A Few Terms We Aren’t Using Anymore (And Why)

Language has a weird superpower: it can make someone feel seen… or turned into a category label with legs.
And because English is basically a group project with millions of editors, the words we use keep getting revised.
Not because everyone woke up one morning and chose “political correctness,” but because we’ve learned more about
how words shape bias, stigma, and accuracy in everything from health care to housing to tech.

This isn’t a “Gotcha!” list. It’s more like a wardrobe cleanout: we’re donating a few phrases that don’t fit anymore,
keeping what still works, and putting some items in the “only wear for legal documents” drawer.
If you write, teach, manage, code, or just exist in publicthese swaps help you sound current, respectful, and (bonus)
clearer.

Why Some Terms Retire

Most language shifts happen for three practical reasons:
precision (the new term is more accurate),
respect (the old term carries baggage or dehumanizes),
and impact (certain words increase stigma and can affect outcomesespecially in health and social services).
Sometimes the “new” term isn’t brand-new; it’s just a better default, with room for people to name themselves.

Terms We’re Sidelining (Plus What to Say Instead)

1) “Illegal immigrant” / “illegals”

Calling a person “illegal” turns an immigration status question into an identity. Many major style guides now recommend
using illegal for actions, not people. Try:
“immigrated without legal permission,” “undocumented immigrant,” “people without legal status,”
or a specific description of the situation (visa overstay vs. unauthorized entry).
It’s not about being delicateit’s about being accurate and human.

Quick example: “She is an undocumented immigrant working with an attorney to adjust her status.”

2) “The homeless”

Collective nouns can sound like a single faceless bloblike “the audience” but with way higher stakes.
Many writers now prefer “people experiencing homelessness,” “people without housing,” or “people living without stable housing.”
If you use “homeless,” keep it as an adjective (not a label), and avoid turning it into a group identity.
Also: “unhoused” shows up more often now, but it can be imprecise, so use it thoughtfully.

Quick example: “The program provides medical care for people experiencing homelessness.”

3) “Handicapped” (as a person label)

“Handicapped” can carry a dated, pity-tinged vibeand many people prefer more neutral phrasing.
Depending on context and community preference, use “person with a disability” (person-first) or “disabled person”
(identity-first). Not everyone prefers the same approach, so when possible, follow the person or community’s lead.
Note: some fixed terms remain (like signage), but your writing doesn’t have to be stuck in 1979.

Quick example: “Accessible seating is available for disabled guests and guests with disabilities.”

4) “Addict,” “junkie,” “abuser,” or “clean/dirty” (about drug tests)

Health agencies increasingly recommend person-first, stigma-reducing language because stigma affects care and willingness to seek help.
Swap labels for descriptions: “person with a substance use disorder,” “person who uses drugs,” or “in recovery.”
Replace “substance abuse” with “substance use” or “misuse” when appropriate.
And instead of “clean/dirty,” use “negative/positive test result.”

Quick example: “He has opioid use disorder and is receiving treatment.”

5) “The mentally ill” or casual “psycho/crazy/insane”

Broad labels flatten people into diagnoses, and casual slang can reinforce stereotypes.
In professional or public-facing writing, try “people living with mental health conditions” or name the condition
only when it’s relevant and verified. For everyday emphasis, English offers a thousand options that don’t borrow from diagnoses:
“wild,” “unexpected,” “over-the-top,” “unreal,” or “I can’t believe that happened.”

Quick example: “The campaign focuses on mental health support for teens and families.”

6) “Felon,” “convict,” “inmate,” “ex-con”

These terms can define someone forever by a past act and carry heavy stigmaespecially when the point is reentry, employment, or community support.
Alternatives include “incarcerated person,” “person in jail/prison,” and “formerly incarcerated person.”
If a specific legal status matters, state it precisely (e.g., “person convicted of a felony”) rather than using identity labels.

Quick example: “The program helps formerly incarcerated people find housing and job training.”

7) “Oriental” (for people)

This is one of those terms that might still appear on a menu (rug, noodle, etc.) but doesn’t belong as a label for humans.
Many style guides recommend avoiding it for people and using specific identities when possible:
“Chinese,” “Vietnamese,” “Korean,” or broader terms like “Asian” or “Asian American” when appropriate.
Specificity is both more respectful and more informative.

Quick example: “The study included participants from several East and Southeast Asian communities.”

8) “Master bedroom” / “master bath”

Real estate and design industries have been shifting toward “primary bedroom,” “main bedroom,” or “owner’s suite.”
Part of the move is to avoid uncomfortable historical connotations and to use language that simply describes the room’s role
(the main sleeping space) without implying a hierarchy of people.
If you’re writing listings, renovation plans, or product copy, “primary” is now widely understood.

Quick example: “The primary bedroom includes an en-suite bath and walk-in closet.”

9) Tech terms: “master/slave,” “blacklist/whitelist”

Many teams now prefer alternatives that describe function without loaded metaphors:
“primary/replica,” “leader/follower,” “main/secondary,” or “source/target” for system relationships;
and “allowlist/denylist” instead of whitelist/blacklist.
The practical perk: new terms are often clearer for global teams and less likely to confuse users.

Quick example: “Add this domain to the allowlist, and block the rest with a denylist rule.”

10) Gendered job titles: “chairman,” “fireman,” “salesman,” “mankind,” “manmade”

These terms can unintentionally suggest who “belongs” in a role. Gender-neutral options are easy:
“chair,” “chairperson,” “firefighter,” “sales representative,” “humanity,” “synthetic,” “manufactured,”
or simply rewrite the sentence to avoid the issue entirely.
It’s a small edit with a big payoff in tone, professionalism, and inclusion.

Quick example: “Our chair will open the meeting with updates from the sales team.”

11) “Preferred pronouns,” “transgendered,” “sex change” (as default phrasing)

In many contexts, “pronouns” is enoughadding “preferred” can imply they’re optional or negotiable.
For transgender topics, major guides recommend using “transgender” as an adjective (not “transgendered”),
using the person’s name and pronouns, and avoiding sensational phrasing. When in doubt, be straightforward:
“transgender person,” “trans man,” “trans woman,” or the terms someone uses for themselves.

Quick example: “Jordan uses they/them pronouns and is a transgender advocate.”

12) “Minorities” (as a vague catch-all)

“Minorities” can be imprecise and can imply “non-default people” rather than actual communities with specific experiences.
Better options: be specific (“Black employees,” “Latino communities,” etc.) or use terms like
“underrepresented groups” when you’re talking about workforce representation.
If you mean multiple groups, say so clearly (and avoid turning adjectives into nouns).

Quick example: “The scholarship supports students from underrepresented groups in biomedical research.”

Bonus: “Latinx” (not “banned,” but definitely not universal)

This one is less “we’re never using it again” and more “know your audience.”
Research suggests many U.S. Latinos who are aware of “Latinx” don’t want it used as a broad label.
Meanwhile, some individuals and communities do use it (and “Latine”) intentionally.
The respectful approach is simple: follow people’s self-identification, and when speaking broadly,
consider widely preferred terms like “Hispanic” or “Latino” depending on context.

Quick example: “The survey asked Hispanic adults which pan-ethnic term they prefer.”

How to Update Your Language Without Sounding Like a Robot

You don’t need a PhD in Vocabulary Management. A few habits do most of the work:

• Describe, don’t label. “Person experiencing homelessness” describes a situation, not a permanent identity.
• Use person-first or identity-first based on preference. If a community prefers identity-first, honor that.
• Be specific when accuracy matters. “Undocumented,” “visa overstay,” and “asylum seeker” are not the same thing.
• Replace metaphors with function. “Allowlist/denylist” beats color-based logic every time.
• When in doubt, ask (or follow the organization’s style). The most respectful term is often the one someone chooses for themselves.

Conclusion

Retiring a term isn’t about pretending the past didn’t happenit’s about communicating better right now.
The best modern language is usually more human, more specific, and less loaded with assumptions.
And if you ever worry you’ll “mess up,” here’s the good news: people rarely expect perfection.
They expect effort, respect, and the ability to adjust when you learn something new.

Experience-Based Snapshots: What These Changes Look Like in Real Life (About )

Picture a typical Monday: someone on your team drafts an email that says, “We’re collecting donations for the homeless.”
Nobody meant anything by itthis was the phrase they’ve heard their whole life. But when the email goes to a partner nonprofit,
the feedback comes back politely: “Could we say ‘people experiencing homelessness’ instead?” The writer isn’t “canceled.”
They just learn that the phrase lands differently for people who work closest to the issue. Next time, the updated wording
makes the message sound more professional and more compassionate without adding a single extra sentence.

Or take a health-related article draft: “Drug abusers often relapse.” That sentence feels like it’s describing behavior,
but it also smuggles in judgment. An editor swaps in: “People with substance use disorder may return to use.”
Suddenly the tone changes from scolding to clinicaland the piece becomes more credible. Readers are more likely to trust the
information because it doesn’t sound like a lecture. It’s the same facts, delivered with fewer barriers.

In tech, the shift can be almost comically practical. A developer writes documentation: “Add the IP to the whitelist.”
A teammate flags it: “We’re using allowlist/denylist now.” The developer rolls their eyesuntil they realize the new terms
help international colleagues who never found “white = good” intuitive in the first place. The documentation gets clearer,
onboarding goes faster, and nobody has to explain why a “blacklist” isn’t literally a list that’s black. (You can’t unsee it.)

Housing and design have their own everyday moments. A homeowner says, “We’re repainting the master bedroom.”
Their contractor replies, “Greatso the primary bedroom.” No drama, no debate, just an updated industry norm.
The homeowner adopts “primary” because it’s what they’re hearing in listings and renovation plans. It becomes less about
ideology and more about speaking the language of the marketliterally.

Even identity terms show up in routine settings. A school counselor asks a student for “preferred pronouns.”
Another staff member suggests, “We can just say ‘pronouns’it’s more affirming.” The counselor tries it and notices that
the question becomes simpler and less loaded. That’s the theme across all these changes: fewer assumptions, more clarity.
Most of the time, the “new” language isn’t fancy. It’s just precise, respectful, and easier to hear.