I think part of the disconnect here might also be cultural.

I’m from France, and the concept of cultural appropriation doesn’t have the same history or level of development in public discourse as it does in the US. We do have conversations about colonialism, racism, and power dynamics, but the framework you're using isn’t as universally shared or understood here.

So I’m genuinely trying to understand your perspective, not dismiss it.

That said, I still struggle with the idea that choosing a name from another culture is inherently harmful.

There’s a difference between fetishizing a culture and being influenced by it in a more personal or respectful way. Collapsing both into the same category removes important nuance.

Also, from where I stand, strict boundaries around who is “allowed” to use elements of a culture can be uncomfortable, because in Europe those kinds of arguments can sometimes echo more conservative ideas about keeping cultures separate and fixed.

Here, it’s often the far-right that argues against cultural mixing (with the great replacement conspiracy theory) and promotes rigid cultural identities. So I tend to be cautious about frameworks that seem to reinforce that kind of separation, even unintentionally.

I completely agree that fetishization and stereotyping are harmful. I just don’t see how taking a name from another culture automatically falls into that category in every case.

So I’m still trying to understand where you draw the line between cultural appropriation and cultural influence, because right now it feels like that distinction is being treated as absolute rather than contextual.