New Post
Search
HelpFYI
in reply to a message by Trudy
The argument to which Siri is referring is this:
A "boyish" name implies masculine qualities. (This is just a simple definition, and there is really no way to argue against it. Basically, boys are male, so boyish is masculine.)
Giving a girl a "boyish" name or a name that is perceived as masculine (expected to identify a male) at least appears very likely to be an attempt to impart masculine qualities to the female bearer. If it's not a conscious attempt, then it is likely to still be an unconscious one.
Although this is an assumption about the parents' impression of the name as "boyish," the parents are certainly aware that a "boyish" name makes the impression on most other people of masculine qualities. If they claim they are unaware, it is either denial, or they are living outside their own culture.
Since naming girls implies an attempt to impart masculine qualities, the question is begged: Why is that necessary, important, or even appealing?
The most intuitive answer, which - although it may not be correct - it may be assumed to be correct by a reasonable observer, is that the parents believe the female bearer will benefit somehow from the implication that she possesses masculine qualities. They may or may not be right.
If you believe that a female benefits from the perception that she has masculine qualities, then in order to claim that you are egalitarian (feminist), you must also admit that a male benefits from the perception that he has feminine qualities.
If you name girls boy names, or like "boyish" names for girls, (it does NOT matter whether or not you acknowledge the implication of it to everyone else), you presumably would have to have the same practices and preferences for naming boys "girlish" or girl names, in order to be egalitarian.
If you are not egalitarian, you are one of three things:
1. sexist.
2. conformist without regard to perpetuating negative stereotyping of the feminine (female) relative to the masculine (male), and positive stereotyping of masculine relative to the feminine.
3. activist, or attempting to challenge the status quo. (Few people would believe the claim that this was the reason for naming a girl a boy name, however.)
Number Two is by far the most likely, in my opinion, for most everyone that does it. That is, you have been influenced by sexism (you unconsciously believe stereotypically male qualities could improve a woman; that "girly" is not as cool), and refuse to acknowledge or examine it in yourself.
**This is only the case IF you don't also find femme names on males equally appealing, and are as willing to use them.**
It's not a perfect argument, but it's convincing to me.
- chazda
A "boyish" name implies masculine qualities. (This is just a simple definition, and there is really no way to argue against it. Basically, boys are male, so boyish is masculine.)
Giving a girl a "boyish" name or a name that is perceived as masculine (expected to identify a male) at least appears very likely to be an attempt to impart masculine qualities to the female bearer. If it's not a conscious attempt, then it is likely to still be an unconscious one.
Although this is an assumption about the parents' impression of the name as "boyish," the parents are certainly aware that a "boyish" name makes the impression on most other people of masculine qualities. If they claim they are unaware, it is either denial, or they are living outside their own culture.
Since naming girls implies an attempt to impart masculine qualities, the question is begged: Why is that necessary, important, or even appealing?
The most intuitive answer, which - although it may not be correct - it may be assumed to be correct by a reasonable observer, is that the parents believe the female bearer will benefit somehow from the implication that she possesses masculine qualities. They may or may not be right.
If you believe that a female benefits from the perception that she has masculine qualities, then in order to claim that you are egalitarian (feminist), you must also admit that a male benefits from the perception that he has feminine qualities.
If you name girls boy names, or like "boyish" names for girls, (it does NOT matter whether or not you acknowledge the implication of it to everyone else), you presumably would have to have the same practices and preferences for naming boys "girlish" or girl names, in order to be egalitarian.
If you are not egalitarian, you are one of three things:
1. sexist.
2. conformist without regard to perpetuating negative stereotyping of the feminine (female) relative to the masculine (male), and positive stereotyping of masculine relative to the feminine.
3. activist, or attempting to challenge the status quo. (Few people would believe the claim that this was the reason for naming a girl a boy name, however.)
Number Two is by far the most likely, in my opinion, for most everyone that does it. That is, you have been influenced by sexism (you unconsciously believe stereotypically male qualities could improve a woman; that "girly" is not as cool), and refuse to acknowledge or examine it in yourself.
**This is only the case IF you don't also find femme names on males equally appealing, and are as willing to use them.**
It's not a perfect argument, but it's convincing to me.
- chazda
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1