• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Sweden prevents couple from naming child "Superman"

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: Vic
"Fact" as determined by whom?
Click to expand...

By common sense.

I don't think that's a fact at all. It's just as probable that being named "Superman" could make him the coolest kid in class. Your argument is meaningless. Should we outlaw all "non-cool" names because the child might be ridiculed? Should parents be prevented from naming their children "Eugene"?
Click to expand...

Considering that "Eugene" is a valid name, whereas "Superman" is a comic-book hero, I think it's safe to say which one is a proper name for a child and which one is not.

Anyway, what is more likely to be fact is that you probably ask you government whether you should hang your toilet paper overhand or underhand, and think that anyone who hangs it in the non-approved manner should be punished. :disgust:
Click to expand...

Nope, I do not. But I do find it rather strange that you think it's more important to protect parents right to give their kids moronic names, than it is to protect the child.
 
Originally posted by: Nemesis77
Originally posted by: CPA
I just love it when a government believes it knows what is best for a child
Click to expand...

The parents don't always know what's best for the child either. Naming the kid "Superman"? How stupid is that? If they are in to practical jokes, they should do them on grown-ups, not on helpless children. Of course, if the kid wants to change his name to Staalman once he's an adult, there's nothing stopping him.
Click to expand...

Didn't Sweden legalize drugs?.....j/k

The US went through the hippy generation as well, in which many a horrified infant was dubbed with the names Rainbow, Peace, Starbright and many other names by their coked out hippy parents. Did not know that you had to get government approval from comrade presidente of Sweden when naming children over there....

At times like this I'm glad that we are separated by an ocean of not only physicality but by intangible beliefs in life, liberty and the pursuit of a gaovernment who does not own us like serfs...
 
Originally posted by: Nemesis77
Originally posted by: Vic
"Fact" as determined by whom?
Click to expand...

By common sense.

I don't think that's a fact at all. It's just as probable that being named "Superman" could make him the coolest kid in class. Your argument is meaningless. Should we outlaw all "non-cool" names because the child might be ridiculed? Should parents be prevented from naming their children "Eugene"?
Click to expand...

Considering that "Eugene" is a valid name, whereas "Superman" is a comic-book hero, I think it's safe to say which one is a proper name for a child and which one is not.

Anyway, what is more likely to be fact is that you probably ask you government whether you should hang your toilet paper overhand or underhand, and think that anyone who hangs it in the non-approved manner should be punished. :disgust:
Click to expand...

Nope, I do not. But I do find it rather strange that you think it's more important to protect parents right to give their kids moronic names, than it is to protect the child.
Click to expand...
Oh God... now we've gone to nested quotes... must really be a flame war now... sigh...

First point: Common sense as determined by whom?

Second: do you even have any inkling of knowledge about the origin of names? That almost all names go back to something translatable in their original language? Names weren't just made up from convenient sounds. Hell, naming a son William wouldn't be too much different (in its original Germanic meaning) than naming him Superman.

And third: did you even read the article? This is the middle name we're talking about, have you figured that out yet? Who the hell doesn't have a stupid middle name? Why would the kid be picked on for that? What protection do you think you are offering and have you even bothered to stop to think that it is probably unwanted?

edited: typo
 
Originally posted by: Vic
If I wanted to (I don't), I could give my child the middle name of "Superman" here in America. What "more" freedoms were you refering to?
Click to expand...

Just about all freedoms. I think only freedom we don't have here that you do have, is the right to carry guns in public. All the other right (freedom of religion, speech etc. etc.) we do have and they are enforced. Besides that we have legalized gay-marriages and other freedoms that are more rare in other countries.

And the official name for Sweden's type of government is a "Democratic Socialist state."
Click to expand...

I went through CIA World Factbook on Sweden and I didn't find word "socialist" in there.

Are you like Germany yet, where it is a criminal offense and a $500 USD fine to even insult someone else?
Click to expand...

I can call someone a moron if I want to. But you can be held responsible on what you say if you start to spread BS about others. That's mainly because of the finnish culture that place great deal on ones word.

Anhd I bet that if you called someone a moron in Germany, cops would NOT be coming to get you
 
What about some of the dumbass names we have in our own country?????????

No examples as to keep the flames low.
 
I think we are losing something in the translation.

translation

It says superman as the english translation but it mentions the noun form which is "övermänniska" or overman....If i am not mistaken this is probably along the lines of the german word "uberman" with which nietzsche described the coming of a higher evolved race of man. When nietzsche's work was first translated into english, several popular translations used the english term superman instead of the more conceptionally accurate over-man. I could go on and on but....

why could this term over-man be potent enough to cause discomfort in people using it? The nazis adapted their idea of a pure blue eye blond hair race destined to rule the world from this concept...obviously they altered it to fit their agenda. Could people have discomfort from even mentioning the words??

anyone from sweden wanna set us straight? I could be totally wrong, maybe it just is a wicked word to pronouce.
 
Originally posted by: Nitemare
The US went through the hippy generation as well, in which many a horrified infant was dubbed with the names Rainbow, Peace, Starbright and many other names by their coked out hippy parents. Did not know that you had to get government approval from comrade presidente of Sweden when naming children over there....
Click to expand...

Oh great, here we go again....

At times like this I'm glad that we are separated by an ocean of not only physicality but by intangible beliefs in life, liberty and the pursuit of a gaovernment who does not own us like serfs...
Click to expand...

Like I said, we have all the freedoms you do, no matter what BS you are being spoon-fed to the contrary (that USA is the "shining beacon of Freedom"). We don't have PATRIOT-act, we don't have DMCA we have freedom of religion (no spoon-fed christianity in pledged of allegiance), we have legalized gay-marriages etc. etc.
 
Originally posted by: beatniks3
I think we are losing something in the translation.

translation

It says superman as the english translation but it mentions the noun form which is "övermänniska" or overman....If i am not mistaken this is probably along the lines of the german word "uberman" with which nietzsche described the coming of a higher evolved race of man. When nietzsche's work was first translated into english, several popular translations used the english term superman instead of the more conceptionally accurate over-man. I could go on and on but....

why could this term over-man be potent enough to cause discomfort in people using it? The nazis adapted their idea of a pure blue eye blond hair race destined to rule the world from this concept...obviously they altered it to fit their agenda. Could people have discomfort from even mentioning the words??

anyone from sweden wanna set us straight? I could be totally wrong, maybe it just is a wicked word to pronouce.
Click to expand...
If this is the case, then regardless of how distasteful I find the Nazis or fascism, I believe that banning a name for a political reason would be even worse.

As for the rest of those great freedoms, Nemesis, who cares? They're meaningless laws that sound good, but only further affirm the government intrusion in your personal lives. Gay-marriages sound great, but it doesn't mean anything. I'm straight and been co-habitating with my GF for 5 years, not married. My personal relationships do not require government sanction nor societal approval. I agree with you on PATRIOT and DMCA, we are no more free from problems than your country is, except that some of us are raving paranoids and others think they should be paid everytime they actually stop to think. And Christianity is NOT spoon-fed in our Pledge of Allegiance. The expression is "Under God." Exactly who that God is, whether Jesus, Allah, Jehovah, Buddha, Nature, etc., is subject to personal interpretation. If that offends you, then remember that the only person who can offend you is yourself.
 
I guess it was a good thing for Frank Z that he didn't live in Sweden.
Moon Unit, Dweezil, Ahmet Emuukha Rodan and Diva.
 
Originally posted by: beatniks3
I think we are losing something in the translation.

translation

It says superman as the english translation but it mentions the noun form which is "övermänniska" or overman....If i am not mistaken this is probably along the lines of the german word "uberman" with which nietzsche described the coming of a higher evolved race of man. When nietzsche's work was first translated into english, several popular translations used the english term superman instead of the more conceptionally accurate over-man. I could go on and on but....

why could this term over-man be potent enough to cause discomfort in people using it? The nazis adapted their idea of a pure blue eye blond hair race destined to rule the world from this concept...obviously they altered it to fit their agenda. Could people have discomfort from even mentioning the words??

anyone from sweden wanna set us straight? I could be totally wrong, maybe it just is a wicked word to pronouce.
Click to expand...

Nope, nothing is lost in the translation of the name. Superman is called "Stålmannen" ("the steel man") in Swedish. It has no Nazi connection.
 
Originally posted by: Vic
As for the rest of those great freedoms, Nemesis, who cares?
Click to expand...

The ones who those freedoms actually affect?

They're meaningless laws that sound good, but only further affirm the government intrusion in your personal lives.
Click to expand...

So how does legalizing gay-marriages (for example) "further affirm the government intrusion in your personal lives"? Please do tell me, I'm dying to know! Legalizing gay-marriages just gives them the same freedoms heteros have. Instead of having the government dictate that can they or can they not get married, they now have the same freedoms as everyone else does: the can get married ifthey want to.

Gay-marriages sound great, but it doesn't mean anything.
Click to expand...

Tell that to the gays that can now get married.

I'm straight and being co-habitating with my GF for 5 years, not married. My personal relationships do no require government nor societal approval.
Click to expand...

Having the relationship officially acknowledged by the law brings benefits to the couple, for example when it comes to inheritance. Of course, you can always choose not to get married. And previously that has been the only choice for gays, but not anymore.

Christianity is not spoon-fed in our Pledge of Allegiance. The expression is "Under God." Exactly who that God is, whether Jesus, Allah, Jehovah, Buddha, Nature, etc., is subject to personal interpretation.
Click to expand...

And if you are atheist? If you don't believe in God (Buddhists don't for example. Buddha is not a god)? The "under god" was added to the pledge in the fifties to highlight the difference between USA and Soviet Union (which was officially atheist).

I'm agnostic, why should I pledge allegiance to a god I don't even believe in?
 
could someone please explain what causes the discomfort in saying it?? that seems far more interesting than going on and on about freedoms.
 
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Nemesis77
Oh for crying out loud.... I just love/hate those "they don't have all the freedoms that we do"-crap. News-flash: Europe and Scandinavia have all the basic freedoms as USA does, if not even more!

And I believe the more or less official term for Sweden (and similar countries like Finland) is "welfare-state with free market-economy"
Click to expand...
If I wanted to (I don't), I could give my child the middle name of "Superman" here in America. What "more" freedoms were you refering to?
And the official name for Sweden's type of government is a "Democratic Socialist state." Are you like Germany yet, where it is a criminal offense and a $500 USD fine to even insult someone else?
Click to expand...

And I could've swore we had a monarchy!
 
Originally posted by: beatniks3
could someone please explain what causes the discomfort in saying it?? that seems far more interesting than going on and on about freedoms.
Click to expand...
Because their government says so? I can think of no other reason. Justify it how you will, claim to be defending the child by protecting him from being ridiculed for a middle name that no one need ever know except the child and the parents. It doesn't make any sense to me.

Some people, like Nemesis I think here, get fixated on government. They think of it as the grantor of all license, the provider of all things. The will of the mob is not to be questioned!
I'd reply directly to his comments but I just don't do the nested quotes thing.
Quick sidetrack though: being married would not benefit me in anyway. For example, last year I would have paid roughly $2,000 more in taxes had my GF and I been married. Oh, and we have Wills. Perhaps you've heard of those? By stating the you need a government-approved marriage in order to have a relationship, you are bringing the government into your personal life, are you not? And I suggest that you read up a bit more on the Buddha. No, he is not God Himself, but his philosophies do contain the belief in God.

Alright, I'm out of this thread.
 
😉 I doubt it. Anyways, it's sort of hard for any of us to know exactly WTF went through the minds of the people in charge of this at the tax authority.
 
Justify it how you will, claim to be defending the child by protecting him from being ridiculed for a middle name that no one need ever know except the child and the parents.
Click to expand...

not claming anything but....
If your middle name was Hilter or Butt pirate how would you feel growing up? U would know, your school would know, your employers would know, the irs would know, etc. etc.

that is why i want to hear from a swede why on earth this name could cause discomfort!



 
Firstly, anyone who thinks a kid named "Superman", or "Stålmannen" in Swedish, wouldn't get teased in school, is a friggin moron.
No, it shouldn't be that way in a perfect world, but this isn't a perfect world, and kids are the way they are.

And secondly, I belive the goverment is there, among other things, to protect it's citizens, be it from physical harm, or from dumbass parents.
If my parents wanted to name me "The Phantom" or something, I'd sure as he** be thankful for the goverment stopping it.

As for people saying Europe, or Sweden, lacking freedoms, STFU, if you've lived here, by all means, your oppinion is based on something, otherwise, you don't know WTF you're talking about.
 
Parents who give their kids names like that are either morons or incredibly irresponsible, or both. I'm completely with the government on this one. Freedom is usually good but in this case it's just going to give the kid problems in the future. The Sweden government did a good job trying to protect the child's interests.
 
Originally posted by: iwearnosox
"The tax authority, which oversees rules for names in the Scandinavian country of 8.9 million, blocked a request by Sara Lindenger and her live-in boyfriend, Johan Leisten, both 28, to name their child Staalman, Superman in Swedish...
Click to expand...

Ha, and Sweden wonders why they never have any superheroes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top