Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, as another compromise, what about a great grandfather's name or using the grandfather's middle name?

I also disagree with the sentiment that following a cultural and family tradition is anti-woman. It's not. Traditions can be meaningful to a family and create a sense of history and belonging for a child. They can also evolve over time, but I don't think it should be thrown out flippantly.

Not all traditions are anti-woman, but this one clearly is, given that it cuts the mother out of naming her own child, as well as ensuring her child can’t be named to honor anyone on her side of the family. It doesn’t get much more anti-women than that.

DP here. And I don't see this. They could pick a middle name that is from the mom's side. If it's helpful, DH has his father's first name. His middle name is his maternal uncle's (who died very young) first name. He goes by his middle name. DH is white, and these choices weren't cultural/traditional...but this kind of thing is completely doable. Interestingly, DH's first name is very common in the US, whereas his middle name is not and often bungled by Americans (would not be in the UK). He goes by it nonetheless.

If that’s equal, they can pick Hani as a middle name, right?

Also I understood in a previous post the same tradition has the fathers name as the middle. So the tradition cuts out the woman entirely. But that’s ok she’s just carrying and delivering and caring for the child, why should the fact that she dislikes the name matter?

Not exactly. Majority of Arabs simply don’t have middle names. Name is the following: “x, son of y, son of z, son of m, son of…. ,last name. With a girl it would be “x, daughter of y, son of z, son of m, son of…. Last name.” So lots of Arabs dunno where to put “son of y son of z of of m” so then they just put fathers name is middle name spot. But it’s not a middle name and the “son of” part can go on forever. Other Arabs living in the west don’t make this substitution and instead adopt the western practice of giving their child a middle name. And others just leave it blank. So basically there is no middle name tradition in the Arab world. Arabs living here are confused over what to put as the middle name. Some pick a middle name, some just substitute the fathers name (which is not a middle name) and others leave it blank. For our daughters we put my husbands name. Out of our friends, two families did what we did, 3 left it blank, and 5 families picked a middle name for their child.

Right...so the tradition is to only honor the fathers side. Since none of those son-ofs have anything to do with the mother/brood mare.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, as another compromise, what about a great grandfather's name or using the grandfather's middle name?

I also disagree with the sentiment that following a cultural and family tradition is anti-woman. It's not. Traditions can be meaningful to a family and create a sense of history and belonging for a child. They can also evolve over time, but I don't think it should be thrown out flippantly.

Not all traditions are anti-woman, but this one clearly is, given that it cuts the mother out of naming her own child, as well as ensuring her child can’t be named to honor anyone on her side of the family. It doesn’t get much more anti-women than that.

DP here. And I don't see this. They could pick a middle name that is from the mom's side. If it's helpful, DH has his father's first name. His middle name is his maternal uncle's (who died very young) first name. He goes by his middle name. DH is white, and these choices weren't cultural/traditional...but this kind of thing is completely doable. Interestingly, DH's first name is very common in the US, whereas his middle name is not and often bungled by Americans (would not be in the UK). He goes by it nonetheless.

If that’s equal, they can pick Hani as a middle name, right?

Also I understood in a previous post the same tradition has the fathers name as the middle. So the tradition cuts out the woman entirely. But that’s ok she’s just carrying and delivering and caring for the child, why should the fact that she dislikes the name matter?

Not exactly. Majority of Arabs simply don’t have middle names. Name is the following: “x, son of y, son of z, son of m, son of…. ,last name. With a girl it would be “x, daughter of y, son of z, son of m, son of…. Last name.” So lots of Arabs dunno where to put “son of y son of z of of m” so then they just put fathers name is middle name spot. But it’s not a middle name and the “son of” part can go on forever. Other Arabs living in the west don’t make this substitution and instead adopt the western practice of giving their child a middle name. And others just leave it blank. So basically there is no middle name tradition in the Arab world. Arabs living here are confused over what to put as the middle name. Some pick a middle name, some just substitute the fathers name (which is not a middle name) and others leave it blank. For our daughters we put my husbands name. Out of our friends, two families did what we did, 3 left it blank, and 5 families picked a middle name for their child.

Right...so the tradition is to only honor the fathers side. Since none of those son-ofs have anything to do with the mother/brood mare.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, as another compromise, what about a great grandfather's name or using the grandfather's middle name?

I also disagree with the sentiment that following a cultural and family tradition is anti-woman. It's not. Traditions can be meaningful to a family and create a sense of history and belonging for a child. They can also evolve over time, but I don't think it should be thrown out flippantly.

Not all traditions are anti-woman, but this one clearly is, given that it cuts the mother out of naming her own child, as well as ensuring her child can’t be named to honor anyone on her side of the family. It doesn’t get much more anti-women than that.

DP here. And I don't see this. They could pick a middle name that is from the mom's side. If it's helpful, DH has his father's first name. His middle name is his maternal uncle's (who died very young) first name. He goes by his middle name. DH is white, and these choices weren't cultural/traditional...but this kind of thing is completely doable. Interestingly, DH's first name is very common in the US, whereas his middle name is not and often bungled by Americans (would not be in the UK). He goes by it nonetheless.

If that’s equal, they can pick Hani as a middle name, right?

Also I understood in a previous post the same tradition has the fathers name as the middle. So the tradition cuts out the woman entirely. But that’s ok she’s just carrying and delivering and caring for the child, why should the fact that she dislikes the name matter?

Not exactly. Majority of Arabs simply don’t have middle names. Name is the following: “x, son of y, son of z, son of m, son of…. ,last name. With a girl it would be “x, daughter of y, son of z, son of m, son of…. Last name.” So lots of Arabs dunno where to put “son of y son of z of of m” so then they just put fathers name is middle name spot. But it’s not a middle name and the “son of” part can go on forever. Other Arabs living in the west don’t make this substitution and instead adopt the western practice of giving their child a middle name. And others just leave it blank. So basically there is no middle name tradition in the Arab world. Arabs living here are confused over what to put as the middle name. Some pick a middle name, some just substitute the fathers name (which is not a middle name) and others leave it blank. For our daughters we put my husbands name. Out of our friends, two families did what we did, 3 left it blank, and 5 families picked a middle name for their child.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, as another compromise, what about a great grandfather's name or using the grandfather's middle name?

I also disagree with the sentiment that following a cultural and family tradition is anti-woman. It's not. Traditions can be meaningful to a family and create a sense of history and belonging for a child. They can also evolve over time, but I don't think it should be thrown out flippantly.

Not all traditions are anti-woman, but this one clearly is, given that it cuts the mother out of naming her own child, as well as ensuring her child can’t be named to honor anyone on her side of the family. It doesn’t get much more anti-women than that.

DP here. And I don't see this. They could pick a middle name that is from the mom's side. If it's helpful, DH has his father's first name. His middle name is his maternal uncle's (who died very young) first name. He goes by his middle name. DH is white, and these choices weren't cultural/traditional...but this kind of thing is completely doable. Interestingly, DH's first name is very common in the US, whereas his middle name is not and often bungled by Americans (would not be in the UK). He goes by it nonetheless.

If that’s equal, they can pick Hani as a middle name, right?

Also I understood in a previous post the same tradition has the fathers name as the middle. So the tradition cuts out the woman entirely. But that’s ok she’s just carrying and delivering and caring for the child, why should the fact that she dislikes the name matter?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, as another compromise, what about a great grandfather's name or using the grandfather's middle name?

I also disagree with the sentiment that following a cultural and family tradition is anti-woman. It's not. Traditions can be meaningful to a family and create a sense of history and belonging for a child. They can also evolve over time, but I don't think it should be thrown out flippantly.

Not all traditions are anti-woman, but this one clearly is, given that it cuts the mother out of naming her own child, as well as ensuring her child can’t be named to honor anyone on her side of the family. It doesn’t get much more anti-women than that.

DP here. And I don't see this. They could pick a middle name that is from the mom's side. If it's helpful, DH has his father's first name. His middle name is his maternal uncle's (who died very young) first name. He goes by his middle name. DH is white, and these choices weren't cultural/traditional...but this kind of thing is completely doable. Interestingly, DH's first name is very common in the US, whereas his middle name is not and often bungled by Americans (would not be in the UK). He goes by it nonetheless.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We named our DD a first name she never uses. But we are not Arab.

I’m a white person who goes by my middle name. It’s not a big deal. First day of school teacher called out FIRSTNAME? I said actually I go by MIDDLENAME teacher stopped made a quick note. No problem.

OP - you can do this!

Actually, it’s very annoying to have to the teachers and everyone you meet to call you by your middle name.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We named our DD a first name she never uses. But we are not Arab.

I’m a white person who goes by my middle name. It’s not a big deal. First day of school teacher called out FIRSTNAME? I said actually I go by MIDDLENAME teacher stopped made a quick note. No problem.

OP - you can do this!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We named our DD a first name she never uses. But we are not Arab.

I’m a white person who goes by my middle name. It’s not a big deal. First day of school teacher called out FIRSTNAME? I said actually I go by MIDDLENAME teacher stopped made a quick note. No problem.

OP - you can do this!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, as another compromise, what about a great grandfather's name or using the grandfather's middle name?

I also disagree with the sentiment that following a cultural and family tradition is anti-woman. It's not. Traditions can be meaningful to a family and create a sense of history and belonging for a child. They can also evolve over time, but I don't think it should be thrown out flippantly.

Not all traditions are anti-woman, but this one clearly is, given that it cuts the mother out of naming her own child, as well as ensuring her child can’t be named to honor anyone on her side of the family. It doesn’t get much more anti-women than that.

Anonymous wrote:OP, as another compromise, what about a great grandfather's name or using the grandfather's middle name?

I also disagree with the sentiment that following a cultural and family tradition is anti-woman. It's not. Traditions can be meaningful to a family and create a sense of history and belonging for a child. They can also evolve over time, but I don't think it should be thrown out flippantly.

Anonymous wrote:I’m amazed how many people feel a new mother should surrender her rights to name her own child to avoid upsetting her in laws. What about the reverse? Imagine having a daughter in law from a different culture and insisting she doesn’t have a right to name her own children? That would be pretty offensive/likely to cause a rift in my book.

As well, DH may say it “has” to be the first name, but here’s another place for compromise— Hani can be his middle name. No, it’s not the exact tradition. Yes, it does honor the person in question and the baby is still named for Hani. Expecting a mother to give more in a compromise than her in laws is a pretty sorry reflection of how people think women should be treated.