"Nicknames" as first names

I'm so glad my parents didn't give me the diminutive of my name that they used everyday. I hate it, my actual name gives me several choices like someone named Elizabeth could choose to be Liz, Lizzie, Beth, Betty or even be radical and use Elizabeth.

I'm with you. I don't understand why people don't just call their kid the shorter name if that's what they intend to refer to child as. And in no world is a name going to hold back a child in the future. Your little Tilly/Matilda is probably going to be in school with an Apple, a Romeo, and a Luna, a Princess and god knows who else. It's such an old fashioned way of thinking.

Seán is interchangeable with John to this day where in grew up

"It just goes against the whole concept of a nickname. The point of a nickname is to verbally express affection. If you use it as their actual name it becomes pointless."

Yes - nicknames. But shortened names aren't just nicknames and sometimes are other names entirely and they are not just about expressing affection, they are because people used to have massive families and very few names. So the name John might be the dad and a son, and sometimes even more than one son! So you get Jack used for a grown-up, not just Johnnie which might be the affectionate child one. Or Margaret and Elizabeth and Mary were so used that you get funny things like Polly being used for Mary (I think I've remembered that right). Or Daisy for Margaret. Which is obviously a nonsense these days. Polly and Daisy have been so widely used they are also now names in their own right.

I find it a bit weird that you might put Katie or Kate and not Katherine on the BC. But then I like Katherine and it links so easily to Katie. The other point being that people understand this link very well so it won't cause lots of hassle to do this. However putting Polly for Mary is now just majorly nonsensical. Polly is now a name in it's own right. Why is it so different from the other IE names? It sounds very similar. In the meantime, MN loves an ancient Greek IE sound at the end. Like Xanthe. Two syllables and an ie sound on the end. But somehow that's ok but it's not ok to be Polly or Daisy (both of which I've seen criticised on here as adult names?). Which are probably much more established names and probably easier to use for the owner? I would rather be either than a Xanthe. Nothing against anyone who loves Xanthe by the way but I don't think it'd be an easier name to have as an adult particularly. Would a judge Xanthe sound more the part than a judge Polly? I just took a look at judge names. There's a Lucy. Sounds fine. Would a Judge Lucille sound better or more authoritative? I don't think so. Would a judge Aurelia or Amelia or any of the long fashionable names have more gravitas than Lucy? I don't think so. What about people like Betty Boothroyd? After a lifetime of being Betty - wouldn't she just have sounded a bit silly suddenly insisting on calling herself Elizabeth when she gets the speaker role? Did she lack authority due to her name? Of course not. We think nothing of it as soon as someone with confidence steps in.

I suppose the other thing is that one person's "gravitas" is another person's pretention or just fussiness. It's like the parent who insists on calling the child by their full name whilst the child cringes and to everyone else is the usual shortening. When that name is really long and has "gravitas" that can be extra cringey for the child!

Not saying there is anything wrong with a longer name. Some are absolutely lovely and yes it might be nice to have options. I think things like Katherine, Elizabeth etc are so known and their many options so known that that's fine. I also understand someone who wants to call their child Eliza or Bethan might just go for that as both sound complete anyway. I think it might be a bit odd to be Lizzie with no Elizabeth as the connection is so strong anyway and people would assume it. But I don't think a longer name is necessary for a Lucy or a Polly or a Daisy. Or an Archie for that matter. Our associations change along with the names anyway and perhaps we should question ourselves a bit if we are thinking some names are not suitable for some roles as that is limiting others and a kind of prejudice really.

It's strange because some are acceptable and others not. Archie, Alfie, Ellie, as examples are generally accepted but Izzy, Millie, Lottie might get questioned.

On the gravitas- definitely think names like John or Paul or Mark (or whatever trad one syllable name you like) have more weight to them than Alfie or Jimmy.

Yes, John, Paul, Mark, Alfred, James have more gravitas than Jonnie, Paulie, Markie, or Alfie. The latter are cutesy nicknames to be used by family and close friends

@Confusion101 to answer your question about how they introduce themselves.

I'm Elizabeth. Mostly I go by Liz. When I meet someone new I introduce myself as Liz. On anything official I'm Elizabeth so usually if people are reading my name off a system etc that's what they use.

I really like my name and I love that I can shorten it to loads of different things. I don't think I'd like it if my parents had just put Lizzie on my birth certificate (the nn the used from me being born)

I think you’ve misunderstood my point. The lack of imagination is the people calling their baby Chuck instead of Charles or whatever because they fail to think that it might not be so amusing when the child is 40.

On the gravitas- definitely think names like John or Paul or Mark (or whatever trad one syllable name you like) have more weight to them than Alfie or Jimmy. Obviously some people aren’t interested in this 🤷‍♀️ I’m just giving my own view.

I quite like the Duke or Dustman test (as in, could the name work for either- if so, it’s a good name as it is). Alternatively, if the name you like sounds like a dog’s name (as some of these abbreviations do) maybe better to give the kid some options.

a diminutive name is lesser and in some way undignified
Personally I find Deborah, Isabel, Albert and Edward MUCH more dignified than Debs, Izzie, Albie or Eddie.

The point of a nickname is to verbally express affection. If you use it as their actual name it becomes pointless.

This.

Another example is Neighbour has a Magdalena, she’s always been called Lena, occasionally Leni by family .

They hate it when someone shortens it to Maggie, Magda or anything similar with the front part of the name, and find the full name ‘ old’. So they might as well just Named her Lena and used Leni as nickname if they wanted one.

I do agree with PP who say it depends on the nickname. Eg Freddie or Kate are so well established as names I wouldn't bat an eyelid to find out they weren't called Frederick or Katherine on their BC. But I would find it strange if someone was called Andy or Lizzie rather than Andrew or Elizabeth. Which when I type it makes absolutely no sense. Perhaps with the Freddie/ Frederick thing I'm influenced by the fact that Frederick is not that nice (ditto Archie/ Archibald).

I hate hate hate nicknames as names.

It just goes against the whole concept of a nickname. The point of a nickname is to verbally express affection. If you use it as their actual name it becomes pointless.

Also I love nicknames (just not on the BC) because of all the options. I never call my kids just one specific nicknames - I use different ones all the time. If my DS name was, say, Jeremy, as an exemple, I'd call him Jerry, Jay, Jer, Remy, etc. I wouldn't want to be limited to just the one nickname.

And then part of it I guess is that I just find it grating. Like looking at a text full of typos. The name just feels incomplete and wrong.

And finally, I can see no downside to using the proper name on the BC - doesn't stop you calling them Albie or Alfie or whatever everyday if you want to. So why not use the full name ?

I should clarify that this is solely my opinion /perception and I of course fully respect people's right to name their child whatever they want.

My parents debated for a long time about a diminutive or the classic name and in the end chose the long name and I'm so glad they did. Along the lines of Kate vs Katherine.

As a child I went by one nickname, at about 10 I swapped to another nickname (the diminutive my parents had considered as the full name) and then at about 18 started using my full name. Like Katie->Kate->Katherine. Close family still use the second nickname.

There's nothing exactly wrong with the diminutive and it's not super out there, I don't think it would have really hampered my career. I just prefer my proper name and like being able to choose between them.

I would always pick the full name for the birth certificate.

One of mine has Tommy on the birth certificate. If he thinks it's too babyish when he's an adult he can go by Tom or even Thomas if he wanted too. So far he refuses to be called anything other than Thommy

The comparison with one syllable traditional names (John or whatever) doesn’t work as these names already have gravitas.

😆

@BungleandGeorge agree, I don't get the angst.

I also don't understand why someone called Betty can't just use Elizabeth if a situation should arise where they want a formal name.

I don’t get it either. I believe in naming a baby exactly what you intend to call them.

people say they worry about having a formal name available, but really they should worry about the paperwork headache they are creating for their child if that child enters a field that involves rigorous background checks.

Give them the name you want, not the name someone else wants.

I have a ‘shortened’ name as my first name, it suits me, it is me, neither of the long versions of my name would suit me and they would never feel like me.

A middle name also gives them options, or if they hate all their names they can change it by deed poll.

I agree, name them what you want their name to be. End of.

I can honestly say I give very little thought to the names of adults that I meet. Unless it’s incredibly unusual or something it just doesn’t really register. I don’t think it has the enormous significance that some people make out, as long as it’s a recognised name just use whatever you like. The child can always change it. Or just go by their second name or a totally different name (which seems quite popular with the older generation!).

Putting a diminutive form on the bc always just seems like a lack of imagination to me- your child isn’t always going to be a newborn and later on might prefer the option of a name with a bit more gravitas. The comparison with one syllable traditional names (John or whatever) doesn’t work as these names already have gravitas.

ive never heard the name ‘John’ being called imaginative or full of gravitas 😂

@User6761 you see I don't quite get that. The archies I've met have never been introed as Archibald. Which is pretty dreadful let's face it. Yet before the Royal baby I only associated it with older men and didn't have a cutesy or childish association at all. The name Archie I associated with a particular sort of reserved older Scottish bloke. I think it only sounds cutesy because it's now the name of babies and toddlers and was previously an older man name. I don't like mumsnet"s snobbery about what people call diminutives. In some cases it makes sense and is nice to have the long name. In others it makes no sense. Depends on if you like the longer name I suppose. My parents gave me a longer name they didn't like to fit the short name I was being called. I absolutely hate it and changed it as soon as I could as it didn't feel like me at all. If people want to be formal there is always the surname option. I can't imagine having different names for different people. I would feel strange doing that.