Which is what I’m offering. Others are offering theirs. And among those who have offered their views is John McWhorter, a renowned linguist specializing in language change who should not be casually dismissed. As he writes in an article in The Atlantic,
… according to counsel from Brandeis University’s Prevention, Advocacy & Resource Center, or PARC, considerate people must go further [than gender-neutral terminology]: Apparently, we must retire victim, survivor, trigger warning, and African-American too. We must do so, that is, if we seek to ignore some linguistic fundamentals while also engaging in distinctly callow sociological calisthenics. When we are to even “consider” avoiding the word prisoner (try person who was incarcerated) or walk-in (because not all people can walk) and the phrase everything going on right now (I’ll leave you to find out what’s wrong with that one), we are being preached to by people on a quest to change reality through the performative policing of manners.
McWhorter concludes as follows:
But these sanctions are based on no general agreement among even sensitive, sociologically concerned people. Couched as compassionate counsel, this list is mostly a series of prim concoctions by people who, one suspects, simply need more to do. In the end, working to change conditions is much more important than obsessively curating the words and expressions we use to describe them.
And I agree that the OP is silly but the side discussion that it triggered is not.