Don’t know if these are national, but my local Air America affiliate runs anti-bigot PSAs, the formula of which is one person making a bigoted statement (something like “you can figure out this tip because you’re good at math because you’re Asian”) followed by the bigot saying “know what I mean?” and the second person in the spot says “no…I don’t know what you mean.”
So there’s one the other day with two co-workers talking about a third co-worker’s baby’s christening. The good co-worker asks what the name of the baby is. The bad co-worker says something like “oh, one of those names…Loquita, Shaquanda, something like that.” And goes on to express her not understanding why African-American parents give their children names like that because it can interfere with their ability to advance in the world, closing with the obligatory “You know what I mean?”
While the good co-worker couldn’t conceive of what the bad co-worker meant, I could. Not that I agree with the idea of bad-mouthing someone’s choice of name for their kid, but there has been as least one study that supports the idea that, indeed, people with stereotypically “black” names are less likely to be called for job interviews than people with stereotypically “white” names. So while the bad co-worker was certainly rude, is it reasonable to tag her as racist?
Even a blind pig finds a truffle every now and then.
One can be a racist and still be correct. Not very freaking often, but it is possible. But then, theoretically a flock of bats could fly out my ass singing “Grandma Got Run Over By A Reindeer,” but I’m not holding my breath.
I basically agree with you too. In an ideal world, people would only be judged by the beams radiating from their hearts but that’s not the way it is. Black people in the town I grew up in combined certain types of sounds to create “new” black names and the result isn’t always aesthetically pleasing. I grew up with a Shataqua and LaInger and many others. If they ever did break out of that rural ghetto, its just going to be that much harder for them.
Observing that people are discriminated against because of their name is one thing. In part, it’s an observation of racism in action.
What you’re suggesting if that black people should intuitively know what Mr J Boardmember will think of their choice of name for their new daugter. 20 or 40 years from now.
Pretty much by definition, those you could pick out now as strange-yet-common kids’ names will be normal adult names in a few decades.
There is a similar trend in Australia with some parents. They come up with bizarre spellings for existing names or make up new names by jamming two existing names together. AS far as I am aware this is an Anglo Saxon trend.
We refer to the names as “future dead kid’s names” as a preponderance of murder victims and kid’s that die in house fires have these names. It certainly isn’t racist and everyone knows what you mean if you mention it.
I agree too, but I don’t think it’s so much racist as classist. The credit union at my old job, there was a girl who worked there named Aquanetta (I kid you not). My collegues all of whom were black themselves were horrified at this. Mostly for the same objections.
One of my first jobs was at the Occupancy Department for the Chicago Housing Authority, and you would not believe the names I would see. Let alone trying to decifer the handwriting. The problem isn’t so much that those names scream black as they scream poor and uneducated.
The person who “don’t know what you mean”, IMHO is a total idiot or a compulsive (non-truth teller).
While this person may not agree with such a statement which may indicate racial trends for PC reasons, they dam well know what that other person means.
I admit it makes me uncomfortable when people carelessly practice behavior that reinforces negative stereotypes about their own race - I mean, I honestly can’t fathom the arrogance, ethnocentrism, and paternalism required to (a) appraise the quality of a group’s naming traditions, and (b) argue for them alter those traditions based on the aesthetics of one’s own group.
I am… hmm… not offended by these names… hmmm… not hating the parents… what emotion is it when you hear of such a name and just shake your head and roll your eyes and say “Not another one.”? (I don’t think I’m being racist about it because I have the same reaction to stereotyically white names that the parents feel the need to muck with traditional spelling.)
And at first I thought that GorillaMan’s statement showed an insight that I had not previously had. But wouldn’t this require that the names in question be repeats of each other? If thousands of people chose the name"Shaquanda" for their daughters, then it would eventually be a common name and nothing more thought of it. It would eventually migrate across race and class the way we now have people from Japanese decent with traditional Norwegian names and vice versa.
But… the people choosing these names are (I think) choosing them partially for their uniqueness. So if you have thousands of people all picking DIFFERENT names with only a similar construction, I am not so convinced that they will cross over into common useage.
If I remember my Freaknomics, it wasn’t that the blackest names (their phrase, not mine!) were causative of future problems, but correlative with them. I think the explanation boiled down to being that the type of family that would tend toward using one of these names would provide a less favorable environment to breeding success (i.e. they would tend to be poorer with less education).
I’ve heard that ad, and what makes the bigot so annoying is her tone: it’s a low, amused, supercilious, conspiratorial tone, suggesting that she’s sharing a common exasperation that we white people have with those black people.
If she were making the point in a different context, it’d be okay; but mocking a black coworker for giving her child a name that’s typical for mainstream black American culture? Not so cool.
You can step off your high horse and meet reality.
It is not:
Ethnocentrism - plenty of other groups including whites get criticized for their naming choices. Most spoken middle names (e.g. Billy Ray) are considered tacky and uneducated as well. We have been through that here several times before. I cringed when my brother revealed the names of my nephews (Gunner and Montana).
Paternalism - right. There is that “anti-judgmental” crap again. No one can have an opinion on anything that other people do. God forbid we discuss the practical ramifications of a made up naming system.
You may have a point about arrogance but that is it is a type of practical arrogance that people use to assess another person quickly without reading their entire biography.
This isn’t long-term cultural heritage we are talking about. The trend started in the 1970’s and has gone from there. It is simply a bad idea from certain standpoints to give your kids name that sound overly trendy, uneducated, or ghetto.
I question your basic premise when you state “a group’s naming tradition”. What “tradition” is this? This type of name has only been appearing in America for a few decades at best. I suppose it may be a judgement call when a trend or fad becomes a tradition, but to me, this seems a pretty recent developement to be a “tradition”.
Negative opinions on this naming fad come from people of many races.
As has been previously stated, whether one personally approves of this naming fad or not, it appears that people with names like this are at a disadvantage in society. A simple recognition of fact. So yes, call me arrogant and paternal when I roll my eyes that someone has intentionally minorly hindered their child’s future progress.
On preview, looks like others were faster with these points… but I’ve already typed them.
I seem to recall hearing of immigrants coming to America with distinctly ethnic names changing them to something more “American”, or even having the immigration officials change them because the ethnic name was too hard to pronounce/spell. Some of the former supposedly to fit in better in American society.
It’s a shame that a name might be something that could hold you back, but you don’t have to strictly go by your given name. Nobody calls me by my given name, and it’s not even strange or uncommon.
Yeah, but I’ve noticed that certain cultures are more bountiful of opinions on things that have nothing to do with them whatsoever than others.
But that’s not even what the word “arrogance” means.
Okay, and blacks are only about what, 400 years old. Any thing we come up with would be new. The rest of your quote is just more embarassing arrogance.
I am not sure that I follow this. Are you saying that African American culture has only been around for 400 years? Obviously there have been people with dark skin for a wee bit longer than that.
And yes, any tradition starts as a trend or a fad (or a religious or imperial demand), but one and a half generations of a subset of a society practicing something does not make it a tradition in my mind.