We’ve had a very interesting question raised recently: does it matter what a dog’s name is? At first glance, you can be forgiven for thinking there is an obvious answer: ‘no!’. But then we got thinking and realised that this topic is far deeper than we realised. So perhaps names do matter after all? Let’s discuss.
As a warning, this article contains terms (we have asterisked as best we can) that some people may find offensive.
Table of contents
Do Dogs Understand Their Names?
Certainly some animals understand their names in one way or another. Some very intelligent animals, like dolphins, whales and certain parrots even have their own unique calls for each other, similar to names.
What about dogs? Dogs can learn to recognise the sounds we make when we say their name, and through classical conditioning and repetitions, understand that sound means to respond to the owner. Basically, an owner will use a dog’s name repeatedly, and usually offer praise or a reward when the dog responds. The dog learns that responding to the sound of their name will lead to reward, so will continue to do so. Cats can do this too… but are better at ignoring us!
But can dogs (and cats) actually understand that the sound of their name refers to them? This is a little less clear. Dogs and cats do not recognise themselves in a mirror as being themselves, implying they do not have a mental awareness of ‘self’. This would imply they cannot understand that ‘Molly’ means ‘me’, as there is no distinction in their world between themselves and the rest of the world. Some other tests have proved dogs can distinguish the rest of the world from themselves, such as being aware that their weight is preventing them from moving a blanket they are standing on, which complicates this further. We just aren’t sure yet.
In short, there is not yet evidence dogs can understand what a name is, and that it refers to themselves. But they can understand that hearing the sound of their name means they must respond, in the same way that hearing ‘sit’ means they must ‘sit’.
Do We Need to Bother With Names?
How many Rovers are there? How many Ollies, Maisies and Maxes? Probably a lot, and they can easily be confused. How many 94100003124s are there? Only one.
We have the ability to distinguish dogs much more precisely than just a name. Dogs can be microchipped with an individual number, or tattooed with a tag. Documents alongside the dog describing it and listing the chip number and markings make this easier. Surely with all this information, names are redundant and confusing? And certainly, other industries do not name animals. Farming, laboratories, scientific studies, wildlife preserves and more do not use names for their animals, and they function quite well.
Of course, chips can fail, documents can be lost, tattoos fade, but generally they are a much more efficient system of naming things. However, we all know that a name is much more than that. Let’s look at the problem of not having a name.
The Problem of No Name
History is full of people’s names being stripped from them. Rich ancient Romans gave their slaves a single name, discarding their actual name. African slaves were given European names by slave owners. The Nazis gave their prisoners in concentration camps numbers, not names. Of course these examples are incredibly hyperbolic compared to animals with no names, but the point is the same. Having a proper name makes someone human – removing it dehumanises them, makes them less than human or even like an object. Many who argue against practices like farming point out the refusal to name animals is due to workers not wanting to think of the animals they are raising as equals, to make their job easier. Consciously or not, for better or worse, there is likely some degree of truth in this – it is far easier to slaughter cow 1004 for meat, than Bertha.
Anthropomorphism is the practice of treating animals like people, or near people.
Naming them is a part of this. We think this is why naming dogs with human names, like Dave, Jack or Sophie is so common. We can prove the power of the name further. The media is full of animals that become celebrities thanks to their name. Consider Geronimo – you already know exactly who we’re talking about, the alpaca who was sadly put down due to testing positive for bovine tuberculosis. Do you think people would have become so passionate about the issue if he was one nameless alpaca in a herd? Back in 2001, the UK faced a foot and mouth outbreak in livestock. A calf was found abandoned and given the name Phoenix. Phoenix escaped slaughter thanks to her name creating a media storm. Want more evidence? How many of you give your pet your surname? Doing this makes them part of the family, the human family.
Naming an animal raises them to human-levels. It anthropomorphises them. This often affects how people react to and treat them. No one cared about the calf until he was called Phoenix. Geronimo wouldn’t have become a star without his name. Consider “my pet snail died yesterday” to “Humphrey, my snail, died yesterday”. The lack of a name opens animals up to indifference, neglect and even abuse.
What About Offensive Names?
Let’s start this section with the curious case of H. P. Lovecraft’s cat. Lovecraft was an American author in the late 1800s. He was fond of animals. His favourite was an old black cat called N*gger-man. You may understandably be dismayed at the inappropriateness of his cat’s name. Indeed, even in the 1890s, the N-word was considered a racist term. Despite this, it was still in widespread use and commonly used to name places, objects and animals. Lovecraft was known to be quite racist, even for his day, but it is unlikely anyone batted an eyelid at his cat’s name. The cat even featured in several of his novels.
While we are sure no one would call a cat this in 2021
Consider the term ‘bl*ckie’, another racist term. Not long ago it was considered socially acceptable or not as offensive as it is today. We have met dogs and cats in 2021 called Bl*ckie, nearly always because of their dark black fur. How do we approach these owners? Do we demand they change their name? Do we refuse to let them see a vet? Or do we politely explain that their dog’s name is no longer acceptable, and they should refrain from using it in public? You can imagine an owner’s anger if we tried this approach. Likely none of these are the correct choice, and there isn’t a lot we can do about specific animals. The hope is as people who use these terms realise they are no longer acceptable, they won’t give it as a name to their next black animal.
Bl*ckie has been considered offensive for longer than most animals are alive, so there is less excuse there, but what about words that were recently considered normal but are now offensive? This list is changing all the time as societal values change. The traditional English name Karen is often used online to refer to impolite older women, and Boomer is used to attack older, more socially conservative people. One could easily find their dog now has an offensive name.
And where do we stand on names that are offensive to some people and not to others?
Allah, the name of God in Islam, is considered an inappropriate name for people, let alone animals, to many Muslims. If someone wanted to call their dog that, should they recognise it may cause offence? What about Jesus Christ? Many Christians would find it offensive to call a dog this. Isis? Gypsy? Stalin? Maggie Thatcher? You might laugh, but all of these names may be acceptable to some people and deeply offensive to others. Clearly these sorts of names matter.
Descriptive Names?
Names are not just a title, but often descriptive and affect our judgement of something before we have even met it. Unless you know Latin or Greek, descriptive names are key to understanding plants and animals. Condylura cristata? Hapalochlaena fasciata? Psychrolutes microporos? Yup, us neither. But a star-faced mole, a blue-ringed octopus and a blobfish? Even if you’ve never seen these creatures, their common descriptive names help us picture them. While not quite to the same extreme, this can be seen with dog names. Fluffy? Patch? Socks? You might be able to work out what features these dogs have before even meeting them. Names can be useful tools.
Sometimes though, our pre-judgement is very wrong. Would you rather meet a dog called Fluffy or Chomper? Well Chomper is a family-friendly dog and Fluffy has bitten three people this week! It can even affect our judgement of the owner! We might imagine one owner for Princess and another for Brutus. We are often wrong – even the biggest burliest men can own Princesses. Some of these names may even be demeaning to the dog, and by affecting our judgement of them, cause harm.
It is known that we subliminally judge things before we really know them, so by meeting a dog called Biter, we may instinctively be less friendly and less willing to interact with the dog. As vets, this can even affect the way we treat animals. Names like Sh*thead, Poo and Dumb*ss (all of which we have seen!) can cause a similar effect. For some horrible people, this subliminal judgement leads to animal abuse, since the animal is seen as inferior or not worthy of love. This is, again, more common when an animal lacks a name at all.
What’s the Verdict?
We hope you can see that far from being a simple way of identifying a dog, the name is one of the most powerful things they have. Names are important for dogs to interact with humans. A name affects how people see the dog, either as just an animal or as a beloved pet. It affects how people judge the dog before they meet it, as well as how they judge the owner. It even affects how the animal is treated.
So yes, it really does matter what they’re called. We urge you to think long and hard about how others, and you, may perceive your pet’s name – it could affect their lives in ways we may not anticipate.
You might also be interested in:
Discussion
Is whitey cool? What about Dick for a dog..Pussy for a cat? If one is of African decent may they use the n-word to name an animal? It’s used with great proficiency in music nowadays…thanks for the non cited historical lecture
And thanks for the equally uncited response 😉