Names and Careers

urbanefox has nailed it lullabelle I'm afraid.

I think it's down to a class thing in this country.
Different names are popular amongst different groups so you are more likely to have a heart surgeon called William than say Mason because parents who are likely to have a heart surgeon son are choosing different style names than the parents of say a brick layer.
I don't mean to offend with these views but I think it's the family from which you come that determines your likeliness of becoming a HCJ etc and those families simply have different taste/naming style

lullabelle85, you need to take your personal emotions out of this subject for a minute! Names and who chooses them and why and their cycles and usage in different countries is a fascinating subject. To write off any interest in name usage as ''yucky snobbishness' or whatever you're doing here is incredibly simplistic. You're taking people's interest in a fascinating subject and giving it the most negative and judgemental interpretation possible. So, em, pot = black

IMO, the colleagues sneering at Cherrbert's name are the ones with the problem, not Cherrbert herself. We shouldn't choose our children's names based on avoiding such judgemental twattery. Better to roll your eyes at the judgemental twats and move on.

I read the Freakonomics book. They talk about the guy with name Loser who does extremely well and his brother called Winner who struggles to achieve anything. I thought authors were saying both forces are at work, people can certainly overcome the disadvantage of a funny name but it may not be easy.

Seems to me that as funny names become more common then people will care less about them.

From what I've experienced so far that has been the case, I'm sure that not everyone is like that but it's put me off, isn't is supposed to be a friendly lighthearted site?

Oh dear saying the whole of mums net is judgy yucky snobs is itself extremely judgemental when only a handful of users have commented on this thread.

Oh dear such snobbery, I'm sure one of you is Katie Hopkins....who wants to have a name that was top 10 the year they were born?! Not me! And although Lilly-Mae or Gracie-rose aren't my cup of tea naming a child is down to personal taste and as they get older they can bloody well be Lilly or grace....who cares?! Maybe if people were less judgemental and stuck up it wouldn't matter if you were called John or jed or Jesus it's a name, it's a first impression but it doesn't therefore define a person. Mumsnet =judgy yucky snobs.

Really simply, yes, I think it's possible that giving your child a name that marks them (or realistically, you) out as a member of the lower-educational attainment/socio-economic stratae of society has the potential to disadvantage them.

Now, I have interviewed/ selected candidates for interviews etc, and I would like to think that their name is not something I particularly care about.

HOWEVER, I work with a number of older, more conservative (snobby?) types, and in fact, in my industry, they make up a significant proportion of the higher ranking management. The same is true of many other industries - law, medicine etc.

There is a woman I work with whose name is a mispelling of a type of sweet. Think something like Cherberrt. She's an accountant. She's lovely and her name is neither here nor there in her ability to do her job. However, I have heard more than one senior member of the team at work sneer "Cherberrt?? Is that really someone's name in accounts? Good grief!". Now, given that these people are happy enough to voice their prejuduces so openly, what if she had been applying for my job? WHere they would have been the people interviewing her. I guess it's not too much of a stretch to say they might have given her a harder time, or taken more to be coonvinced by her than by me, with my safe, classical Greek name.

Its a certain social group that are likely to rent rather than buy in the first place, so its not the best reflection on social mobility.

That's not true in all countries - there are parts of Europe where practically everyone rents, rich or poor, especially in cities. I don't know if Denmark is one of them but it wouldn't surprise me.

you have to know what you're doing with hyphenation. If it's French or Catholic, it's ok. ie, Anne-Sophie, Marie-Elle = acceptable

Lily-Mae, too cutesy, too on trend. Obviously this is just my opinion and worth no more than one opinion.

I can't see what's wrong with Lilly-Mae or Gracie-rose

For a baby / child....nothing. But for an adult, everything!

Your

It's not just the judgement of others as an adult but also you're experience as a child. Bullying, or lots of reference to have a princess/chavvy/studious/cool name etc can also become part of your identity and how you see yourself. Like if you're called darcy after the dancer then your more likely to think of yourself as good at dancing and this put more effort in at it and have more confidence.

I thought the point of the book was more to do with getting people to think that the world is a little more shades of grey than black and white than people use statistics and studies to 'prove'. Studies and stats can be interesting and useful, but you have to fully understand what they are really showing - and be aware of what their weaknesses are and what they don't show.

I do think that going x number of studies show this time and again is really bloody naïve. In fact this is why you have people like Ben Goldacre challenging this and why the Cochrane Institute was set up to review study findings and their methodology (although even Cochrane reviews have certain weaknesses).

I do remember reading the findings of a particular WHO study, and then a critical appraisal of the same study which looked at the figures compiled by WHO. Scarily, the conclusion drawn by this study when the figures were reviewed, revealed a biased on the part of those writing the study (which supported the general historic belief on the subject). The figures actually seemed to support a picture completely the opposite to what was reported. Indeed a couple of years later WHO did shift their recommendation in that direction somewhat.

Point being NEVER take stats at face value alone.

From the link to slate.com - DeShawn's name is an indicator not a cause of his life's path -
That is fairly conclusive - it's not the name its the socioeconomic background that has the biggest influence. It just happens that these names are more common in low socioeconomic groups.

"I had a good read of the freakonomics link and as far as I could see the results are fairly inconclusive."

I would say that's a fair summary of most of the dramatic 'findings' in the Freakonomics books - either they're inconclusive/overplayed, or they're no news to anyone with any basic knowledge of economics [grinn]

yes, I deal with people on benefits at work and I'd avoid saying anything that would imply I had stuff they didn't have. I dress simply. I don't act like a lovie. I'd avoid saying anything which implied I thought it was anything more than chance that I was on the other side of the counter. You know what I mean? Judgement is very much tailored to the field, but the person must have judgement!

"how would you feel if you went for an appointment with your surgeon and they had blue hair, multiple tattoos, multiple piercings and a (pick-your-own-choice-of-lower-class) accent. Would you trust them?"

In a professional context, particularly medicine, this shows bad judgment - which yes would be worrying.

It stands to reason that if you are dealing with a wide cross section of the public, you know many people will be offended or troubled by a very unconventional appearance. I would be concerned if a surgeon looked like that and I may very well not trust them. The lower class accent is irrelevant. It's the appearance which shows bad judgment.

There are two main issues

• subconscious bias; and
• overt prejudice.

The former is difficult to track but of course it makes a difference. Read this for race perception discussion in relation to names.

www.slate.com/articles/business/the_dismal_science/2005/04/a_roshanda_by_any_other_name.html

Subconscious bias works in two ways - prejudice against the name (which affects entry into competitive traditional professions) and the way a child is treated (which can affect character development and professional interests). Eg. if your surname is Doctor, you will have people saying to you "so are you going to become a dr then?". Equally, works with first names a girl called Fifi Trixibell is more likely to be treated by those with subconscious bias in a way that anticipates girly/feminine interest than a girl known as George.

Overt prejudice does happen. A friend of mine works in a very traditional old school snobby world and she told me that the man in charge of recruitment used to literally bin applications from graduates saying "We're not having anyone called Tracey/Kevin" working here.

So to answer the OPs post - yes of course names affect child opportunities and development. It's not so much being taken seriously at the end point - it's more about even having the opportunity to get there in the first place.

People are prejudiced - even subconsciously.

I don't think that the point has been missed at all. A discussion doesn't end because one person mentions studies that prove her point. Actually I had a good read of the freakonomics link and as far as I could see the results are fairly inconclusive. Anecdotal evidence is not evidence in itself but an accumulation of case studies does start to become evidence.
Several posters have pointed out correctly that statistics are a blunt instrument that while they do answer questions it does depend on what question was asked in the first place.

There are a lot of variables when it comes to poor name choices and future career prospects it is too simplistic to say that Priceless Pimpernell didn't make MD because of his name. His name may not have helped but if Priceless was that ambitious a name change is probable.

The whole point of a discussion is to hear different opinions not to stop having opinions just because one poster made their point bluntly.

Hard as it may be for some to understand many of us don't feel judgey at all about names. There are names that I don't particularly like but I really don't care if my surgeon is called Olivia, Ahmed or Priceless I will have researched their work and judged them by their reputation not their name.

I live in a 'nice' area. Married etc etc.

I saw a family support worker before I had DS as they thought I may need extra support because of previous mental health problems.

She made snotty remarks about unusual names like 'Apple'. I did think it unprofessional at the time and thought it would put some parents off an unusual name.

I also didn't see her again...

tying in with what lugo said, when the MW or HVs visited me, I was with a partner, not on benefits, but I think I knew deep down when I had children that it wouldn't work out with their dad, so I chose very conservative names. Names I'd have felt brave enough to use if we were married, financially secure, conservative etc... I reluctantly let them go for more respectable conservative names because in my heart I knew I'd made a mistake and I'd be a single parent one day. And yes, I was on benefits for a while. I'm glad my children weren't Coco and Bruno, but James and Emma (not actual names)

I wonder if there is more awareness now, because of the internet. An insight in to what people would never say, but what they really think, it's all to be found in its shocking glory somewhere on line.

Sociology student here and as others have said; time and time again this has been studied with the same conclusion judgement on names starts at nursery and continues though life. This creates an uneven playing field from day one restricting potential advantages to gain a good education, a good home and a good job.

What frustrates me is people who blindly refuse to understand how research works and believe anyone who mentions it is a snob or nasty.

I don't think it's right but I wouldn't lets child be cannon fodder just to rebel against social convention (but that's just me). You don't have to like something to accept it happens and conform to social norms.

This thread goes to show no matter what you are called or what you look like you will be judged, sometimes very severely and totally wrong. With that being said we should either all call our children Emily and Tom or just grow up!!