... COOL.

    Apparently my parents played it safe. I received my moniker, Stephen, while it was still fairly popular, but past its peak.

    I checked, and it appears that names like Gladys and Hortense have gone way out of style. But maybe some contrarian originality-prizers will make them trendy again. Someday, nubile young candy-stripers named Hortense will be working in nursing homes populated by blue-haired dowagers named Heather.

    I'm going to share this with all my friends who are planning on having children.

    Final free-association thought: Gary Larson once had a "Far Side" cartoon that showed a class photo of a "kindergarten class of 1985." The caption beneath said: "From left to right: Scott, Jennifer, Jennifer, Scott, Jennifer, Jennifer, Scott, Scott, Scott, Miss Linden, Jennifer, Jennifer, Scott, Scott, Scott, Scott, Scott, Jennifer, Scott, Jennifer."

  17. aaron   21 years ago

    Devin,
    That also works for Chandler, Phoebe and Grace. Now someone just needs to do a Neilsen ratings/baby names comparison.

  18. Isaac Bartram   21 years ago

    I note that my real name is quite high in the rankings for the 1940s. I was named after a family friend who went to college with my mother. I have always been thankful they did not name me after his cousin, Sydney, who was a roomate of my dads.

  19. patrck   21 years ago

    Check out Adolph. It had a fairly precipitous drop in about 1940.. wonder why.

  20. mobile   21 years ago

    George seems to have been on a downward slope since 1900

    Except in Kuwait

  21. Mo   21 years ago

    Both Mostafa and the alternate, but less cool, Mustafa aren't in the top 1000, I feel special.

    Of course, it was #3 most common in Egypt in the 70s.

  22. phocion   21 years ago

    Reagan and Kennedy seem to have both skyrocketed in popularity as names in the last twenty years

    Actually it looks like "Kennedy" skyrocketed not because of the president, but when the female MTV VJ of that moniker became popular in the 90s. Which is probably even more pathetic (or not, depending on your POV)...

  23. phocion   21 years ago

    Type in "ETH" to see perhaps the more striking example of opposite trends at work.

  24. Stevo Darkly   21 years ago

    Some random observations:

    1) Someone said the name "Adolph" took a sharp decline in the 1940s. The actual situation is a bit more interesting. "Adolph" was already in a sharp decline at the beginning of the 20th century -- but in the 1940s, while the number of babies given that name was already fairly low, the rate of decline actually slowed and then held pretty steady until the 1960s. To me, that suggests that "something" actually gave the name's plummeting popularity a bit of a boost. The name didn't drop into the floor until the 1970s.

    2) Check out "Malcolm." A bit of a jump in the 1990s, which I'll bet is directly due to Spike Lee's 1992 movie Malcom X.

    3) "Shaniqua" enjoyed a spike in popularity in the 1990s, but was almost never bestowed prior to the 1980s or after the 1990s.

    4) Variations of "Mohammed" (use "MOHAM") are on the rise, but nowhere near so much as "Jesus."

    5) "Candy" was a very '70s name. "Candi" is a very '80s name.

    6) No one names their kid "Dick" anymore, but "Jack" is making a comeback.

    7) The popularity of "Clinton," ascendant in the 1970s, took a nosedive in the 1990s. Something similar happened to "Hillary," "Hilary" and, unfair as it may be, "Chelsea."

    8) Meanwhile, "Reagan" surged in the 1980s (starting at about zero) and even more so in the 1990s. "Ronald," however, has been in a nosedive since the 1940s, albeit with some leveling off from the 1970s to the present. Ditto for "Ron."

    9) Check out "Brigitte" and you'll get a graph that resembles the physical characteristics for which certain women named Brigitte are famous.

    10) "Lily" and "Lilly," once dead, are blooming again.

  25. Andy D   21 years ago

    Cool thing... hmmm... what can I point to that hasn't been pointed out already... well, vowell names all seem to be low in the middle, high at either end. Neato.

  26. SR   21 years ago

    Actually, on the subject of presidential names, what's fascinating is the decline in influence over the past century. Punch in Woodrow, Warren, Calvin, Franklin, Dwight(!), and Lyndon(!) and check out the placement of the spikes. (John was already in the top 5 in the 1950s, so JFK couldn't have much effect on it. However, it is interesting that Truman had no effect on Harry/Harold.) Yet, after LBJ, presidents no longer produce any spike associated with their names. Indeed, if you check Richard, Gerald, James/Jimmy, Ronald, George, and William/Bill, you'll often find the name *declined* in popularity.

  27. SSAnME   20 years ago

    Check out the name Hillary. Such a precipitous decline in the '90s. Yikes!

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Tariff Rebate Checks Are a Bad, Inflationary Idea

Eric Boehm | 8.11.2025 3:35 PM

Hostile Takeover: Trump Federalizes Law Enforcement and Deploys National Guard in D.C.

Tosin Akintola | 8.11.2025 1:25 PM

Congress Spent At Least $27,500 on Poster Displays in 2 Months. Here Are 4 Ridiculous Examples and 1 Good One.

Sophia Mandt | 8.11.2025 1:10 PM

Hotel Sex Trafficking Suit Can Proceed, Inviting Hotels to Profile and Harass Guests

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 8.11.2025 12:45 PM

U.S. Revenue Grab on Chip Exports Raises Legal, Economic Alarms

Jack Nicastro | 8.11.2025 12:31 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2025 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!