Print

Print


True, it might lead to a hassle.  But names are important enough that the
fact that they make already-annoying forms a little more annoying shouldn't
compel anyone, it seems to me, to adopt a naming convention they are not
comfortable with.



On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 8:11 AM, Dana Nutter <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> On 07/09/2011 05:35 PM, Mia S. Soderquist wrote:
>
>> Lee wrote:
>>
>>> Curious. I don't feel I have lost anything by having been given the
>>> "standard" first, middle, and last names. But maybe I feel that way because
>>> I know the story behind why the names were chosen for me.
>>>
>>
>> My original name was actually a mistake. I was supposed to be named Carrie
>> Ann, after the song, but I ended up named Sherry Ann. Yay, heavily medicated
>> childbirth. (Not that it matters. Carrie isn't me either.)  My name was
>> typical of the era in which I was born, so it kind of dated me too. Whenever
>> I tell people what my birth name was, they inevitably say that it doesn't
>> suit me at all.
>>
>> This was the second time in my family that there was a naming mistake that
>> people just decided to roll with-- my mom grew up with just a middle initial
>> "K", which was supposed to be "Kay".
>>
>
> My mom has no middle name.  That alone can create bureaucratic issues, one
> of which shows up on my birth certificate.  I'd had to see the arguments
> that having a single name will bring up.
>



-- 
I have stretched ropes from steeple to steeple; garlands from window to
window; golden chains from star to star, and I dance.  --Arthur Rimbaud