It sounds way less offensive to those who decry the original terminology’s problematic roots but still keeps its meaning intact.
6 points
Why not both? We have the capacity to replace outdated/useless words and make the situation better for others. In fact, one does not prevent the other whatsoever
that’s also true. But seeing as this is a discussion primarily about removing terms from common parlance, i think it’s reasonable to focus on solely that aspect.
Ultimately, i’m just not really convinced that doing this is going to be ultimately productive at the end of the day. I might be wrong i suppose. But i think i’d need to see some supporting data first.
