Whether you call it the Gulf of Mexico or America seems uncontroversial. I find removing the original name of Denali and returning to the imperial name of McKinley to be far more offensive.
As for this post, I guess removing the name Denali is akin to small penis energy. So your version of the gulf is fitting.
I can’t see how a name change would legally affect documents in that way. It’s not like other countries are calling it the new name. And if we tried to play it that way our country would lose all integrity, credibility, and trust on the global scale for at least the next four years. However, I have seen name changes as a way to hide PR issues, particularly among small companies.
Whether you call it the Gulf of Mexico or America seems uncontroversial. I find removing the original name of Denali and returning to the imperial name of McKinley to be far more offensive.
As for this post, I guess removing the name Denali is akin to small penis energy. So your version of the gulf is fitting.
Renaming it excludes it from existing legal language, like the Gulf of Mexico protection and restoration act. It SHOULD be controversial, but everywhere I look I see people joking about it as if there’s no real-world repercussions. https://www.congress.gov/search?q={“source”%3A"committee-materials"%2C"search"%3A"Gulf+of+Mexico"}
I can’t see how a name change would legally affect documents in that way. It’s not like other countries are calling it the new name. And if we tried to play it that way our country would lose all integrity, credibility, and trust on the global scale for at least the next four years. However, I have seen name changes as a way to hide PR issues, particularly among small companies.