I’ve seen a lot of discourse on here about whether certain names are problematic (most of the time being potentially culturally insensitive in some way) and I was just wondering, do you think that if somebody was given a “problematic” name by their parents, then they have a responsibility to change it, legally or informally? Does it depend on the specific name, or whether their parents were willfully ignorant or just didn’t fully understand the name’s implications?
On one hand I feel like it’s a little unfair to say someone has a responsibility to change their name when they weren’t the one responsible for choosing it in the first place, particularly if it’s already cemented itself as part of their identity, but at the same time just because they weren’t the one who chose it doesn’t mean it couldn’t negatively affect others (especially if it makes somebody feel as if their culture is being stolen or fetishized), which could be completely avoided if they went by something else.
Anyway I’m just curious what people think, I don’t think there are necessarily any right or wrong answers here but I’d be interested in hearing some different perspectives.
1 Like
Not unless the people who are offended are willing to pay all the costs associated with a legal name change.
I honestly think it’s ridiculous to suggest that somebody should change their name just because someone somewhere (who might not even represent the views of 1% of their community) might hear it and feel offended by it.
4 Likes
imo this weighs heavier than the other side. Cultural significance is valid and important, but it’s also usually abstract, while someone’s name is very, very concrete, and taking it away is invasive.
Of course I can see why people would want to change their name, but outside pressure to do so is crossing a boundary, no matter for what reason.
5 Likes
No, if it’s already their name, then they shouldn’t have to change it, unless they want to (which I feel some people would). I think if we were to start expecting people to change their names with every widening of knowledge and understanding or with every societal event, then it would quickly become very complicated. I’m thinking of the people who were named [name_f]Isis[/name_f], for example, before new associations emerged. I specifically remember this video about it.
Still, I guess it depends on the person and on the name 
2 Likes
No, not a responsibility by any stretch of the imagination. It wasn’t their choice and it’s now their name, part of their identity.
If someone felt actively uncomfortable being named something that they felt was not the best choice by whoever had named them, for cultural reasons, then of course I’d understand and support them changing it. But they’re not obliged to do so.
6 Likes
Of course not. Changing your name is complicated and time-consuming, involving reams of paperwork, exorbitant fees and court appearances. And names are an essential part of a person’s identity – forcing someone to change it would be erasing that.
6 Likes
I have a very strong opinion about this ‘name gatekeeping’ or any cultural gatekeeping really. I believe that the world is a better place if it’s generous, open, kind, chill and not weirdly petty and jealous. Obviously I don’t tolerate any mockery, that’s a different thing. But yeah, I would be so excited if someone from Japan would have a name from my small country. I would take this as a compliment. I know most people would be excited in my country. So yeah, if someone would tell me that my name [name_f]Gretchen[/name_f] offends them, because I don’t have enough [name_m]German[/name_m] blood… I would really laugh… or offer them a snickers… or bite them. Maybe all at the same time 
This is very much just my opinion, I respect it if someone disagrees.
So yeah, I think the only reason for someone to change their name is when they don’t love their name.
4 Likes
I also wonder, who gets to decide whether a name is “insensitive” or not? A name might be considered perfectly normal in one country or community but “problematic” in another. Some English-speaking Christians find “Jesus” as a given name to be offensive, for example . Does that mean anyone who has that name should change it just in case they encounter someone who is offended by it? [name_m]Even[/name_m] if it’s a perfectly normal and inoffensive name in their own culture?
Likewise, some Americans might find names like “Osama” and “Jihad” to be problematic because of recent history, but (from what I understand) those are fairly normal names in Arab or Muslim communities.
I also question the idea that a person can be genuinely be negatively affected by somebody else’s given name. I can definitely see how somebody might be negatively psychologically impacted by their own name because of other people’s negative views on it (Adolf would be a good example of that). But I don’t really see how other people’s names can affect someone in a concrete way.
3 Likes
I don’t think anyone has a duty to change their name because someone else feels it’s problematic. Everyone has their opinion of what counts as being problematic, and it’s impossible to please everyone. Additionally it’s your name, so I don’t think other people should be making you feel like you have to change your entire identity because they say so.
2 Likes