Have you ever had pointless, unnecessary changes inflicted on you by higher-ups trying to justify their own existence? How did you and your co-workers feel about it?
When this has happened enough times, you really start to resent those people and their power over your lives.
You mean like idiot GOP politicians forcing college instructors to declare their ideological allegiances, or prohibiting the teaching of facts about America’s shameful racist past? Yeah, we’re familiar with that.
The word is also used in version control systems to designate the “master” branch, or the source code that is (supposed to be!) shippable at any given time. However there are no “slave” branches to speak of. Usually only “develop” (the main working branch), “release”, “feature”, “bugfix”, or “hotfix” branches. All of these are eventually merged into master if they are not abandoned by the programmer.
Naturally the use of the word “master” has caused controversy in the version control arena as well, with various groups arguing to rename it because of supposed offensiveness. A blog post which describes the debate and includes an excellent rundown of uses of the word master in everyday language (listing 16 definitions and 18 contexts) can be found here: Why renaming Git’s master branch is a terrible idea
Sure. But minor terminology changes happen all the time. People might whine about it, but it’s just because some people need something to complain about.
I don’t think master on its own is horrifying - but the master/slave terminology for drives or servers IS - and its worthwhile to start changing the language. And master is also rather sexist, assuming the primacy of men. Imagine (men) house shopping and being shown to the room you were going to spend a third of your life in and hearing the realtor say “and it has this lovely womanspace.” That’s a lot of assumption to unpack. Likewise, the assumption that black is bad (blacklist/black balled) is one of the things that cements unintentional bias in people. Where it can be changed so that the next generation gets less of it, why not do it? Words mean something - they shape the reality of our world.
(Picnic, however, is, as far as I can tell, a stupid thing to have an issue with. And trees should not be banned - although it probably IS inappropriate to have any tree as a mascot if the school in question is named after someone who spent their life working against lynching).
Sure, we could do that. Or we could realize that this was about a much more specific concern, and not exaggerate it for political purposes. Either way.
What’s funny is how similar you sound to the other side: “this thing doesn’t bother me, so it shouldn’t bother anyone”.
Is that the reason we have to keep up with a constant stream of new diktats? Because people need something to complain about, and they’ve picked on language?
I don’t believe that’s so. It’s the other way around; words acquire good and bad connotations based on what we associate with them. Unless you can change the associations, they will just attach to whatever new term you use. An example is how medical terms for low intelligence have become stigmatised, and had to be replaced with new ones, which then become stigmatised themselves and are replaced in turn.
Language changes and evolves because it always has and always will. There’s nothing new here, except that now progressives and minorities actually have some noticeable rhetorical and cultural power and influence. But some conservatives and whites just can’t seem to handle this.
I think you have the cause and effect reversed. Candidates like Trump want votes so they seek out nonsense like this and publicize it. They look for ridiculous things nobody would have otherwise heard of and promote them as national news.
It wouldn’t surprise me if you could trace a money trail back to the source and find many of the people out on the far left lunatic fringe are actually being supported by conservatives.