Does anyone really judge a child by their name these days ?

[muscatmama]

I was idly browsing the internet for mention of the name that we are strongly considering for our soon-to- be born 3rd child and I was really surprised at how aggressively some people seem to dislike some names (this one in particular it seems) I know it's the internet, there are no boundaries, trolling is rife etc - but I really have never had such a strong reaction to any name - I just tend to think 'not my cup of tea' and judging by the names in my DS and DD's classes - anything goes really. I was also surprised by the amount of people, including teachers, who suggested that a child would be bullied because of their name. Surely the problem is with the bullies and not the name? What do people think - is giving your child a name that isn't in the Top 100 really doing them such a great disservice?

And they're very 'white' names.

That's what it all boils down to really, isn't it it Mitzy. In order to "pass the high court judge test" (which should be renamed the Mumsnet Name Quality Test) you have to either be white or try to make sure people think you'll be white on paper.

It is the parents you are judging, not the child as such. But the child is a product of their parents and in MOST cases, if the parents have been daft enough to give their child an awful name, the child is going to be struggling.

Not every time. But most times.

Mercedes is quite a common name in Spain my assumption would be that the girl had Spanish ancestry

Bertie you are aware that Mr Benz named the car after his daughter? It's a perfectly ordinary name, just not that common in the UK.

But then do our usernames conjure up certain images/ thoughts?

"Nonetheless, if someone is really wrinkling their nose and discarding a CV on the basis of Jamie-Leigh rather than Jemima then they are brainless dimwits."

If the effect were so obvious that it led to obvious scorn, it would be much easier to spot and deal with. The effect of 'first impressions' is much more subtle, the stuff of glasss ceilings, and all too often unrecognised or 'othered'

I think some names do have unconscious assumptions attached to them. Not to the child or even the parent but sometimes it is an idea about the parent. I couldn't give a shit about Kai, Jai, Leon, Devon, Jayvon or whatever - doesn't provoke a response in me.

When I've met for example; a Keanu/River/Judd/Phoenix plus surname I've thought parents liked 80s/early 90s films.

When it's a DD named Princess plus anything (usually two names after so Princess Gracie May or Sidney May) I have an idea what the parent may be like. I can't help it. The names evoke an immediate response. It's not necessarily negative- but it does provoke a response.

I was asked to meet and assess a Devlin once (a boy and not exactly that name due to me respecting confidentiality) and had an idea of what he would be like and his family too on an unconscious level just by the name. I discovered he was extremely upper class (almost aristocracy) and his siblings had very classic names like Camilla, Antonia and Edward. So not at all what I anticipated.

I would judge the parents, if it was a name stupidly spelled or something like that.

I judge the parents more

midsomer and youredead but why? What exactly is it that you'd think about the parents?

So in the USA there are children called Espn after the parents favourite sports channel

Crap crap way of naming your child
As is Chardonnay Pinot Grigio or Sauvignon Blanc Or Shiraz etc

I would not go as far as having a list of authorised names as other countries have tried but there is a point where pickled spiders bum should not be encouraged as a name (or such like)
Fwiw I work in a v v multicultural school and there are so few children of British heritage that there is little judging of names as they are culturally v diverse

I would think they were a bit stupid, thoughtless. Naming a child is such a basic first step, why call it Jorja?

It doesn't matter if you think people are right or wrong to judge based on a name, or if most people do or don't judge. That fact is that some people do judge and some of those will have influence over a child's (and later adult's) life. So it's in the child's best interest to give them a sensible name. I don;t think that means in the top 100 necessarily, but a real (not made up) name that easily pronounced and spelt in the country where the child is likely to live.

Of course it matters. If people are going to judge children for their names (and because names are so closely linked to background, they are judging children - or adults- based on their background) then they are the ones who are wrong (and like Jessica said, it's not "right or wrong", it's wrong). Why the hell should anyone else have to change other than those in the wrong? Clearly it's those who have that "influence" that need to change.

Yes, that's why we had that component in our training.

Because making first impressions is pretty much a universal trait. And it takes conscious behaviour to overcome it.

And I'm a bit wary of posting this, because it might sound as if I'm having a go a specific posters but I'm doing it anyway because it was such a key point - those who think they don't do it are often the most rigid (when actually tested in scenarios)

It's not something that only 'other' (inferior) people do.

Yes, but Edith, surely to God you (general 'you') wouldn't be stupid enough to hold onto that, would you?

So I have a number of CVs and one is from Mohammed and a white British man turns up - I'd be surprised, he wouldn't be what I was expecting, but I wouldn't continue to think of him as a Muslim.

I'm honestly not sure the point that is being made here.

All sorts of people have children. Some are poor and some are overly influenced by current trends and celebrities. Some go for traditional and timeless names.

So do I 'know' those with 'poor' names are going to be stupid?

Well, no, because on a CV you have their qualifications as well

And then I was named after Ancient Greece so about as middle class or aspiring as you can get (think Adrian Mole's Pandora) but I go by a shortened form of it which sounds like a 'lower class' (darling) name.

One of the poshest families I know had a son named Morgan. Hasn't harmed him - he went to Oxford and is doing a PhD there.

Because let's be clear here, what people mean is 'thick.' People might thick you are from a thick family so you will stay in the dregs because even if you are actually quite bright, no one will give you a chance because of your name.

I don't think that's true. Statistically, social mobility is a bit of a myth and people do tend to stay roughly within the social class. There are loads and loads of Rebecca's and Alexandra's and Amy's from my generation from 'thick' families who have 'stayed poor' (haven't gone to university in other words.) Nothing to do with their name!

If Jaayyde is actually pretty switched on and does well then her qualifications speak for themselves.

Iirc it's been fairly well noted that a persons name can have a huge bearing on whether their CV is looked at or not.

You can scream "It's wrong!" all you like - but if you name your daughter Princess Tinkerbell there's a good chance she'll struggle to get a job.

In the case of foreign sounding names I believe the judgement is based on the first name + surname, and that will be true for all countries and cultures.

Do I judge a child by their name? No I don't, I judge the parents. Do I judge an adult by their name? Probably yes. I might pretend I don't but we are all guilty of following societal structure.

It might be worth noting that any judgement is not necessarily negative, so even if you think "what a pretty name" you are still judging it.

I doesn't matter what Edith would or wouldn't do. It's about what actually happens in the real world.

Of course it's wrong. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

Apart from the studies about how people's biases affect how they sift CVs, I've also seen studies about teachers' unconscious biased towards children based on names. Teachers are likely to make judgements about probable behaviour based on names. Children with 'traditional' and/or MC names get more behaviour rewards at school.

Of course it's wrong. But that doesn't mean it isn't real, or that parents shouldn't consider the impact on their children.

You can be as pure as you can possibly be and name your child something you love without weighing up social factors, based on how the world should be.

That won't actually change the way the world is. And the children will be the ones dealing with the impact.

I suppose I do quietly judge certain names for 30 secs or so when I first meet the child (judging the parents rather than the child) but I move on pretty quickly and wouldn't let it change how I treated the child

I help out at a junior sport club so come across a large number of children and once you get to know the child then their name is kind of incidental tbh, some of our loveliest kids have 'younique' names and it's very easy to get past if you like the child

I guess if the child is less likeable then having a daft name is just another thing to cloud your judgement

I"m afraid I judged a family member who called their child Macauly when Home Alone came out. I didn't judge the child, I judged the parents.

The "High Court judge" test is just bullshit anyway - by and large, most high court judges are called names which were popular with white middle class people 50 years ago. Jeremys, Nicholases and Stephens abound. Looking forward to the future, the judges of 50 years time are more likely to be Olivers and Harrys.

I mean, if you want a real high court judge name, you want to be calling them Launcelot

Plus, the first Asian woman high court judge : Bobbie. No doubt if that name was on here, it'd be a resounding no with lots of 'well, it's cute when she's younger, but...'

"Yes, but Edith, surely to God you (general 'you') wouldn't be stupid enough to hold onto that, would you?"

I'll do the non-stupid thing, and go with the evidence of what actually happens. Which is that, unless you are making a conscious effort to overcome the effects of a first impression, you are influenced.

Thinking this universal effect is restricted only to the 'stupid' flies in the face of the current evidence. Now, I'm not familiar enough with the literature to know if societal behaviour has changed a lot in the last 5 years or so, or if the weight of evidence before that time has been discredited.

Has it? Because if I'm hopelessly out of date about this, I'll stop posting it.

But as suspect that nothing has changed that much, and the effects of first impressions continue merrily away including among those who are unaware they're doing it.

BTW, the 'surprise' at a white Mohammed is a very good example of the effect. The conscious effort to ignore that is exactly what I'm on about.

Surely what we are discussing is just another form of bias. If it doesn't exist then someone should really inform all those daft scientist who spend their time blinding studies. It absolutely exists and of course there is an effect on your child.

I'm afraid people do judge.
Little Kaidan Jaxxon Smith and his classmate Peregrine Laurence Cholmondley-Smythe bring up different mental images, don't they?
Haha, very true!

Ugh bold fail!