I'm not saying that those who use these terms are racist. I'm saying that language evolves. If there are equivalent technical alternatives that don't carry a history of oppression, why not use them? It costs nothing and can make the environment more inclusive. This doesn't replace concrete actions, but it also doesn't prevent them from happening.
If changing a word is "purely performative," then keeping it is also purely performative. The difference is that one choice preserves a metaphor of domination and the other does not. Technology is made of choices. This is one too.
That means I won't bother fighting changes that became established before I was born. I most definitely doesn't mean I have to go along with every change I see proposed now.
> If there are equivalent technical alternatives that don't carry a history of oppression
No one chose to be born in a certain context.
But everyone participates in the context that they continue to feed or transform.
Do you recognize that you live in a system that produces racial inequality today?
If the answer is yes, then there is some level of participation, albeit minimal.
Because living in a structure is already being inside it.
If you are white, your ancestors did this. They created separation and made simple words dehumanize people. So yes, you and everyone else has a chance to make amends. The choice is yours.
If changing a word is "purely performative," then keeping it is also purely performative. The difference is that one choice preserves a metaphor of domination and the other does not. Technology is made of choices. This is one too.