To hate when people say in response to a name that they can't imagine Judge/CEO/Accountant having that name.

[squoosh]

These days names are chosen from such a wide and wacky pool that it's inevitable that in 50 years time when we're old and doddery and looking to draw up a will, speak to a financial adviser or surgeon that many of them will have names that seem silly to us. I'm thinking Lexie-Rae, Poppy, Spike, Jayden etc.

I hate lots of names and have very rudely said so on a number of occasions but this is my most hated reason. Are people basically saying that the name isn't middle class enough? I don't make a judgement on a person based purely on their name, I may make a judgement on the person who bestowed that name on them.

Do people honestly think that if someone is called Daisy-Boo she will be unable to study hard, get into a good university, gain a good degree and become a doctor/scientist whatever. Will her name physically prevent this? No it bloody won't.

If you do a search of barristers in the bar directory you find the name Hugh returns 102 results, the name Keith returns 2 and the name Kevin returns 1.

Just saying.

edgar no but they happened to have Dr Tabitha something on today.
What always amazes me about these threads is the way that the parents get blamed for limiting their child's prospects whilst the nobbles who are flinging the CVs into the bin escape approbation.

Don't tell me not to pick a name that reflects my child's cultural background, suits him aNd makes me smile because of some else's unreasonable prejudice.

How does that work with the traditional housemaid's names?
Do all the floras and Maud's still work below stairs?
The ones attached to th MC mums at DS"s nursery don't seem like they are destined for a life of servitude.

From what I gather from this thread, people are assuming that the people in charge of selecting candidates for a job are going to look at the unusual name, assume they are working class (gasp)/have hippie parents/have parents who liked the name and then choose the applicant called Thomas instead? I seriously doubt it.

Just saying what, StillSquiffy ? That posh people (if Hugh is indeed a posh name, I imagine that's your point) are more likely to become barristers. Quelle surprise.

Unfortunately koykarp it is an indisputable fact that if you send out two identical cvs, one from Catherine and one from Des'Ree or Kalpana (or James vs Tyrese vs Rajesh) then Catherine and James will get offered loads more interviews. It's a dead simple hypothesis to test, and whenever it gets tested it is sadly proved right.
But all the experiments I've seen refer to names suggestive of ethnic origin, I've not seen any which tests class-suggestive names independent of race. I think there have been experiments done on the way "girly" female names influence perception, including examiners' assessments, with Catherine coming out ahead of Betty-Lou on identical scripts , but I'm not sure about that one - maybe someone can find a link?

Of course, given that there are prejudiced people out there (consciously so or not), the question as a parent is how much you let that influence your naming choices. As a pp said, it would be mad and wrong to not have a mixed-race child for fear of racism. But maybe on something like a name pragmatism is the better (if sadder) approach.

Luckily examiners don't see names on scripts for most exam boards these days. Maybe all job interviews should be the same, taking place behind a two way mirror.

Just a thought.

pubic sector is trying with the points system for short listing and interviews.

It would be interesting to test the theory, I can't help but think the interviewer will be looking at qualifications/experience over having a middle class name though.

If however I am wrong, and a candidate were to be discriminated against because their name was unusual/working class, I may suggest my DC's use their middle names when applying for jobs... I really don't think it will come to that though, especially in 20 years time.

Poor/WC does not = certain names. There are 1000s of WC kids with normal names.

Just to add, obviously the right answer is for cvs and exam scripts to be triaged without names.

I am reminded of the interesting results that occurred when leading US orchestras decided to do their auditions blind. Even the ones which would have claimed not to be gender-biassed (and actually many were happy to admit to the most appalling prejudice) suddenly discovered to their shock that many of the best candidates happened to be women.

NarkedRaspberry - Do you mean that in reply to my post? I agree, I was using that as an example as a lot of posters have suggested that only working class parents give their children unusual names, not that all working class people have unusual names.

I would laugh if my DD2 who has a very MC name according to MN ,was thought to be from a nice MC background.

How wrong would the person discriminating on names alone would be.

"I can't help but think the interviewer will be looking at qualifications/experience over having a middle class name though"

where my dad used to work they binned all CVs that had "funny" email addresses before even looking at qualifications, he told me to only ever have non humerous variations of my name in my email address, at least the one I use for applying for jobs, so qualifications are not the first thing that is looked at

have also heard that stapled CVs get binned in some companies

My eldest DD would be chucked on the reject pile straight away though

I didn't. I meant that it's not a WC vs MC names thing. It's a clear divide between names that have a long history of being a used as names in the UK and names that are made-up/recent American imports or have 'unusual' spellings.

eg What class is someone with James on their birth certificate?

I must say we've only ever had a good reception when telling people our son's names apart from my Grandma who wrote us a letter begging us not to use the names , people tend to say that's a really cool name. If we ever did get a negative reception I tend think it would say more about the person judging than it did about my sons and their names.

I know Jameses of all backgrounds, the manual working ones go by Jim or Jimmy (with one exception - a solicitor, but quite a bent one) and the professionals go by James

There was a study which showed that people will favour information presented by someone with a less complicated name. There were two fake investment reports produced, one by someone with an easily pronouncable name, and one by someone with a complicated name. People more readily accepted the information presented by the person with the less complicated name - people do judge, whether or not we're aware of it or want to.

But, it can be overcome. I know a very young and highly successful lawyer (Partner in big firm) who's name is Sunny.

Exactly MonkeyMoma. They could be any class.

How could you tell what sort of background a Vijay has or a Mohammed?

They're proper names.

There are 1000s of asian Drs and lawyers etc. No one would even know if their names were considered 'chavvy' or not.

And???? Does that make Armani less laughable?

"Exactly MonkeyMoma. They could be any class"
yes, because James is not a limiting name!