Ok what about your balance sheet being in the black? Should that be neutralized too?

I think it’s going too far. If you want to do something for people go out and help them. Devote time to kids, provide mentorship, etc. This other superficial stuff only satisfies misguided activists and does nothing for affected kids.

Here’s the thing. It’s easy to find someone or something to pillory. It’s time consuming and hard to get on the ground and help. People love “showing” how good they are, but rarely act on it in real life with hard effort —that’s too much work.

As Zizek says, what happens the day after (the revolution)? Everyone is enamored with the effervescence or revolution being the good guys... but no one wants to do the hard work. Everyone’s life has to go on when you get back to reality.

I generally don't like the way these discussions play out because there is plenty of vocabulary we've changed over time when it becomes less palatable to the contemporary taste. It's easy to pull out all of the more innocent examples of the word while ignoring the perspective of those who don't appreciate it.

There are definitely instances of taking it too far, and they tend to be the ones that get disproportionate attention because they generate easy outrage. But in all honesty, if what we're seeing happen right now is progress towards a fairer society, I'd rather not stand in the way of it just because I'm used to having 'master' as my main branch on git, and I'd prefer to have the people most directly affected make their voice heard on this kind of thing.

So no “maître d'” no “maistro”, “meister” either... or is there a line somewhere?

Am I not my dogs master? I mean, of course it should not be used to show relationships between people, but relationships between things or people and animals, I don’t see an issue.

I don't think reductio ad absurdum is an appropriate reaction. Nobody is banning those words wholesale.

Of course no one can ban a word. Words exist independently of any authority... that said, it’s not an absurd proposition to think people will want to control those words for their own reasons. I don’t think my examples are a stretch given that it’s a stretch to tie conceptual data relationships to human relationships and see something untowards in it.

Do we change the name for “Slavic” people too because it harkens back to their history where Slavs were the default slave people in Western Europe and the origin of the word’s English meaning?

If anything, Slavs would have a point as it unfairly defaults them as being slaves etymologically.

I might well be wrong but this kind of authority over the use of language seems to be much more US-specific than I've seen elsewhere, which you could attribute to the overall dominance of US people in the places where these discussions tend to crop up (github, HN, Reddit, Twitter, Tumblr, etc.).

I don't really know what to make of it except that these discussions about not using 'master', 'cop', etc. seem _heavily_ biased to the US perspective and current affairs in the US. I can understand it taking place due to the sheer cultural upheaval that has (quite frankly) been a long time coming, but my mild frustration about `US === the whole wide world` can take a step aside while we focus on the injustices fellow humans face.

Sorry, I respectfully disagree. I am exposed to a similar phenomenon. I am blind. And blindness is routinely used to indicate all sorts of inabilities. Someone is "blind" to something. The blind leading the blind. The blind men and the elephant. I could go on for days. However, I am OLD enough to understand that I am not going to change the world. And there are also no public demonstrations going on, cheering "disability is cool". I just have to deal with the reality of my situation, as everyone on this fucked up planet has to learn at some point in their life. Policing the language does ntt change people.

Reinforces? ... Like the Amex Black Card is bad, why being in the black financially is bad, why cooking delicious ribs on the grill turns the outer portion black, why black is the preferred color for high end limousines, why Chanel and Dior and Bond use black and white logos, why black is used in fashion to emphasize slimness, etc., etc. ad nauseum.

You can also be Black and Proud. I would not suggest you use white in the same sentiment.

If it were just a constructive suggestion, it would be harmless enough. My guess, though, is that "errors" in usage will be regarded with increasing gravity. Use the wrong wording, and your boss and colleagues will tacitly start marking you as one of "them", division increases, and the cycle continues.

There is nothing new under the sun. We're just inventing new ways to hate each other.