As a writer, words are my bread-and-butter… would be a great metaphor if I could actually afford butter. Or even bread, for that matter. Right now, I can only dream about an end-of-the-month Salticrack – have you seen the price of those things?

Beyond exorbitant groceries, there is one thing we now get for free – the choice of our surname. Well, not completely free because you’ll still have to pay the Home Affairs cost of changing your name, not to mention the cost of getting a new ID card, driver’s licence, and passport, for that matter. But, effectively, our beloved Constitutional Court has ruled that men can now take their wives’ surnames.

I, for one, did not know this was disallowed. That being said, my knowledge of what’s legal and not is expansively lacking, and even the laws I do know, I do not always fully acknowledge. I don’t think I’ve ever met a tax law I wouldn’t consider a ‘grey area’.

However, whether I knew it or not, men could not legally take their wives’ surnames, despite the incredibly sexist overtones of this law and male ownership of women (cue the whining misogynists and tired arguments rooted in male dominance masquerading as tradition. YAWN).

I applaud the legislative change. As does my friend, Jonathan Willy. I think he took his wife’s surname before it was legal. I think he took his wife’s surname before he had a wife. I’m going to test my husband’s love for me by suggesting he take my surname. I’ll keep his though, because I had to go through all the administrative hassle. Now it’s his turn. Prove your love.

By and large, though, South Africans have a lot of freedom when it comes to naming rights – certainly more freedom than should be allowed in some cases. No doubt, the poor sod named Matric Examsion would agree with me on this one. We’re right up there with Americans who, no lie, have been known to name their children Ima and Wanna, accompanied by such endearing surnames as Mann, Hoare, or Pigg.

These same people should not only be disallowed from having children, but from naming anything. Again. Ever. Or from voting. That would help a whole lot of us in a whole lot of ways.

However, it’s not always a conscious decision to be a completely awful parent and effectively abuse your child with such a cruel name – some people just don’t think it through. Jenna Taylor and Mike Hunt can confirm this as a fact. I don’t know if their parents were just incredibly naïve, or whether they didn’t want to share their child’s name ahead of the birth in case it was ridiculed. Either way, it backfired spectacularly.

I also can’t understand parents who have multiple children with unusual names, such as Brayton, Gayton, and Fartlicker, while naming their last child John. If you’re going to punish one, punish them all. It’s only fair.

Countries like Iceland, Japan, and China (unsurprisingly) are incredibly strict with what you can and can’t name your child – essentially to protect the child from idiot parents. One mother couldn’t name her daughter ‘Blaer’, which translates to ‘light breeze’. Maybe it’s the subtle fart connotation, but I feel Blaer is a much more socially acceptable name than, say, Ima Hoare.

I firmly believe you’re safest going with the tried-and-tested names – Kings and Queens, Presidents, The Beatles. However, when it comes to naming pets, I feel you need to go with something more animal-aligned. Human names on dogs are just creepy. ‘Stop rubbing your butt on the Persian carpet, Henry!’ is just a deeply concerning phrase.

My big black dog runs very fast, so we named him Flash. My little township dog was very nervous, so we named her Fidget. Mostly because ‘For the four hundredth time, get out of my F*cking way’ was simply too long.

Whether or not they’re taking my surname, however, is still up for debate.