> it's not suggesting we should do anything to black people
Should I provide you with a list of racial slurs that do not suggest to do something to a minority?
> "Yellow" means caution or slow in most contexts. It's the color of safety vests and caution signs. Should Asians take offense? What about native peoples
I'm sure you can educate yourself with the reasons why semaphores are colored the way they are. Such reasoning do not hold for blacklist and whitelist.
Also you do realize that Asian people and Native Americans do not identify as Yellow or Red, right?
Black people do identify as such, and labeling white and black as allow/reject would have never made so popular if black people weren't so under represented in the software industry in the first place, so yes, lack of inclusion in the first place is the racial influence that allowed these terms to become popular in the software industry, and now that people are trying to change that with a better term. Again, language is a dynamic thing, embrace that.
I don't blame white men for introducing these terms early into software development. One cannot be fully aware of the weight their words carry, but language is a dynamic creature, and should adapt for all kind of reason.
You have a group that you want to include and is affected by a term that's triggering for them, there is an alternative that's just as short and pass it's meaning better (allow-list, reject-list), and sill you seem to argue against replacing it with nothing but "it's original usage was not racial"
> This blacklist (and "master") nonsense is based on a fake story about the term that doesn't hold up under scrutiny
The only fake story so far is your story about "King Henry and his enemies".
You're doing a great effort to enforce terms that have no advantage in terms of semantics and clear disadvantages when it comes to inclusion, but now that I see that you'd support even terms such as master/slave it's quite clear you don't really care about the historical background at all.
> Atheists were persecuted for a long time in history (as were many smaller religious groups) because they were considered "offensive".
Dude, you're comparing persecution of minorities (atheist) due to who they are and their beliefs to... replacing one term for another so that you can make a minority group feel more included.
> You can't create a lie and then demand conformance to that lie
How is "King Henry and his enemies"? I'm still waiting to hear a better version of the story, surely you didn't just say that I'm "the one lacking the historical background" for no reason, did you?