• Maalus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    It’s not rarer, it’s unique. And just because something is unique, doesn’t mean it is good. You don’t think about yourself when naming a child. You think about the child. That’s why all of this is bullshit. If you want your kid to change their name / use their middle name, then go ahead - be selfish and go with “blessica”. I can already see five different ways the name can be twisted, and believe me, other kids will find fifty more.

    I know multiple people with “unique” names or surnames. Some are in the process of changing them - start using a new surname, to later make it official in their papers. The kid won’t be unique or looked at favourably because they have a unique name either.

    • webadict@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      By that logic, forcing any name on a child is selfish, so they should pick their own name, since they are the ones that would have it. Although, in that case, temporary names would probably be a thing, so I don’t really see the issue (or you could use other cultural naming conventions like that, but that is one that exists.)

      Unless your argument is nonconformity is selfish? I personally think some people will find a reason to make fun of another person, but nominative determination does have its appeal if you don’t believe that.

      All names were unique at some point, but that’s a moot point. Eventually they will either become more popular or less popular.