New Post
Search
HelpRe: Dakota.. Cultural Appropriation?
in reply to a message by Glitzy Cate
There is a difference between using a people group as a name, using a place name, and using a name that originated from a different culture.
Using Apache, Cherokee, Navajo as a name would be like naming a kid French, Japanese, or Moroccan. It sounds awkward no matter what people group is substituted.
Dakota is the name of a sub tribe of the Sioux and a language, but it is also a place name in a dozen areas. That makes it a bit tricky. If the parents are naming their kid after South Dakota that makes the name more like Dallas or Florence, but, if they are naming their kid after the people group or language, it is more like using Chinese as a first name, which is weird no matter what a person's heritage. Of course the place was named after the people group. I personally wouldn't use Dakota, but I can see how the sound and meaning would be attractive.
Using a name that originated with a culture/ language different from your own can potentially be seen as appropriative, but there are also shades of gray. Some people might appear white or black or ambiguous but still have Native American or some other ancestry that isn't immediately discernable. They don't owe you or I a purity test to prove their right to bear a name.
Plenty of non-Jewish and non-Arabic descended people have Hebrew and Arabic derived names due to the Bible and Quran, so that is another mitigating factor in some circumstances.
I knew a girl in college from Puerto Rico, and she had a name that originated in Hawaii. You might call that appropriative, but I don't think anyone was genuinely offended by her name.
Using Apache, Cherokee, Navajo as a name would be like naming a kid French, Japanese, or Moroccan. It sounds awkward no matter what people group is substituted.
Dakota is the name of a sub tribe of the Sioux and a language, but it is also a place name in a dozen areas. That makes it a bit tricky. If the parents are naming their kid after South Dakota that makes the name more like Dallas or Florence, but, if they are naming their kid after the people group or language, it is more like using Chinese as a first name, which is weird no matter what a person's heritage. Of course the place was named after the people group. I personally wouldn't use Dakota, but I can see how the sound and meaning would be attractive.
Using a name that originated with a culture/ language different from your own can potentially be seen as appropriative, but there are also shades of gray. Some people might appear white or black or ambiguous but still have Native American or some other ancestry that isn't immediately discernable. They don't owe you or I a purity test to prove their right to bear a name.
Plenty of non-Jewish and non-Arabic descended people have Hebrew and Arabic derived names due to the Bible and Quran, so that is another mitigating factor in some circumstances.
I knew a girl in college from Puerto Rico, and she had a name that originated in Hawaii. You might call that appropriative, but I don't think anyone was genuinely offended by her name.
Archived Thread - replies disabled
4