Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

unenlightenedgoblin t1_ixt2mmj wrote

Reply to comment by beingsubmitted in Trendeigh: Popularity of "eigh" in US names 1910-2020 [OC] by beingsubmitted

Responding to your edit: your data literally shows that there’s nothing unique about these names anymore. I also never explicitly mentioned income—I think that’s less predictive than race, education, and place of residence.

0

beingsubmitted OP t1_ixt6siv wrote

Just because it's less unique doesn't mean it's not done for uniqueness. "Paisley" is already a word, "Paizleigh" is a strategy to be unique. It's certainly not traditional or closed minded.

It's also still really unique. At its peak, "eigh" appears in 1.5% of new baby names in Mississippi.

Finally, it obviously doesn't matter if income is less predictive of "eigh" than race, education, or place of residence. The question is whether it's more predictive than political affiliation.

If you had explicitly said something about income, then my statement "I imagine that's who you're picturing" would have instead been "I understand that's who you're picturing".

By what means would you hypothesize a causal link from education level to use of "eigh" in a name?

−1

unenlightenedgoblin t1_ixt8a82 wrote

I can’t prove causality, I could prove correlation, but frankly it isn’t worth the effort to gather and interpret all the necessary data. If you’re interested, I’d encourage you to test the correlation that I suggest.

If I were to string together an anecdotal argument for causality, however, it would be a sense of threatened white identity. The linkages between this belief and Republican political affiliation are well-documented. To extend this to the significant trend and spatial distribution in names your data shows (1.5% is significant from a possible sample of 000s of names), I would contend that this is a form of ‘defensive’ cultural consolidation of rural whites who feel threatened by national shifts in ethnic composition, share of college-educated adults, and economic growth heavily favoring metropolitan areas.

It’s a way of saying ‘we’re different, we’re not like them’

2

beingsubmitted OP t1_ixu3b2b wrote

>1.5% is significant from a possible sample of 000s of names

A percentage is already "out of". It's already a ratio.

How would fearing a loss of identity lead to abandoning that identity and inventing a new one?

Fearing a loss of identity is not the same as trying to establish an identity. It's very much the opposite.

I see no compelling reason for the hypothesis you suggest.

0