[metabagel]

It's not virtue signaling. Virtue signaling would be putting a decal on your car which says "I support the police". You're signaling to the police officer who pulls you over that you're a good police-supporting person, and they should let you off with a warning.

No, it's simply a hint that your message might be better received if you change your word usage to something which is more current, more inclusive, or less triggering. For example, in the U.S. the word "master" might be triggering, given that black people were enslaved, tortured, and murdered for hundreds of years in this country. I'm OK to avoid it. If you want to use it, you can ignore the squiggle, but none of this has anything to do with "virtue signaling".

[DiogenesKynikos]

> For example, in the U.S. the word "master" might be triggering

Before a few years ago, I seriously doubt that innocuous uses of the word "master" were triggering to anyone beyond a very small group of political activists. It's a common word that is used in many contexts completely unrelated to slavery. Nobody with their head soundly on their shoulders was triggered when they heard phrases like "master chef," "master bedroom" or "master's degree."

There's a difference between avoiding language that actually does have strongly negative or prejudicial associations and actively seeking out reasons to be upset about completely innocuous common phrases. There are words that really do become polluted (like "Führer" in German, which used to be a normal word for "leader," but which now is strongly associated with a certain someone), but there are also words that are completely harmless that people work to try to make an issue out of for ideological reasons (e.g., "whitelist").

There's a certain strain of politics in the US which does actively seek out and attempt to remove "problematic" language. You may agree with that politics. But a lot of people (myself included) don't think that "problematizing" innocuous phrases like "master chef" is actually helping anyone, and rather see it as a form of bullying.

[mr_toad]

I get the feeling that the controversy around the use of the word master started with the master-slave terminology used in hard drive technology (which was problematic) which then just spiralled out of control.

Call me suspicious, but I’m not convinced that the arguments extending the debate to all use of the word master are entirely made in good faith. In fact, it seems a lot like controversy for controversies sake and I can’t help but wonder if some troll isn’t out there fanning the flames.

[vorpalhex]

I really feel your usage of "enslaved" and "tortured" are not very inclusive. There are people whose ancestors experienced such things, and words like that might be triggering and make them uncomfortable.

Maybe you could use friendlier words like "not free" or "hurt"?

[Jcowell]

What’s wrong with what GP just said? They were speaking in a historical relevant context where the words were used in their literal meaning rather than the figurative one that would devalue its meaning outside of pure figurative works.

[vorpalhex]

This is a form of reductio ad absurdum.

If a word like "landlord" can be "triggering" then we can't even discuss actual historical events like slavery or torture, etc (one would at least presume torture to be more triggering than landlord).