Sunday March 2 2014

What’s in a name? Some names are not as cute.


By Stella Riunga

Sometimes I wish I were the president. A president with the power of the Pope in medieval times. My first order of business would be to ban the following names and declare a 10-year-prison sentence for anyone who has the guts to go against my decree: Philomena, Scholastica, Nimrod and Aggrippina.

And by the way, I do not care which holy book they come from. Let me tell you why. I’m an African, and we believe that a name carries a large part of one’s destiny. I have taken it upon myself to explain the destiny you are preparing for your child with any of the above banned names.

This is a name that means you were expecting a boy, only to be surprised when it turned out to be a girl. You had already planned to name your boy Philomen, not that that is any better, and so you decided that adding an ‘a’ would please everyone involved. This is lazy! This is ugly! Poor Philomena will probably grow up to have short, stubborn hair and will drop out of school before S4.

Scholasticas tend to wear glasses. They also tend to lack social graces and are loners, crippled in human interaction, especially with members of the opposite sex. Scholastica will probably end up as a secretary working in a government organisation. She will be a good worker but keep to herself. Her parents will be forced to find her a suitor because she is unable to get one herself.

What kind of a name is this? Where did you find it? Who told you it was a suitable name to give to a child? It sounds like a treated rod. You know, those treated Umeme poles that are covered with some black sticky substance- is it tar?

Unless your grandfather was called Agrippa/Aggripus and left you a will saying that you would not inherit anything unless you named your first daughter Agrippina, then there is really no reason for this name. Unless your other children have names like Nebuchadnezzar, Zurishaddai and Jochebed, of course. Have mercy on your little bundle of joy!