Copy-pasted my comment here, but similar to how we no longer use "retarded" to be sensitive to the disabled, people have been rethinking words like "crazy", "insane", or "sanity" to be sensitive towards those with mental illness. For people with mental illness those words may be loaded with negative meaning and there are often more neutral or descriptive terms that can be used instead.

Update: Not sure why I got downvoted for stating the rationale for why people are making this change. Objectively I haven't even stated my opinion on the change, just the rationale I've seen for it. If you want a source here's one from NPR around this language: https://www.npr.org/2019/07/08/739643765/why-people-are-argu...

I fundamentally disagree that you can't use a word in one context because of its use in another. If I call someone a bastard I do not mean that they were born out of wedlock the context and use of the word are entirely different.

Sure, I agree everything has nuance and context to it. I was really just stating the rationale I've seen given for avoiding those words rather than offering my opinion.

That being said, given your example I'd ask you to consider this situation: If you call someone a bastard jokingly and they happened to be a child who was born out of wedlock and it was a sensitive subject for them, do you think it would potentially be hurtful? Is there another word you could choose to get the same point across that might have been less hurtful? If so, is there a significant downside to using that other word instead? If you found out that someone was literally a bastard and the word made them unhappy, would you continue to use it when talking with them?

Stewart Lee: "What is political correctness? It's an often clumsy negotiation towards a kind of formally inclusive language. And there's all sorts of problems with it. But it's better than what we had before."[1]

[1] https://youtu.be/x_JCBmY9NGM