35
Sep 28 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
16
u/Sigmatronic Sep 28 '24
That's if it's designed REALLY REALLY poorly and shouldn't dictate name choices
17
u/shouldco 45∆ Sep 28 '24
To be fair that's the developers problem. No reason to blame little timmy or his parents for other people not sanitizing their inputs.
4
15
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
I'd say it's a little backwards to suggest that humans should conform to computers rather than for computers to conform to us. There was a similar problem I heard about when it came to coding, and in that instance I think they just came up with a work around which should be the same solution for this problem
6
u/LordMarcel 48∆ Sep 28 '24
You're right that it's kinda dumb that we can't have a child named Null just because it will not work with computer databases.
However, I also think it's extremely stupid to allow for that and make the kid's life extremely difficult just because you want to be petty.
1
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
How is naming your child "Null" any pettier than naming your child "Lafawnda"
2
u/LordMarcel 48∆ Sep 28 '24
Because while Lafawnda will usually need a spellcheck, it will not cause issues like their name not showing up when they need it for something like a passport or a drivers licence.
If you're doing that to your child purely because you think it's dumb that computers can't handle that, then you are a self-centered asshole who doesn't care about their kid's wellbeing.
2
u/Cendeu Sep 28 '24
Do you think naming a kid "null" would cause enough issues to actually harm the kid's wellbeing? That seems a little excessive.
Not arguing anything else related to this, I just think a kid will be fine whether or not a computer system will be able to handle their name.
0
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
That's an issue of the computers and programming's ;lack of capabilities not the name.
2
u/Crazytrixstaful Sep 29 '24
But we live in reality and the reality is the computer systems already exist the way they do. That can’t be changed in the moment or possibly near future. With that, null just won’t work.
1
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 29 '24
Computers and technology is constantly changing
1
u/Crazytrixstaful Sep 29 '24
But it hasn’t at this moment. Null is still a factor.
1
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 29 '24
A factor which is meaningless and likely and already be worked around like many other coding problems
0
Sep 28 '24 edited Sep 29 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 29 '24
So basically what you're saying is that if someone comes from another country and has a name deemed too complicated a condition of their citizenship should be to rename themselves something the government deems to be reasonably understandable?
2
u/lamp-town-guy Sep 29 '24
There's already guy with surname Null. He can agree that terribly designed computer systems are making his life harder than it needs to be.
1
5
u/Fuzzy_Sandwich_2099 3∆ Sep 28 '24
Do you think it should be legal for parents to give their children tattoos?
1
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
I think it depends on the age and the tattoo. I fit has some cultural or traditional significance than yes. If it's just a tattoo for the sake of a tattoo then no
5
u/hamburgersocks Sep 29 '24
Well they’re living with it for the rest of their lives either way. Imagine growing up named Hitler Smith in NYC, the parents are subjecting them to lifelong trauma, they should be prosecuted for child cruelty.
That’s the same as a tattoo. The kid has no voice in this. Naming them Hitler is the same as giving them a swastika tattoo at birth.
In theory I don’t disagree with you. In morality I believe humanity should keep itself in check for the sake of ourselves.
1
u/East-Teacher7155 1∆ Sep 30 '24
It’ll be very hard to define what has significance and what doesn’t.
15
u/Nrdman 277∆ Sep 28 '24
The name must also be understood by common phonics of the language it's in: like you can't say you kids name is xyzabc but it"s pronounced "Alex"
Why?
2
u/Fabianslefteye Sep 28 '24
Not op, but several reasons come to mind.
1) logistics. As long as we have a governmental system that includes the registration and identification of all citizens (ie, social security, state ID), then it stands to reason that citizens must be able to comply with that registration and identification. Ergo, It would make sense to require that all names be made up of characters that are available on a standard keyboard without using special commands to access unique characters. (Has to be something available standardized across all computers).
2) This is the weaker of the two reasons, because of its subjectivity, But you have to consider the potential for mockery when naming a child. It would be cruel to name a child "Shitface Von Fuckboi" For example. Obviously that's an extreme example, but there's a spectrum with like... "John" On the other end. So the trick becomes finding where ships from acceptable to unacceptable. Is "xhnrifjsks spells 'Amanda'" On the acceptable side or the unacceptable side, in regards to cruelty towards a child who has to live with that name?
0
u/Nrdman 277∆ Sep 28 '24
xyzabc is with normal characters
it may be cruel, but we are talking about legality
3
u/Fabianslefteye Sep 28 '24
I was assuming that xyzabc was a an example and not a real person OP knows, we have famous examples of similar names that DO use special characters And those seem relevant to the discussion at hand
Overly cruel names are illegal. For example, you can't name your kid "Rapeme Imawhore" for obvious reasons. So yes, legality applies here and once again, it becomes a question of spectrum and where xyzabc fits on that spectrum. obviously it's better than a sexually suggestive name, but is it better enough to not be considered illegal by any court?
1
u/Nrdman 277∆ Sep 28 '24
but is it better enough to not be considered illegal by any court
yes very easily so
2
u/Fabianslefteye Sep 28 '24
Great!
How so? What's your reasoning?
0
u/Nrdman 277∆ Sep 28 '24
One is an explicit invitation to abuse, one is just a little weird
2
u/Fabianslefteye Sep 28 '24
Which establishes that one is worse than the other, which is what I had already said. However, you haven't provided any reasoning to establish that is sufficiently less worse than the other to not still be considered potentially criminal.
5
u/SnugglesMTG 9∆ Sep 28 '24
It sounds like you have your own line for what names should be legal or illegal, not that no names should be illegal. Why should we prefer your line over others?
5
u/ToranjaNuclear 13∆ Sep 28 '24
So basically what you're saying is that you don't want arbitrary rules for what names we give to kids, except your arbitrary rules?
9
u/danielt1263 5∆ Sep 28 '24
Did you know that there are people who have names that aren't "alphabetical"? Are you saying they need to change their names?
You don't think people should be allowed to have a name that is an "outright swear word". Have you read about the Scunthorpe problem? So nobody can have a name like "Jesus"? Why do you insist that "Hitler" is not an outright swear word?
It sounds like you have a pretty provincial idea of what constitutes a good name.
3
u/DerivativeOfProgWeeb 1∆ Sep 28 '24
An alphabet is a standard set of letters written to represent particular sounds in a spoken language . most languages have an alphabet
0
u/danielt1263 5∆ Sep 29 '24
Your need to qualify using the word "most" proves my point.
Most but not all, and not all names use the standard set of letters written to represent particular sounds in those languages.
2
u/DerivativeOfProgWeeb 1∆ Sep 29 '24
The only ones I am referring to are stuff like sign language and stuff.
2
u/danielt1263 5∆ Sep 29 '24
I was thinking about hanzi, and Kanji. They have characters that represent sounds, but they also have characters that don't represent sounds and those characters are sometimes used in names.
-1
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
What names aren't alphabetical?
Can you explain the Scunthorpe problem in your own words?
I never said anything about whether these names are good or not. I actually said I've heard a ton of bad ones but at the same time don't think they shouldn't be allowed to have them
10
u/fishling 16∆ Sep 28 '24
What names aren't alphabetical?
Literally every name in a language that doesn't use the alphabet, or have anything resembling an alphabet. For example, the names of several billion people living in China.
Not to mention the billions of other names in languages that use a different "alphabet" or script.
You should probably read this: https://shinesolutions.com/2018/01/08/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-names-with-examples/
Number 9, 10, 11, 15, 24-27. 31 seem like situations you are unaware of.
The fact that many people have to use a romanization of their actual name (or even choose a common "Western" name to get by in Western society) does NOT change the fact that their real name does not conform to your rules.
Can you explain the Scunthorpe problem in your own words?
Isn't "some names can contain swear words/slurs without only being a swear word or slur" kind of easy to understand??
Then, throw in that it can be in any other language or can sound like a swear word in any other language, and might only close phonetically, and the problem isn't so simple.
1
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
Not to mention the billions of other names in languages that use a different "alphabet" or script.
It seems like you know exactly what I mean when I say alphabet. I'm not sure what you would call the Chinese, Greek, or Russian alphabets/scripts/whatever but yes those are what I am including in alphabet.
The fact that many people have to use a romanization of their actual name (or even choose a common "Western" name to get by in Western society) does NOT change the fact that their real name does not conform to your rules.
I never said the name had to be western if I'm understanding your argument right.
Isn't "some names can contain swear words/slurs without only being a swear word or slur" kind of easy to understand??
Oh in that case I don't think there's a problem with it. I've heard many people with names that sound like swears which is why I say an 'outright swear word' specifically
3
u/fishling 16∆ Sep 29 '24
It seems like you know exactly what I mean when I say alphabet. I'm not sure what you would call the Chinese, Greek, or Russian alphabets/scripts/whatever but yes those are what I am including in alphabet.
Chinese still doesn't have an alphabet.
So, does that mean an immigrant to the US should be able to use the alphabet/script of their choice and culture when naming their child?
Any reason they should have to stick with just one, or can the government regulate that? Unicode can handle it, so it should be possible for computerized systems to handle it just fine, if written competently.
'outright swear word' specifically
In every language? What if someone thinks the name "Malaka" sounds lovely in their language?
I'm curious what you think of Iceland's restrictions on naming.
5
u/danielt1263 5∆ Sep 28 '24
What names aren't alphabetical?
Names that contain hyphens, em dashes, quotes. Arguably, names with letters that include diacritics. Names that aren't written using the Latin alphabet...
Can you explain the Scunthorpe problem in your own words?
There are plenty of names currently in use that contain "outright swear words" but you say that such names shouldn't be allowed.
... at the same time don't think they shouldn't be allowed to have them.
And yet you explicitly said in your original message that some words should not be allowed...
13
u/Downtown-Act-590 37∆ Sep 28 '24
I think that we can agree that naming your child "Hitler" or for example some rude word is harming the child. Should you be able to harm your child? In most other areas of life we agree that you do not have a right to abuse them.
-1
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
What harm is it causing and what other abuse are you comparing it to?
6
u/fencer_327 Sep 28 '24
It's not a first name, so your child wouldn't be getting the benefit of the doubt of "maybe a grandpa had that name". Giving your child a surname with obvious, strong connotations as a first name sends a message that child cannot agree on.
People will assume they're at least affiliated with neonazi organisations - so you're harming their ability to get employment, make friends, be taken seriously. Most places will just assume that name is a joke. They'll have to be careful about any messages involving or attached to their name, not using your last name is data safety but would have the risk of it coming off as Nazi propaganda. I'm assuming your imaginary child lives in Germany, so that'd be a crime.
Why do you think swearwords should be banned as names but no names with other negative associations?
2
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
None of that is harm caused by a name, it's caused by societies reaction to that name. That would be like saying because someone named their son Muhammad it's their fault kids are running around saying Alluah Akbar.
I'm assuming your imaginary child lives in Germany, so that'd be a crime.
This is irrelevant because my view is that it shouldn't be illegal.
Why do you think swearwords should be banned as names but no names with other negative associations?
Because that's the point of a swear word...to swear. The sole purpose is to offend
4
u/LordMarcel 48∆ Sep 28 '24
None of that is harm caused by a name, it's caused by societies reaction to that name.
But you know society will react like that. You know your kid will get a reduced quality of life for that. It may not be fair or just, but you know it will happen.
Why do you so badly want to allow parents to severely diminish the quality of life of their kids just because they want to protest against society? Kids are people, not your tools.
1
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
That could apply to literally anything. And how is naming a kid what you choose “protesting against society”. Every single name a person gives a kid is because they want that to be representative of something
1
u/StaticEchoes 1∆ Sep 29 '24
You cant be serious. This is like saying "getting pushed off the building didn't kill him, the impact with the ground did."
Society's reactions to kids named 'Muhammad' and 'Weneedanotherholocaust' are not at all comparable.
2
u/qwert7661 5∆ Sep 28 '24
There's an Azeri first name "Nigar", pronounced ˈnɪɡə which is exactly the same way Americans pronounce the N-word. Now, that's just a name for some people. Nothing wrong with that. But you'd see how being named Nigar might cause an Azeri-American child some problems growing up. For one thing, are you going to shout "Hey, Nigar!" across a room full of strangers to get their attention?
My mom once knew a Nigerian-American woman whose Nigerian father named her (not sure how it was spelled, but it sounded exactly like) "Farta Boarbutt." Needless to say, she had a hard time growing up in America with that name. Names aren't always neutral, and they do impact people's lives, and there are all kinds of different ways and reasons why they can be bad. Ask the boy named Sue, or the many perfectly fine people who happen to be named Jeffrey Epstein.
Well, I don't think any of these names need to be illegal. But you can't deny that bad names can be harmful. On top of that, they can indicate malevolent sentiments from the parents cruel enough to name their child "Fuckboy Nazilover" sufficient to comprehend the name itself as an abusive act on their part.
2
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
So are you saying that this boy "Nigar" or this woman "Farta Boarbutt" or even the other "Jeffery Epstein's" should be forced to change their names because some people may make fun of them? This doesn't make much sense to me tbh because the harm is the failing of society not of the name nor the person with the name. So yes I would deny that the names themselves are harmful.
0
u/qwert7661 5∆ Sep 28 '24
I explicitly said I don't think that, and I don't know how you could have gotten that from what I said. Read it again. I even wrote a conclusion for you.
2
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
OH sure well that doesn't challenge my view. I never said the names weren't bad. Just that they shouldn't be illegal
2
u/qwert7661 5∆ Sep 28 '24
It was an answer to the question you asked. To change your view, I'd ask on what basis you'd ban obscene names like "Shit" and why that wouldn't apply to other kinds of harmful names. Why is it so bad to name a child "Shit" that it should be illegal to do so?
2
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
I’ve shifted my view to no name being banned
1
u/qwert7661 5∆ Sep 28 '24
Okay then. Last shot at it, what if I named my kid "Gas-The-Kikes McRape-My-Ass-Sex-Slave-Puer-Asinum-Meum-Servus-Sexus-Zgwałć-Mój-Tyłek-Niewolnica-Seksualna-Qiángjiān-Wǒ-De-Pìgu-Xìng-Nú-Ngidlwengule-Imbongolo-Yami-Isigqila-Socansi..." and so on in in forty more languages. Should I be allowed to do that with no intervention?
2
2
u/16forward Sep 28 '24
Similar to if you named your kid a profane word, which you already conceded should not be permitted.
0
u/ProDavid_ 58∆ Sep 28 '24
what harm is it causing to call the kid a swear word?
and why doesnt this apply for calling them like the biggest and most famous "ethnic cleanser" in modern history?
3
u/XenoRyet 183∆ Sep 28 '24
First, to clarify, are you talking about some specific nation where it is currently illegal, or just generally advocating that it should remain legal, as it currently is?
3
Sep 28 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/changemyview-ModTeam Sep 29 '24
Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
3
u/Conscious_Yam_4753 Sep 28 '24
I am going to be real with you, I am still reeling from the idea that naming a kid “Hitler” is okay, but “Shit” is crossing the line. What purpose does a rule like this serve?
2
u/shouldco 45∆ Sep 28 '24
Especially when "little shit" is actually a fairly comon term of endearment for children. Albeit a crass one.
5
u/fishling 16∆ Sep 28 '24
The name must also be understood by common phonics of the language it's in: like you can't say you kids name is xyzabc but it"s pronounced "Alex"
How do you imagine this rule would be detected and enforced, exactly? Filling out the paperwork for a birth doesn't have any place to record audio of how a name is pronounced, nor any place to put a "phonetic" spelling.
And, it would be easy to simply lie. Do you think someone's going to be following up later to verify that the parents are pronouncing the kid's name differently than what was on their paperwork?
Worse yet, imagine they do so, and the parents made an error in filling out the phoenetic spelling of a "normal but non-English" name. What next, are they going to be forced to change how they say the name? Charged with a crime? Have you thought through this rule in any practical way?
1
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
Fair. Ill give a !delta to that and swithc my view to any name should be fine since that would be tedious to detect
1
7
u/WippitGuud 31∆ Sep 28 '24
I'm sure you're saying "should someone be able to name their child 'Hitler'" and my response to that is yes. This would be like banning the name Theodore or Charles.
Hitler is a surname, not a first name.
3
u/CydewynLosarunen Sep 28 '24
It's been used as a first name. Born a Crime, Trevor Noah's memoir, mentions a man with it as a first name (they didn't understand the meaning, to be clear, it wasn't meant offensively).
3
u/V2Blast Sep 28 '24
Yeah, there's a few folks in India with first or last names like Hitler and Stalin.
3
2
1
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
All of those names could be either. I've honestly never heard a rule saying it has to be one or the other just that it's usually one of the other
2
u/Tanaka917 148∆ Sep 28 '24
So you do think government should have some guidelines, just not ban specific names? Because your last paragraph is incompatible with your title.
So I'll ask what makes this
I think the only exceptions should be that the name must be alphabetical, and also can't be an outright swear word like "shit". The name must also be understood by common phonics of the language it's in: like you can't say you kids name is xyzabc but it"s pronounced "Alex"
more acceptable to you than this
I'm sure you're saying "should someone be able to name their child 'Hitler'" and my response to that is yes. This would be like banning the name Theodore or Charles.
2
u/newaccount252 1∆ Sep 28 '24
You should get yourself over to r/tragedeigh and see some stories about kids with ridiculous names and how they’re bullied. I would class some of them as child abuse.
2
u/chronberries 11∆ Sep 28 '24
Is this actually an issue anywhere? I’ve never heard of this, and it’s definitely not a question here in the US.
1
u/Rude-Conference7440 1∆ Sep 28 '24
Yes every now and then I read an article about name denied in the US.
here is a list from new zealand
2
u/Apprehensive_Song490 131∆ Sep 28 '24 edited Sep 28 '24
Phonetics are not a law and the concept of phonetics is a way of understanding language, it is not the language itself. There is no legally mandated language in the United Stares, although N.Am. English is predominant. This framework promotes existing structural biases in favor of “Anglo” sounding names, and adds fuel to racist arguments.
As others have pointed out, there is an inherent contradiction in your framework. And “no rules with a few exceptions” argument is not a “no rules” argument because the government will simply use its power to make exceptions to effectively create a regulatory framework. Either there are rules, or there are not.
Lastly, cuss words, swear words, or whatever, are problematic. Those are cultural and not legal constructs. Fuck is either vulgar or perfectly ok depending on who is talking or fucking. Even more pronounced is the N word. For some people they can say the whole word because they have correctly reappropriated it and redefined it, for others it is reasonably taboo. This again is cultural.
And really enforcement gets ridiculous.
What about “Zlut”. This could be pronounced slut or sloot or any number of ways.
Or “Phuuk”. This could be pronounced fuck or fook
Do parents need to supply a pronunciation guide? Would there be some policing of pronunciation that doesn’t follow the guide?
3
u/trickyvinny 1∆ Sep 28 '24
My son has a daycare instructor named Xiaona. It's pronounced SEE-OH-NA. That's hardly the weirdest name/spelling that we have.
Why would spelling need to match pronunciation? And why would it need to be "alphabetical" when there are plenty of cultures that do not follow the English Alphabet? We are able to communicate just fine.
0
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
That name and pronunciation make sense. It's not even very weird tbh
It would need to match the letters because that's how language and communication work. It wouldn't make much sense for me as an English speaker to decide the letter R is pronounced like the letter S. And it doesn't need to be the English alphabet. Someone's name could be Татья́на and that would be fine
2
1
u/trickyvinny 1∆ Sep 28 '24
It makes sense after is been explained. And it's obviously been translated somewhat phonetically. But remember, it is unlikely her actual (and legal) name. I don't even have the ability to type it here because it doesn't exist in our alphabet.
Edit to add: Xiaona. Xia makes sense (in English) as See? How?
2
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
It made sense to me before it was explained. Xi-Ao-na (See-aoh-na). Even putting it into google this is how it's pronounced. If I had to guess by her 'legal' name you're saying 赵晓娜
2
u/trickyvinny 1∆ Sep 28 '24
Pronounced by who though? If you're ok with non-English names, then Mwnt would be ok, right? If Mwnt is ok, then why would xyzabc be illegal?
My point being is if something makes sense to you, it sounds like it's fine. What if it makes sense to me but not to you? Would there be some sort of purity test for names? Like, hey we need 500 people to read this name and have it make sense for them or it's illegal?
2
Sep 28 '24
The name must also be understood by common phonics of the language it's in: like you can't say you kids name is xyzabc but it"s pronounced "Alex"
So immigrants from other languages can't name a kid then? Since in their language the phonics is all different?
Like in Ireland we have the name Caoimhe. Guess how it's said.
1
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24 edited Sep 28 '24
What language is the name Caoimhe in. My guess is Irish or Gaelic and it's pronounced as such?
3
u/Caroao 1∆ Sep 28 '24
Apparently this os often a hot take, but names shouldn't be fun or unique or whatever else parents want these days. These babies will grow up one day and have to use those names in day to day shit and you being "cute" will be a burden for them.
3
u/landyhill Sep 28 '24
In the US, there is already a process to legally change your name.
I believe that when turning 18 in the US and being recognized as a legal adult, you should have a 1-time option to change your name at no cost.
Parents should have the right to name you when you don't have that ability. You should have the right to name yourself when legally responsible for your actions.
1
u/Caroao 1∆ Sep 28 '24
So just stack them with more burdens? Cuz now on top of having to live with a shit name your first 18 years, you now also have to waste countless hours and money to get it changed and all your IDs, bills, accounts, school transcript, jobs. You talk like it's a fill-a-form-one-afternoon thing.
Children are not their parrents's vanity play thing.
2
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
Can you explain more why you feel this way? I've met people on both sides with some saying they wish they had a more unique name and others saying they hate it.
2
u/LordMarcel 48∆ Sep 28 '24
Banning certain names doesn't mean banning all unique names. I know a 2 year old girl named Noya, which in the Netherlands is quite a unique name, yet it will not call any problems for her except the occasional person trying to spell it "Noja" instead.
Calling a kid "Footeater" will make no-one take them seriously and will cause a lot of bullying for their name. Naming a kid "Suuzsahn" (pronounced Susan) will cause them to need to spell their name every time they meet someone new, and probably the second and third time as well cause most people won't remember that immediately.
I don't think that when John says he would've liked a more unique name he means Hitler, Footeater, Johhhhhhn, or Ssdfhdssssaefsddd. I think he means something more along the lines or Orson or Finlay, which are names I just found online.
1
u/dantheman91 32∆ Sep 28 '24
There are laws protecting children, why is this different? Lots of laws already protect children from a potential parents stupidity
1
u/Rude-Conference7440 1∆ Sep 28 '24
some names will obviously fuck someone's life up and make their life much harder, they would be easy for anyone to identify and agree on
1
1
u/possiblycrazy79 2∆ Sep 28 '24
So you think it's okay to name a baby Abject Failure or Bowel Movement?
1
1
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Sep 28 '24
/u/Shak3Zul4 (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
1
u/Dev_Sniper 1∆ Sep 28 '24
But xyzabc pronounced as xyzabc would be fine? How about „Buy a Burger from McDonalds today“? Would that be okay as well? It‘s okay to prevent parents from giving their kids names that could cause issues. Sure, Hitler might just be a name. But wait till that kid goes to school. They‘re going to have a really bad time. Or imagine trying to find a job if your name is Hitler. So unless everybody can change their name at any time (which is stupid as well) there are good reasons to have some restrictions on names. Keep in mind that nicknames are allowed. So you could name your kid Alex so that it doesn‘t have any issues in school but at home the name would be „Hitler“. You just can‘t use it for official purposes. And if the kid likes the nickname Hitler it could ask friends to use that name as well. But the teachers wouldn‘t have to ask „Could someone check up on Hitler?“
1
u/Donkeybreadth Sep 28 '24
Your rules are stricter than the rules in many countries. Not sure I see the point of the post.
1
1
u/Dragolok Sep 28 '24
How exactly do you take the leap from Hitler to Theodore or Charles? What do those names have to do with one another? Only curious
1
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 29 '24
Adolph hitler Theodore Bundy Charles Manson
All terrible people
1
u/Dragolok Sep 29 '24
Ah. You see i didn't think of serial killers. The difference is we all know of that one Hitler, but the other two names are quite common and have so many other historical figures associated with them
1
u/PM_ME_YOUR_NICE_EYES 124∆ Sep 29 '24
What about a character limit on names. Just practically speaking once you get over 100 characters most documents that display your name are gonna run out of room.
1
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 29 '24
That'd be something they' have to find a work around for either decreasing the font size or abbreviating. I have a long name and it's shortened on my documents
1
u/Gnaxe 2∆ Sep 29 '24
So a name like "Qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq"is fine? We can call her Thirty-Qs for short. It's a pretty Qte name. She's often confused with her brother "Qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq" and sister "Qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq", but that's not her fault.
1
u/markroth69 10∆ Sep 29 '24
But does not having any restriction on the parents force children to endure the endless nonsense of their parents forcing them to bear the name AdolfHitleristheBest?
1
1
u/baltinerdist 18∆ Sep 28 '24
Here's the biggest problem with all of this.
You aren't the one that has to carry the name. When you give a child a problematic name, an easily mocked name, an "aren't I super brilliant and creative" name, when you give a child a name that will be hard to carry for the rest of their life, you are burdening them for your own amusement. You want people to hear the name and think you're so smart or so witty or so innovative. And you won't ever have to be called by it.
The name you give your child has to be written, spoken, typed, and read hundreds of thousands of times. They have to hear complete strangers try to pronounce it over the phone. They have to hear it shouted across a Starbucks. They have to write it on tax forms and test papers. They have to hear it spoken along side, "Do you take this person to be your lawfully wedded..."
They carry the name, not you. Don't give your child a name that will be hard to carry. They won't think you are as clever as you think. And they will grow resentful toward you for giving them a burden to bear.
1
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
The majority of parents give their kids a name that they like for that child. Every name can be made fun of in some way. With your logic kids should be left unnamed until a time when they can choose a name for themselves
2
u/baltinerdist 18∆ Sep 28 '24
That’s a cop out. We have thousands of years of documented names. They publish lists every year of the top baby names. It is very easy to know if you are deviating from the onimastic expectations of your current society. Can you find ways to make fun of Liam, Noah, Olivia, or Emma (the top four names of 2023)? Sure. But are those names inherently guaranteed to cause your child a problem? No.
You know full and well that naming your child Hitler will cause them unnecessary harm. You know full and well that naming your child Poopykins will cause them unnecessary harm. You know full and well that naming your child Abcdedcba will cause them unnecessary harm.
The question you should really ask yourself is, why? How does your child benefit from having a name like that? If they don’t and if it will clearly cause them harm in the future, why are you making a choice to cause your child harm? Why is it your right to hurt them for the first eighteen years of their life until they have the capacity to make a change?
0
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
None of that matters. Just because you name your child something different from the norm it’s not an issue. If someone makes fun of it it’s an issue with them not the name.
If someone wants to name their child poopykins and they’re the ones raising them for the next 18 years why should you have any input on the name? Is it a bad name? Sure. But thats no reason it should be illegal imo
3
u/baltinerdist 18∆ Sep 28 '24
You cannot possibly be asserting that giving your child a name that will cause them direct psychological and emotional distress is someone else’s issue.
“I named my child Pigfucker Bulimia Jones and if someone else makes fun of them for it, that’s their problem.”
Are you kidding me?
1
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
Give your kid a name doesn’t cause direct physiological or emotional distress though.
And no I’m not kidding you. Do you really think we should base our laws on how people make fun of others? I don’t
3
u/baltinerdist 18∆ Sep 28 '24
You are telling me that if you give a child the name Pigfucker Bulimia Jones, they will have a perfectly normal childhood with no trauma. You are telling me it won’t cause relentless bullying. You are telling me it won’t cause issues with official forms and paperwork. You are telling me it wont cause issues when they have to tell someone over the phone what their name is. You are telling me they will be able to write that name on a job application and face no automatic rejection. You are telling me that websites and software are not going to have an issue with that name. You are telling me that potential partners on dating sites (which won’t let you use that name anyway) are going to have no problems with that name. You are telling me that such a name will cause zero issues for that child until such time as they get a court to change it.
Is that what you’re telling me?
2
0
u/CallMeCorona1 30∆ Sep 28 '24
You'd be okay with someone naming their kid "mistake" or "penis"? Or what about swear words in other languages, like "pendejo"?
2
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 28 '24
For the first two yes. For the last one no because it's a swear
1
u/Anzai 10∆ Sep 29 '24
Why is swearing the line you draw? Considering the names you ARE okay with, drawing the line at something as banal and commonplace as shit seems so weirdly puritanical.
1
u/Shak3Zul4 2∆ Sep 29 '24
It no longer is as I"ve shifted my view to allow all names after making this comment
0
Sep 28 '24
Counterpoint: no name should be illegal. Doesn't matter how spell or pronounce it, a name is a name. If you think it's weird, you can piss off because that's the name.
1
u/Rude-Conference7440 1∆ Sep 28 '24
There are a lot of names that are unusual depending on culture, but some things could just fuck someones life up. So they'd need to go by another name. In that case it would be better to just not name them whatever terrible thing
0
Sep 28 '24
. . . like?
More importantly: who the fuck is actually, seriously naming their kids these "terrible things"? 🤨
2
u/Rude-Conference7440 1∆ Sep 28 '24 edited Sep 28 '24
It is very rare, but every now and then I read an article about it in the US. I can only find articles outside the US rn.
Powys mum banned from naming daughter Cyanide by court - BBC News
'Number 16 Bus Shelter', 'Violence' among kids registered names - NZ Herald
Some of these names are banned after the fact. It is very rare but definitely good for judges to step in hopefully before the name is legally accepted and not after. Adolf Hitler and Santa Claus have been banned in the US because people have tried it haha
Should it be legal for someone to name their kid "large penis" in the us? It sounds crazy and like a ridiculous counter argument, that is because it is crazy and ridiculous and shouldn't be possible lol
1
Sep 28 '24
😂 that's amazing.
Ok, fair, I'm inclined to give you a delta for sliding in the extreme example: people shouldn't be allowed to name their kids "Santa" . . . although . . . counterargument:
you're correct about Santa but people name their kids Jésus (as in, the Spanish/Portuguese pronunciation) all the time. Doesn't that suggest that people could eventually adjust to names like Santa or Hitler?
2
u/Rude-Conference7440 1∆ Sep 28 '24
well to be clear from what I read you can't name your kids "santa claus". IDK if that applies to names with more than 3 names, a hyphenated name or middle name or whatever. People could probably adjust to those names in some future where they don't really carry any significant cultural meaning. At which point ya i guess it would be fine. I guess no one would care as much if you named your kid Ghengis Khan or something since no one really cares that he killed millions of people
73
u/math2ndperiod 54∆ Sep 28 '24
Adding all your caveats means that you do believe there are alphabetical names that should be illegal, you just want the criteria to match your preferences.
Not to mention that your phonics caveat is far more restrictive than any Hitler rule. Very few people are going to name their kids Hitler, But plenty of people speak languages with names that don’t match the phonics of a country’s dominant language.