Results 41 to 45 of 57
Thread: Opinions on India
July 18th, 2013 10:06 AM #41Senior Member
- Join Date
- Jul 2013
The point isn't what the people using the name are thinking. The point is that they're NOT thinking about how potentially harmful their name choice is. If you don't have a connection to India, don't name your daughter India. No one is going to divorce that from the country, and the less privileged CAN'T divorce it from colonialism and murder. Is it really worth it to give your daughter a name that is a political statement, whether you mean it to be or not?
July 18th, 2013 10:25 AM #43
India during the 16th and 17th C. People not using the name *because* of the ugly colonial history doesn't mean the name doesn't *have* an ugly colonial history. The existence of British Indians is equally irrelevant. I don't have a problem with the UK and I wouldn't really expect people of Indian descent to either. That doesn't mean the UK didn't do some horrible things during the time of the British Raj which are implicit in the name India, whether the givers of the name do so intentionally or not.Mother to two lovely kiddos, Mila Arden and Cato Bennett
Currently dreaming of...
Atlas, Callahan, Caius, Ezra, Bram, Atticus, Aspen, Sylvan, Constantine, Perrin & Pascoe
Lyra, Elodie, Elowen, Isis, Artemis, Sylvia, Vesper, Anouk, Willa, Cassia, Elka & Sage
July 18th, 2013 10:29 AM #45
I don't care for it. I have only heard about the controversy surrounding the use of India as a name here on Nameberry, so I'm not going to address that except to say I would probably avoid any name that I heard might be controversial, if only to spare my child from having to deal with the consequences of having a potentially offensive name when they grow up. But, here's why I really dislike it: when I hear India (or any place name, really) being used as a given name, I wonder why the parents chose it. Do they have some connection to the country? If so, why not use an actual Indian name? And if not, is it just being used because it sounds exotic? If so...why not use an actual Indian name (or any other actual name that sounds exotic to you)? I'm not 100% against the use of place names in names, but maybe in the middle spot if it has significance (I feel the same about word names)? I just can't help but wonder how awkward a person named India would feel if they ever traveled to India. So, basically...it's just not my style. Ha!
July 18th, 2013 10:46 AM #47Senior Member
- Join Date
- Apr 2012
Anyway, the country has a colonial history, yes. I know what happened was horrible and I'm not denying it happened. I think where we disagree is what is implied by the name India. I don't have a problem with, nor does anyone I know and, it seems, most of the UK. But some people here on NB do- fine. That's your prerogative. Thus, we must agree to disagree. I don't think we'll ever convince each other otherwise
cassandrah, sorry for hijacking your thread!
July 18th, 2013 10:58 AM #49Senior Member
- Join Date
- Jun 2013
I don't want to poke the hornet's nest of India, but I just wanted to point out that I don't think Indiana is a suitable alternative. The etymology of Indiana is "land of the Indians," and this is culturally offensive as well. My Cherokee grandfather doesn't look very favorably upon being called an Indian. He's not from India. Sorry to get a bit off-topic, but I just bristle when I hear of people naming their kid Indiana and then the nonchalant suggestion of Indiana as a benign alternative to India.Current loves:Opal | SaffronWinslow | Hopper