Uses of “master” that don't derive from specifically the use in terms of master/slave relations (and it entered English with multiple different sense ab initio), and perhaps even those with such an origin where the current use isn't even closely metaphoric and reliant on evoking that relationship are less likely to be seen as problematic.
> I am pretty certain “Master” in Git is not derived from master/slave duality.
It apparently comes from copying bitkeeper, which uses master/slave, so it is, indirectly, derived from master/slave.
It's easy enough to interpret (and retain) in the artistic sense of a master copy (which usage is not derived from master/slave), so even with it's etymology it is far from the most problematic use of “master”, but the git usage is not historically unconnected to master/slave.
Or master bedroom, masterclass, masterpiece, mastercard, master's degree etc. Where do you draw the line if the syllables alone are allegedly problematic?
