It sounds way less offensive to those who decry the original terminology’s problematic roots but still keeps its meaning intact.
It sounds way less offensive to those who decry the original terminology’s problematic roots but still keeps its meaning intact.
Because we can’t have both? Changing words to be more inclusive is simple. Uprooting entrenched power systems takes a just a teensy bit more effort. Come on, you can see why your argument is spurious, right?