New Post
Search
HelpRe: I like them...
in reply to a message by araslanka
I think most people won't like them because they're names of African countries, so it seems a little insensitive to use them. Although I do know a boy who has Mali as a middle name because a friend of his parents is from there.
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
They're countries as well? I didn't know (knowledge of African geography lacking!)
I guess I can see why people wouldn't like them cos of that.
But they aren't just countries and there's heaps of overlap with countries and names and things. Like it says here that Kenya is a Russian boy's name too.
Do people think all country/place names are insensitive? Like are India and Paris and China and Dakota and Sahara insensitive too?
I guess I can see why people wouldn't like them cos of that.
But they aren't just countries and there's heaps of overlap with countries and names and things. Like it says here that Kenya is a Russian boy's name too.
Do people think all country/place names are insensitive? Like are India and Paris and China and Dakota and Sahara insensitive too?
1
But not Paris because you're white British so Paris is okay? Or did you just not type it?
There has to be a rule to what's insensitive and what isn't and I'm trying to figure it out.
Now I know Dakota is actually the name of a Native American tribe and so is Cheyenne, so now I know that I'd say they were totally insensitive cos they're races of people. That's just really weird. ESPECIALLY if your race beat up on the people your naming your kid after.
I know if I met a white kid with my ethnicity as their name I'd be like "what... the hell?" :(
And it goes both ways cos I'd never name my kids English. Or French. That would just be crazy.
But I think places are more okay? Less insensitive I mean? Because a place is a place and not people. My brother has a white girlfriend named India and we never thought to be offended by it.
But if your country is having a war with the country you name your kid that probably is horribly insensitive.
There has to be a rule to what's insensitive and what isn't and I'm trying to figure it out.
Now I know Dakota is actually the name of a Native American tribe and so is Cheyenne, so now I know that I'd say they were totally insensitive cos they're races of people. That's just really weird. ESPECIALLY if your race beat up on the people your naming your kid after.
I know if I met a white kid with my ethnicity as their name I'd be like "what... the hell?" :(
And it goes both ways cos I'd never name my kids English. Or French. That would just be crazy.
But I think places are more okay? Less insensitive I mean? Because a place is a place and not people. My brother has a white girlfriend named India and we never thought to be offended by it.
But if your country is having a war with the country you name your kid that probably is horribly insensitive.
1
Well, if you think about it, white Europeans are the ones who colonised pretty much the entire globe and greatly mistreated its inhabitants, particularly those of different races. We still continue to oppress them and appropriate their culture to this day. But Paris was never a colonised place and the Parisians never oppressed, so I see it as different. I still think it's a silly name, but not as potentially insulting or disrespectful.
Can I ask what your ethnicity is? Out of curiosity - you might have a better stand point on this than I do, as, like I say, I'm white, so I can't really decide what is and isn't offensive to other cultures.
Can I ask what your ethnicity is? Out of curiosity - you might have a better stand point on this than I do, as, like I say, I'm white, so I can't really decide what is and isn't offensive to other cultures.
1
There's been some pretty high profile conflict in the countries the Australian children are named after in recent decades.
:0)
:0)
1
Ohh... I get why that mightn't be the best idea then.
Thanks for explaining :)
Thanks for explaining :)
1