would you name your baby a name you couldn't stand? - Page 3

[philomom]

Originally Posted by hollytheteacher

ew it sounds like someone with a british accent saying "to cum sir"

I agree. It almost sounds like bad porn, doesn't it? Not that I'm an expert.....

[tracymom1]

I would do as much research as possible about periods of history he is particularly interested in and come up with some names that you could live with (or maybe even like) from that.

Or - maybe you should do some research TOGETHER and come up with a name that way.

[Mackenzie]

Originally Posted by philomom

I know a lot of Trekkies but they use the Trek names for middle names.

Lucas Kirk
Madeline Troi

He is one of those too... Myself, I've neve watched an episode of star trek in my life... I am sure there are names I would be open too and names that would fall into the "hells nah" category as well...

[Mackenzie]

Originally Posted by philomom

I agree. It almost sounds like bad porn, doesn't it? Not that I'm an expert.....

THAT made me giggle a lot...

[roslyn]

so naming our next child spiderman is acceptable if my husband really wanted to, though he would constantly be teased and the mass public would be appalled by our bad naming skills.... would be totally fine because he is a hero to my husband?

Your husband has a fictional character for a hero? I don't think it's the same thing. As I said, it's not like he's trying to name the kid something ridiculous like Hulk Hogan (or Spider Man for that matter).

...it makes you look like you care more about your hobby than you do your child.

In a world where people are naming their children after Paris Hilton, cars and liquor not to mention designer labels I don't think naming him after a historical figure is all that bad. Actually it's pretty common to name children for historical figures ie Martin Luther King after Martin Luther of the Protestant Reformation.

...and I guarantee you that it will sound a little weak when your son has to answer "no, no relation. No, I'm not Shawnee. My dad just liked history." over and over again.

It didn't stop the Civil War hero who clearly wasn't Shawnee either. Plenty of people are named Scott who are not in fact of Scots heritage. There's a million non-Irish Shawns out there. Why are those okay, yet Tecumseh is not?

[Jenne]

Roslyn- For me, (I cannot answer for anyone else!), it is less about the name and more about that she doesn't like it. I'd have given my same response if the name had been David, Jane, Elijah, or Bob. I think hating a name is a valid reason not to name a child that all on its own. If she posted that DH wanted to name Tecumseh and she loved it and what did we think that's a different animal, in my mind. But the fact that she doesn't like the name, for me, for my family, for our naming "rules", if one person says "No" the name is thrown out. Sometimes we revisit names and rediscuss them. I think that is okay too as long as there isn't brow beating going on. I can't answer if that is what the OP is experiencing but she clearly hasn't changed her mind and I think her opinion ought to be respected. Just as his should be if she were offering a name she loved but he didn't.

I don't think whether a name is from history or a character plays into the discussion either. We looked at lots of names from both. Yeah, so SpiderMan wouldn't fly here but Bruce Wayne might. Just as Hitler wouldn't but Livia would. I think naming is so personal and requires both parents to agree.

Jenne

[WifeofAnt]

Scott and Shawn have been used SO many times by so many people that the origin doesn't really matter much anymore. I would never name my kid something that I couldn't yell out in a crowded playground. There's kind of a limit of how weird you can get before people think its okay to make comments. No offense meant to anyone but it would be like my half-Irish, half-Canadian pasty self naming my children Nyesha and Deandrae. My kids are never going to fit the stereotype the names put out.

[Adaline'sMama]

Originally Posted by roslyn

In a world where people are naming their children after Paris Hilton, cars and liquor not to mention designer labels I don't think naming him after a historical figure is all that bad.


Why are those okay, yet Tecumseh is not?

Personally, I dont approve of naming your kids after silly famous people, liquor, or designer labels either. My DH's list for boys included both Boone and Hartford. I would have compromised with Hartford being a boys middle name, but Boone....in Kentucky? That'd be a no.

As for your bolded question:
Its hard to pronounce
Its not Martin Luther, its much less wll known
It has the word cum in it (I refrained from using a name I loved bc the intials would have been JIZ)
It does sound like a bad porn
The kid will probably end up going by something like TJ or JT or TC ect. because his name will be so complicated to pronounce...you have to admit it is a little more diffucult to say than Scott or Shawn

[Beverly]

Originally Posted by nova22

I think it's fair to compromise with a name that you truly HATE and put it in the middle. That's more than fair considering how much you don't like the name.

I agree. I also agree with the PPs who said that both parents should have veto power. Lord knows my husband has vetoed plenty of names that I LOVED ... but if one of us hates it, it's not gonna happen, period.

[wehrli]

Originally Posted by roslyn

I guess I'll be the outlier here and say I think it's a beautiful name and the legacy behind it is wonderful. If he feels that passionately about it I wouldn't buck him on it. I don't think he'll be picked on for it at all, most people would assume that it's either the Native American or the general and that would be that. My son has a classmate named Thor who has a sister named Electra. Frankly, I don't think it's a big deal and goodness knows I've heard worse with a lot less of a reasonable explanation.

i'm going to have to agree with you...

Originally Posted by roslyn

It didn't stop the Civil War hero who clearly wasn't Shawnee either. Plenty of people are named Scott who are not in fact of Scots heritage. There's a million non-Irish Shawns out there. Why are those okay, yet Tecumseh is not?

point well made

i think some of you people are being plain mean and nasty...

[la mamita]

i like the name, but i can totally understand not wanting to use a name you hate. i think it would be appropriate to use as a middle name OR for a pet. in fact i think it's more appropriate for a pet. i definitely think that veto power is in order and should be respected by both parents.

i also would shy away from the name because if you are not native american, it sounds kind of like cultural appropriation. perhaps that's a new argument you can use?

[annaconda]

Originally Posted by Serenyd

Ugh, hell no. Do your kid a favor and don't back down! I think middle name is a GENEROUS compromise.

[Mackenzie]

Originally Posted by la mamita

i like the name, but i can totally understand not wanting to use a name you hate. i think it would be appropriate to use as a middle name OR for a pet. in fact i think it's more appropriate for a pet. i definitely think that veto power is in order and should be respected by both parents.

i also would shy away from the name because if you are not native american, it sounds kind of like cultural appropriation. perhaps that's a new argument you can use?

Yes definitely. Not to mention that it may be... Off putting to those that are Native American...

[Smokering]

i also would shy away from the name because if you are not native american, it sounds kind of like cultural appropriation.

Indeed. Seems kind of off to me. I'm a bit of a stickler for choosing names within our particular cultural heritage, though - I even decided against Jean-Luc because it seemed pretentious for a non-French child. (OK, and because we're Trekkies and the poor kid woukd get laughed at...)

I would NOT name my child something I hated. Nope. No way. Too much of a control freak for that. Plus, my family would assume I liked it and that would annoy me. I wouldn't feel bad about vetoing, given that DH is the king of vetoes. At nine weeks pregnant he's vetoed, oh, about three dozen of the names I've suggested, and come up with three. Which I vetoed, but I vetoed two of them last pregnancy as well, so he shouldn't have been surprised. The third was Alejandro, which I don't absolutely hate, but the combination of cultural appropriation and "nobody in New Zealand will be able to pronounce that" won the day.

If you want to do the super-rational-seeming guilt trip, you could write a letter back to him explaining the cultural appropriation issue, the need to respect your intense dislike of the name, the pretty-darn-near certainty that your child would be crucified in the playground with a name like that, and the fact that you don't want to cringe when you say his name for the rest of your life. I don't see how he could fail to respect that. Using it as a middle name is MORE than generous!

[Qbear'smama]

The thing is, with a middle name, HE can call the child by that name if he chooses to but the child would not be known by it everywhere. Some families call their kids by their middles and it's just a family thing (all my cousins are called by their middles in the family and by first names by others). So really, if you agree to the middle name, your DH can still use it all he wants and that can 'fulfil his dream' as it were, with less of an impact on the child. I would not be able to understand why the middle name isn't good enough, most everyone has quirky middle names because that's the place to honour people whose names don't quite work as firsts, right??

[roslyn]

Originally Posted by la mamita

i like the name, but i can totally understand not wanting to use a name you hate. i think it would be appropriate to use as a middle name OR for a pet. in fact i think it's more appropriate for a pet. i definitely think that veto power is in order and should be respected by both parents.

i also would shy away from the name because if you are not native american, it sounds kind of like cultural appropriation. perhaps that's a new argument you can use?

It's cultural appropriation to use for a child, but not for a pet? Personally I think it's downright insulting to suggest naming a dog for a great American hero, but hey, that's just me. Further, unless they start dressing the child in Native American clothing and the like, I can't imagine that it would be seen as cultural appropriation. Tecumseh was an AMERICAN hero, the fact that he was Shawnee does not negate that fact. After Braveheart no one would bat a lash if I, an African-American chose to name my child William Wallace, even though I'm obviously not of Scots heritage.

...because his name will be so complicated to pronounce...you have to admit it is a little more diffucult to say than Scott or Shawn...

Interesting. I don't find it difficult to pronounce at all. Besides people will mangle even the most common names. My son's name is Luke. Four letter, one syllable. He didn't get to take his bow at his baseball All-Star game because the announcer screwed it up so badly he didn't even recognize it.

[EdnaMarie]

No names with "cum" in them is not a bad rule to have.

I would name my child a name I hated IF it was a family name. DH's mom, for example. Luckily for us that is not the case, but I would do it.

Otherwise, if it was just a kind of philosophical / artistic attachment to a name, no, I'd dig my heels in.

As someone that is not officially a member of a tribe but with Native American heritage, I would not blanch at a white kid named Tecumseh. 'Bout time someone took Indian history seriously. I do think that is pretty cool... in theory.

If you do go for it, what about Tekumseh? Just because... you know...

[pumpkin]

There are an infinite number of names available. I think that both parents should love the name selected. There were a few names that I was quite disapointed that DH vetoed, but such is life.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Smokering]

It's cultural appropriation to use for a child, but not for a pet? Personally I think it's downright insulting to suggest naming a dog for a great American hero, but hey, that's just me. Further, unless they start dressing the child in Native American clothing and the like, I can't imagine that it would be seen as cultural appropriation. Tecumseh was an AMERICAN hero, the fact that he was Shawnee does not negate that fact. After Braveheart no one would bat a lash if I, an African-American chose to name my child William Wallace, even though I'm obviously not of Scots heritage.

But African-Americans don't, as far as I'm aware, have a history of oppressing and marginalising Scots and trotting out certain bowdlerised aspects of their culture when they want to be cutesy. (Pocahontas Halloween costumes, anyone?) So it's not the same thing. Plus, by virtue of being a very common name, William isn't immediately linked in the public mind with any one historical figure.

As far as the dog thing goes, where I live it's pretty common to name dogs after people or characters you admire. It's not considered degrading, because most people love their dogs and don't think "dog" is an insult. So if I heard a dog was called Martin Luther or William Wallace or Pocahontas or Captain Hook or Henry the Eighth, I think I'd just take it as a tribute. Dog breeds don't correspond to human races anyway, so it's not like a dog could be any less Shawnee than, say, British.

[lookatreestar]

seriously, it doesn't sound like a bad p0rn. that is just being dramatic. i actually don't mind the name, but obviously if you cannot stand it then it won't work.

and i don't buy into the he/she will be made fun of crap. honestly i cannot believe people still consider that while naming children anymore. sad.