Evolution is the process of natural development. Whether an animal or perhaps a car, we are permanently trying to boost on the prior model. Most progress is gradual, interrupted once in a while by a major breakthrough, like walking on two legs or ABS brakes.
So how is it that the human race, which is actually top of the food chain, still needs the very best section of annually when expecting? Especially if you think about that we usually only produce one, rather than a litter, let alone eggs by the hundreds. Haven’t we advanced sufficiently by the 21st century to manage to cut this down seriously to less than six months?
Evidently we’ve not, which raises the question, why not? It could be easy to put the blame on the women. Pregnancy is their job after all. But seeing as they got this all-important role since the men couldn’t be trusted with it, we’re hardly in a position to point the finger.
So what’s the answer? There can actually only be one logical conclusion. Pregnancy and childbirth take nine months because that’s just how long people need to decide on a name. Let’s face it. Other species of animals obtain the birth process over with considerably quicker because they don’t really even bother, unless they’re a Disney character.
Our history indicates us that normally it takes a long time to produce a sensible name, so a child may as well stay in the womb until we do. Actually, there are lots of examples that suggest nine months still isn’t long enough and we have to extend it to a year. Just look at all the youngsters inventively called Junior, or Bob Smith III. It’s an admission that after three-quarters of annually, that’s the best they may manage.
The initial hurdle is relatives. This is particularly true for younger parents, who tend to have more of them alive, all of whom want to be immortalized by their grandchild inheriting their name. So unless you’re having quadruplets, you’ve got an issue حوامل.You can’t even escape with giving your child all four names, because only you can come first and top billing counts for everything. Next is the situation of the specific names grandparents often have. This indicates children’s names were a low priority when faced with the industrial revolution and the odd World War. Who wants to end up calling their child Algernon or Gertrude?
The next problem can be your wife’s side of the family. Whether a lady took her husband’s name in matrimony, she will probably want her family name to survive, therefore it becomes a child’s middle name, even if it isn’t one at all. Just ask Mary Carbunkle Jones.
The sole exception is if this type of person extremely rich. If calling your daughter Ethelred Stinkpants Smith puts her to the top of the inheritance heap, then so be it.
Next comes the issue of pets. Not naming them, as that’s easy and they don’t really care anyway. The sole guideline is to keep in mind that you may well be in the park one day shouting at your puppy, so names like “Fatty” and “Loser” are bad choices.
The problem is that you can’t name your child after having a pet. You might just like the name Max, but when an uncle had a Doberman called Max, it’s just not planning to happen. Charlie is an excellent selection for either gender — except when someone had a pet of the exact same designation that got run over. It’s as though by choosing that name, you’re condemning your child to a fate of jumping out of a window, chasing a bird and getting hit by a truck.
If anything, choosing a title must be much easier now. Today, just about anything is acceptable. In the event that you can’t find a real name you like, then how about a state, a nation or perhaps a continent? A good food-group will do. But despite the infinite choice, it’s amazing just how many parents mess up. They don’t really think how a child’s name can be changed, shortened or generally twisted into something which will scar their psyche for life. How hard was school for the kind of Jeremy Attric, Philip Ness and Frank Ukwit? Who knows, perhaps if he hadn’t been called Adolf, things would have been different.