You're trying to make a point out of nothing. Some names are simply more prone to be called using the first name, the last name only, or both, because it might just "sound" better or be sufficiently recognizable. Of course no one would call Steve Jobs "teve" since it's such a common name. "Marissa" and "Elon" are more rare and directly identify the people they refer to

Your post is an interesting lesson in confirmation bias.

Mayer is a really common name. The only way to distinguish her from the 15 Mayers I know is by full name. But in a conversation about her, I'll use whatever's shorter.

But let's also address the partial vs full name argument that commonly comes up. I hear that argument a lot. Warren Buffett is a good example. Nearly every time he's mentioned, it's by full name unless you're already talking about investment. Using his full name adds a bit of gravitas.

Partial name usage over full name is usually indicative of a few things:

1. Familiarity: The speaker feels familiar with the person - either through personal contact, proximity or extensive exposure.

2. Uniqueness within context: There's only one person with that last name that people would think of when you mention the name. If you're talking about operating systems, saying Gates or Torvalds is often enough to understand. And if you're on stage sweating and awkwardly chanting at a tech conference, people will understand that you're "pulling a Ballmer".

3. Brevity: If you talk about a person long enough in a monologue or discourse, or over a long period of time you'll get tired of mentioning their full name. Last name is usually preferred culturally unless there's a chance of confusion with another person.

4. Personal preference: Sometimes some names roll off the tongue better than others. If a speaker finds a name hard to pronounce or spell, they might pick another.

5. Cultural unfamiliarity: Nadella was easier for me to remember by his last name than his first name "Satya".

6. Rhetoric: You might be trying to appeal to a well-known authority by their most common reference to add panache (e.g. "Gandhi" vs "Warren Buffet"). And this reference can depend on whether you're trying to put a positive spin vs. a negative one. "Barack Obama" vs "Obama" is a good example, with the first/last combo being used more frequently by supporters and just the last name (or the first/middle/last combo) used by detractors.

On the other hand, long names might be preferred due to alliteration or rhyming ("Marissa Mayer" and "Rami Rahim" just flow really well), possible confusion with regular nouns ("Elon Musk", "Steve Jobs"), or that's how they were introduced ("Tim Cook").

Finally, insiders (employees and/or industry partners) will refer to a person differently than outsiders.

So, no, it's not about sex. Sex might be a contributing factor to familiarity or rhetoric depending on the person. But there are plenty of famous men that are referred to by their full name with respect (Buffet) or scorn (Ballmer).

This. As I noted in a sibling, at the time I first responded to the comment, the use of just "Marissa" far outweighs the use of any form that includes her surname.

What are the chances the HN user-base is actually more familiar with Meyer? Sure, she came out of the SV world, but I don't see Musk referred to as "Elon" much on HN.

Nearly every time the people I interface with introduce him into a discussion, he's referred to by full name. His first name sounds a bit weird to me out of context - all strong vowels. But I hear his employees refer to him by first name. It'll differ from place to place.

> What are the chances the HN user-base is actually more familiar with Meyer?

There's also the fact that these huge comment trees are linked to articles and have titles that usually include the person's full name or company at the top. In every case we're talking about someone on Hacker News, we're immediately susceptible to the brevity exception as everyone reading and commenting already contextually knows who you're talking about.

Using a full name in contextual discussion sounds weird to me, honestly. I knew a person who would call me by my full name as I was leaving parties and other social engagements and it was weird and awkward because it was overly formal and I used to date that person. And I didn't appreciate the loud, immediate attention.

Which name you use when referring to strangers is kind of random. I have some people who call me by last name, others by first. A lot of it depended on how they were introduced to me, or whether I lived in a place where that name was uncommon. People like to categorize, and often the more unique a name, the better.

It's important to always assume good faith when someone does something that's weird to you. I've been recently working a lot with social services, which has a lot of good examples of deescalating situations. Like with abused children - when the come into care they will quite commonly interact in an uncomfortably familiar or even sexual fashion because they've lived in situations where those lines weren't very clear. It's not bad behavior - it's just the survival skills they've learned. In those cases, it's most important to just not freak out and calmly talk your way through things. Adults who attempt to read motive out of their behavior tend to start a lot of unnecessary conflict.

I'm a bit weird because I actually bought etiquette and flower arrangement books. This stuff is interesting to me, although the changing landscape of social etiquette frustrates nearly everyone. Just keep in mind that a lot of the words we speak, as well as the way we speak them and the way that we refer to each other is based on unspoken rules that subtly alter between generations and across cultures. There's no one rule for interactions anymore. Even though we like to pretend that there is when someone crosses our own boundaries.

why did you even write this?

this (Trump):

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/Trump_20...

and

this ("Hillary"):

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ec/Hillary_...

Hillary is a different case because her husband Bill was president, so most people associate Clinton with Bill.

Or maybe it's just because saying "Elon" or "Marissa" is enough to know whom we're talking about