Er, I screwed up the link to post #53, but it doesn’t matter.
Best name ever.
I was under the impression that you were disagreeing with someone who was disagreeing with someone you disagreed with.
I know we’re getting away from GQ material here, but I’m wondering how having a president named Barack Obama might eliminate some of the negative stereotypes associated with some of the names we’ve discussed in this thread.
If you’re down to two resumes that are equal in all ways except the names, the most ethical and legal choice is to interview the applicants.
Rejecting someone based on their name is no more justifiable than rejecting someone based on race, and it’s troubling to me that posters can’t see this.
Well it’s slightly more justifiable in that rejecting someone for a job based on name is not illegal, and rejecting someone for a job based on race is. I can eliminate job candidates for any reason I want to except protected classes, and name is not a protected class. “Poor and uneducated” or “rich and spoiled” are not protected classes. I can, and should, have the right to eliminate candidates for any non-protected class reason I want, from an excess of "e"s to the fact that I was beat up in second grade by a Carrie and the name gives me the willies.
I love how people are arguing against what they want me to be arguing instead of what I am arguing.
And people have the right to call you an assholish dick-shitting cunt, too.
relevant thread
Alright, let’s establish what you are arguing. For example,
I think it would be fair to draw from this that you feel that, among a group of people with “weird” names and people with “normal” names with otherwise comparable resumes, those with “weird” names are more likely to be poor workers. Is that in fact your position? And, if so, do you have any evidence for it?
Not to mention, if a black candidate walks into your office, he’ll be more likely to be from a broken, poverty-striken home than a white interviewee, based strictly on statistics. If it’s fine to discriminate based on names correlated with poor socioeconomics, why isn’t it fine to then carry it to skin color and other markers (like geography and surname)?
I can’t wait for the response.
Absolutely. But not in GQ.
Moderator Note:
Perhaps in some other context or some other forum, this is true. Here in General Questions, we frown on such appellations. Knock it off.
Gfactor
General Questions Moderator
FWIW, People in Cameroon seem pretty creative with their names. Some names of my students translate to “Welcome”, “Holiday”, “Smile”, “Tuesday”, “Snot”, “Egypt”, “Mama”, “Who knows?” (his mom wasn’t sure who the dad was) etc. It’s not uncommon to name your kid something bad in order to ward off evil spirits/pride. Suffixes (how do you pluralize that?) are also very popular. In my area, nearly every female name ends is “-tou”. In Mali, I found the same set of names but with the suffix “-ta”. Additionally, there are a few core names that are turned into countless variations- “Aboubakari” can be “Bouba”, “Boubakar”, “Bakary”, “Karimou”, etc. In English speaking areas, names like “Precious” or “Baby” are not uncommon.
A teacher friend of mine once had a student whoes parents had fond memories of the Germans (who are generally better liked here than the French.) The kids name was “Adolph Hitler.”
So yeah, while popular African American names do not come directly from African traditions (and how could they given the deliberate destruction of language, culture and family structure encountered during slavery) they do to some degree follow distinctly African naming trends. Anyway, why not let people name their kids what they want?
I love you.
[Moderating]
We are drifting pretty far from the OP, and are getting well into GD territory. I would suggest that those who wish to discuss the appropriateness of making hiring or other decisions based on names take it to that forum, or to the Pit. If the discussion continues in the current vein, I will have to consider either moving this thread or closing it.
The question at hand is the origin of these names. Please focus on that aspect in your responses.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
I’m still curious about how “Anastasia” got into the original list. I’m really not trying to be jerkish, diggleblop, but I’d really like to know what you thought was so outlandish about “Anastasia” even to the extent of labeling it “no joke.”
Some people think you should be traditional when naming a baby, others think you should be creative. The traditional people use a baby name book. The creative people make one up. I’ve always thought that maybe the creative ones want the name to sound kind of French, because they have roots in Louisiana, or at least, that’s how it started. The tradition has just gone on.
Again, just curious, why did you include “Anastasia” in there?
By the way, in Eastern Europe, it’s usually pronounced “Ahna-stah-zeeya”.
Oprah-I believe her mother chose her name from the Bible, but misspelled it-the original name was Orpah.
Resurecta? I hardly knew 'er!
My gramma’s name is Wanda, and she’s full-blooded Polish. Does that count?