EDIT to add: Iām leaving this up for others to learn as I did, but I apologize for this statement and do not stand by my accusation of homophobia towards OP.
āā
I find the suggestion that a historic poet is āa loaded messageā simply because she was a lesbian to be homophobic. Whether you are gay yourself or not, we can all internalize homophobic messages.
If you donāt find names like Edgar Allen, William, Eliot or Sylvia to be loaded, then there is no reason ( other than homophobia ) to find Sapphos to be. Sapphos also isnāt typically known by most people anyways. What āmessageā do gay people send? What load do you think the children of gay parents are carrying?
Thereās simply no way to rationalize that statement IMO.
To be fair, [name_f]Sappho[/name_f] and [name_f]Lolita[/name_f] are normal names in certain cultures, so I wouldnāt necessarily make assumptions about why a person is called either of them. A heterosexual Greek couple using the name [name_f]Sappho[/name_f] almost certainly arenāt trying to make some kind of social statement.
Yes! I love the name [name_f]Lolita[/name_f]. I wouldnāt use it as I live in [name_u]North[/name_u] [name_u]America[/name_u] and the association is just too strong here, but itās such a beautiful name.
I was trying to get at something similar to this, but my migraine prevented me from explaining properly thank you for putting some of my thoughts into words more clearly!
if you genuinely think that a name meaning ālucifer is kingā is at all comparable to a name meaning ābeautiful sapphic love,ā iām not sure i have a lot more to say to you here.
I am gay and I love the name Sappho/have it in my combos, but I donāt think itās homophobic to be wary about giving your child a name that is so strongly associated with one person (at least in English) who is also very strongly associated with one āthemeā by the majority of people. It doesnāt give your child a lot of room for their own identity, and I donāt mean sexuality-wise but just in general - I would feel the same about a child named, I donāt know, Gothica [name_u]Shadow[/name_u] Eldritch. All of which are coolish names on their own actually, which I also think is being lost in the conversation here - OP never said [name_f]Sappho[/name_f] on its own was a negative association. But if my name was [name_f]Bella[/name_f] [name_f]Sappho[/name_f] [name_u]Love[/name_u] for example, I might feel like my name is making a statement - and even if that is a positive statement, it might not actually reflect me as a person, which would be a shame as itās my name and I should be able to forge my own identity within that. I like trees, but a child named [name_u]Elm[/name_u] Tree Lover might grow up and think, actually, maybe that is a bit much, maybe something like [name_u]Henry[/name_u] [name_u]Elm[/name_u] or [name_f]Joanna[/name_f] [name_u]Elm[/name_u] would have been a suitable nod to my parentsā beliefs/interests/hobbies and left me the space to make the name my own as well.
Well there is the fact that Sappho is not even in the same league of popularity as all those other names. It is heavily associated with lesbians, and again, giving yourself that name is one thing, bestowing a combo like Bella Sappho Love is an entirely different thing. And I didnāt say anything about the person doing it being gay. Again, giving that name to yourself is fine, but itās a lot to put on a literal infant. Agreeing with/liking the message is irrelevant.
I understand this explanation much more. I think the wording confused me a bit, so I do apologize for the original poster for suggesting homophobia as a reasoning! Hopefully they see this!
Though, I do still think [name_f]Bella[/name_f] [name_f]Sappho[/name_f] [name_u]Love[/name_u] is much more subtle than [name_u]Elm[/name_u] Tree Lover. Names like [name_m]Abdiel[/name_m], for example, mean Gods servant. This certainly isnāt a bad thing, but the child may not necessarily identify with that ā it reflects the parents beliefs more. However, itās not so much of an issue because it doesnāt read as a real statement, like your example does.
But I do see what youāre saying. Itās sort of in line of why I dislike the name [name_m]Elvis[/name_m] for boys ā it just feels like someone elseās identity, not the childās.
I understand more now why the full name [name_f]Bella[/name_f] [name_f]Sappho[/name_f] [name_u]Love[/name_u] isnāt a great idea! I honestly didnāt read into the meaning of the name [name_f]Bella[/name_f] at first. I appreciate most names for their sounds, so I forget about that aspect and thatās my fault. However I do still think the name [name_f]Sappho[/name_f] itself is a perfectly fine option, and recognize that you never said it wasnāt now! [name_f]My[/name_f] apologies.
This may be time for my own hot take, since the name [name_m]Lucifer[/name_m] was mentioned. I love the name [name_m]Lucifer[/name_m] and I love the meaning light bearer! Itās such a positive meaning and beautiful sounding name. I really wish it didnāt have the bible connection, the negativity of that character is too much for me. Especially since my (or any) child may follow religion one day.
[name_f]Lilith[/name_f] for me is the complete opposite ā hate the negative meaning, love the sound and the biblical character! Thereās no winning.
I absolutely agree with giving your children names that they can make their own rather than ones that are already loaded with very specific associations. Itās the same as using the name [name_m]Sherlock[/name_m], Einstein or [name_m]Shakespeare[/name_m] or [name_m]Jesus[/name_m] (w/ the [name_f]English[/name_f] pronunciations) to me. They make an impression on whoever that person meets before they get to say a single word; they come with such strong associations that they will have turned into assumptions for many people, or maybe expectations.
Thatās not to say that those are negative, but they are strong; of course some children/people could handle those names, could just shrug it off when somebody says āso are you like really smart / a good writer / can you heal peopleā either as a joke or seriously, but then there are also a lot of people who probably couldnāt and whom those comments would affect very negatively even if they were not meant to be that way.
A [name_m]Shakespeare[/name_m] getting low grades in [name_f]English[/name_f], a [name_m]Sherlock[/name_m] being slow to understand things, an Einstein who fails science class, a [name_m]Jesus[/name_m] who has a short temper and easily gets frustrated - I feel like that would be really difficult for people with those names.
And when names are linked to such personal things as oneās own identity, I feel like the possibility of the āfailureā of a name becomes even bigger - I donāt see the name [name_u]Gay[/name_u] coming back in style, for example, even if 50s names will become trendy again at some point.
I was speaking only about the name [name_f]Sappho[/name_f], I agree with others that while more subtle, [name_f]Bella[/name_f] [name_f]Sappho[/name_f] [name_u]Love[/name_u] isnāt the best name to give a child.
I enjoyed this interesting conversation, thank you to everyone who put their own thoughts in! Itās always great hearing everyoneās opinions and feelings on a subject. I definitely appreciate getting to discuss topics like this with mature, understanding people!! I am also incredibly grateful that this conversation stayed about making sure a child has their own identity when giving them a name, instead of drifting into homophobic territory (which Iāve unfortunately seen happen on here too often than Iād like)!
also, just to be clear, @Inlakesh I never thought you were being homophobic! and I apologize if me starting this conversation lead to you, or anyone else, having any negative feelings. I was genuinely interested in this discussion, not trying to call anyone out or start an argument.
@OpheliaFlora I like your comparison to Einstein and [name_m]Sherlock[/name_m], thatās a good point when it comes to [name_f]Sappho[/name_f] and other names associated with someone so strongly. Itās definitely something to consider when actually using a name such as those!
I see things have cleared themselves up here so I donāt have a lot more to add. [name_m]Just[/name_m] this one though I had reading this: If I heard a girl being called [name_f]Sappho[/name_f] by her peers, Iād assume it was a nickname based on her sexuality and/or presentation. Iād probably spend a lot of time trying to figure if it was a way of mocking her or if she was actually ok with it before considering the possibility that itās her name.
[name_f]Sappho[/name_f], [name_m]Adonis[/name_m], [name_m]Nimrod[/name_m], [name_f]Nemesis[/name_f], [name_u]Beau[/name_u], [name_f]Xanthippe[/name_f], Narciss and Tussi were all originally names, but their figurative meanings have taken over (not for everyone, and not all to the same degree) and that makes them a lot less usable as names. I wonder if we will witness something similar in our lifetimes with names like [name_u]Kyle[/name_u], [name_m]Chad[/name_m], [name_f]Karen[/name_f] or [name_m]Stan[/name_m] becoming so synonymous with their stereotypes that they stop being names. It might already have happened to [name_m]Dick[/name_m].
This is super late but just happened to remember and look this up, the only legit one I found was Viator which is technically the masc version of Beatrix and Viatrix but theyāre all variants of Beatrice so it applies to that as well
This might be too hot of a take, but itās been stewing in my head for forever and I just have to put it out thereā¦
Combos donāt belong to any one person.
This whole āadopting combosā and āis this anyoneās comboā seems so silly to me, because itās a name. [name_f]Do[/name_f] you honestly think that your child is going to be the only person in the world with that first and middle name? [name_m]Even[/name_m] if it is unique, it doesnāt make it yours.
(this is not meant to offend anyone! i genuinely apologize if it does! this just my own personal feelings on the matter!)
thank you for putting some of my thoughts into words more clearly!