(no subject)
Jul. 28th, 2006 03:52 pmIn response to my post about the name Mitanjeli, it was written that, "If a person who is not Indian uses the name, it's cultural misappropriation, and therefore offensive. If a girl who comes from an Indian-American family wants to "Americanize" her name as a teenager, that's something all together different, and Anji or Mitzi are perfectly fine, IMO. They're both cute."
I'm going to state my opinion on the matter, and I would like to hear what the members of this community think. This is not an attempt to flame, I'm earnestly curious about other's philosophies on the matter.
I, however, completely disagree with the comment. I am free to choose the name of my children based on whatever criterion I deem appropriate. Granted, names like Allah, Buddha, Krishna, even Muhammad, Jesus and many others on that scale would absolutely be offensive if used by someone outside-- possibly even inside-- that culture. However, just because a name has root in a specific culture does not mean it is off limits to me because I'm not of that descent.
It might look odd for a white, American parent to have a son named Pedro or Julio. But does that make it "cultural missappropriation?" I certainly think not. I have absolutely no Italian blood in me whatsoever and neither does my husband, but if I want to use the name Giovanni or Alessandra that is my prerogative and anyone who finds that offensive is just looking for something to be offended about. Granted, Indian names may not be highly popularized in our Western culture, but that does not make them "off limits" to a westerner simply because they are not Indian. If this is the case, then I should never hear an Indian child named Samantha or Jessica. After all, cultural missappropration doesnt care which culture you're "misappropriating."
Anyone else, thoughts?
I'm going to state my opinion on the matter, and I would like to hear what the members of this community think. This is not an attempt to flame, I'm earnestly curious about other's philosophies on the matter.
I, however, completely disagree with the comment. I am free to choose the name of my children based on whatever criterion I deem appropriate. Granted, names like Allah, Buddha, Krishna, even Muhammad, Jesus and many others on that scale would absolutely be offensive if used by someone outside-- possibly even inside-- that culture. However, just because a name has root in a specific culture does not mean it is off limits to me because I'm not of that descent.
It might look odd for a white, American parent to have a son named Pedro or Julio. But does that make it "cultural missappropriation?" I certainly think not. I have absolutely no Italian blood in me whatsoever and neither does my husband, but if I want to use the name Giovanni or Alessandra that is my prerogative and anyone who finds that offensive is just looking for something to be offended about. Granted, Indian names may not be highly popularized in our Western culture, but that does not make them "off limits" to a westerner simply because they are not Indian. If this is the case, then I should never hear an Indian child named Samantha or Jessica. After all, cultural missappropration doesnt care which culture you're "misappropriating."
Anyone else, thoughts?
no subject
Date: 2006-07-28 10:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-28 11:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-28 11:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-28 11:28 pm (UTC)I'm liking Shamu, there. Killer might be putting a few too many preconceptions on the poor child. Keiko's a nice Whelsh name but people might think she was Japanese.
no subject
Date: 2006-07-29 01:48 pm (UTC)