I forget now what the exact circumstances were, but dealing with some family’s goofy naming situation wasn’t something I felt I wanted to deal with.
By you, and AFAIK, only you.
You’re of course welcome to do you. But asserting that there is some objective standard of “weird” out there and you’re tuned into it seems to assuming facts not in evidence. At least to me.
Last night at dinner my server was a young 20s white woman named “London”. Like the UK city.
Mindful of this thread I complimented her on having an interesting name, versus my own boring name (that I told her, so we were on as level a playing field as I could provide). She laughed. Encouraged by that I asked how she liked it and how her parents came up with it. She said she really liked it, it felt feminine, and she really had no idea how/why her parents had chosen it. But she was glad they had.
I don’t know that it’ll ever be a top 10 girl’s name. But it is cool. I’m glad there aren’t name police lurking to prevent this kind of thing.
There was a Nickelodeon show with character named London in the early 2000s.
(Show was ‘Zack and Cody’)
My server was sure the right age to have her name inspired by that show.
OTOH …
A couple weeks ago (so before this thread) I met a ~50yo woman who said her name was (phonetically) Lay-uh. After a bit more idle conversation she ruefully admitted, “Well, it’s really Lee-uh”. To which I responded “Yeah, you’d be about the right age to have that done to you. I’m sorry.” She said it still pissed her off being named for the Star Wars princess. So “Lay-uh” it is.
Be careful what you do parents; it matters.
I know a “Mindy” named for Mork’s friend in the sitcom.
Apparently, it wasn’t a name before. Like Wendy and Peter Pan.
My daughter isn’t named London, but that’s the kind of name I’m talking about. And, no, not “Montana,” “Dakota,” or “Cheyanne.”
I’m confused by this anecdote. “Lay-uh” is how it’s pronounced in Star Wars. So she’s choosing the Star Wars character pronunciation, or am I just being a bit brain dead here in understanding. Or does she go by “Lee-uh.”?
This is very confusing. If she doesn’t like the Star Wars name, why does she introduce herself with it instead of her real name?
Addendum: OK, it looks from what I’m reading that by New Hope, the pronunciation changed to LEE-uh? I dunno, as I never got past the fourth movie of that franchise.
My girls had a couple London’s and Paris’ in their highschool.
And, an India and Asia. Twins.
And one Persia.
I applauded this one. I thought, “Well, they took a chance”
Though, note Parisa and Persis are already normal girls’ names. For boys there is Perseus and Persius (call 'em Percy?)
I’m not sure I’d call them normal.
I knew a Percy or two.
Her sister, Tegucigalpa, wasn’t quite so sanguine about the situation.
There’s also Alexis, which is unisex although leaning towards female, and other variations if they don’t want “Alex” as an official name.
“Mindy” wasn’t a name before? Maybe not a popular one; I grew up with at least one that I can think of off the top of my head, before “Mork and Mindy.” It’s a diminutive of Melinda.
(“Jessica” was also invented by Shakespeare.)
Gary was a top 10 baby name in the late 40s and early 50s, and has pretty much dropped off the top 1000. Spongebob’s pet snail may have something to do with it.
No, they’re not all worse. The alternative I am suggesting is better, because it prevents you from exercising parental powers as an arbitrary free-for-all, but forces you to consider your child’s interests in the matter. You’re comparing apples and oranges. The important thing here is making a choice that will stand the most likelihood of benefitting the child and not your wants as a parent nor the decisions of any random busybody. A priest is biased in favor of religious interests. I would also not approve of somwone else choosing your child’s name for you, such as a priest dictating names to parents ("Okay, so you have fraternal twins. The girl’s first name shall be Mary, after the Virgin, her second name shall be Catherine, after her godmother, and her third name can be a saint’s name of your choice, by which you can call her. The boy’s first name shall be Joseph, after Our Lord’s earthly father, his second name Jacques, after his godfather, and his third name a saint’s name by which you can call him**). What you call a “bureaucrat”, however, is actually someone enforcing the laws of an elected legislature, which I am not suggesting should name your child in your stead, only that they should pass reasonable legal rules putting restrictions on more extreme naming choices, and that solely for the child’s benefit, and not for any state right or interest.
As long as the “bureaucrat” (I.E. duly passed legal rules) is imposing restrictions only with a view to protecting your child’s interests, and does not impose draconian rules in the matter, then your feelings as a parent should not prevail. My reason for this is that I see the power to name your child not as a right of yours, but as a duty (indeed, I see any and all powers that a parent might be allowed to exercise over a child, not as a personal right, but as a mere authorization granted in order to be able to carry out one’s duty to one’s child, safeguard the child’s interests, and raise the child to be a good citizen). You may be the one who bestows the name, but it’s the child’s name, not yours, they are the one who have to live with it, not you. And just because you’re the parent doesn’t automatically mean that you are a good judge of your child’s interests. Any fertile person who is capable of carnally knowing a fertile person of the opposite biological sex can bring a child into the world, even a whack job like, say, Donald Trump, or Cletus the Slack-Jawed Yokel. It is thanks to “bureaucrats” that you have to ensure that your children are given at least some education, that you have to provide basic support to your children, that you have to have them vaccinated against diseases that pose a public health risk before they go to school. The intent here is not to make the child property of the state, it’s to make sure neither the parent nor the state can treat a child like property.
Don’t worry. No one is advocating making the state choose your child’s name rather than you doing it, nor is anyone advocating limiting your choices to just a handful of names (as in the time when most people seemed to bear the name of an English or British king or queen, like John, George, Henry, William, Charles, Elizabeth, Jane Anne, Mary, or Catherine). Even after some reasonable limits were imposed (and there are countries where such exist even as of now), there would still be tons of names you could choose from, and the choice would still be yours. If you read my original post above, you will see that I even mentioned that I wouldn’t be the judge of all possible choices, but that I even accept as subjective my own comments where I actually speak positively of giving diminutives as full names.
** Common Quebec Catholic practice in times when the Church held more sway there.
Whats wrong with Bob or dave or dan?
I knew Elvis.
No not that one.
or that other one
I managed to tell the story backwards. It was late and noisy in that place. D’oh. Anyhow she’s not happy being a Star Wars figurine.
The only “episode” of Star Wars I’ve ever seen was the very first. And only once back when it was released.
One of my recent co-workers is an Elvis. He’s about 30 and was born in the US to recent Croatian immigrant parents.
I also knew a Mindy before the Mork and Mindy aired.
That is the ostensible purpose of the Icelandic naming committee: you can name your child whatever you want (within reason), but it has to be a “real” name. If it is not already on the approved list, you can petition that it be added (which often actually succeeds if you can prove it’s a legit name).