Hector Martin

Plug/socket does not mean the same thing as male/female. You plug in an XLR *female* plug into the *male* socket on the back of a microphone. Male/female specifically refers to the pins in that case.

I agree that plug/socket is a bad replacement for m/f. It's just what I saw suggested somewhere.

TBH though, I don't see the problem with m/f at all. It describes the idea well and it's based on a natural concept we all understand. It doesn't favor either side. Besides being perhaps amusing when you first encounter it, what's the issue?

IIRC objection is a sex vs gender thing. I'm fine with M/F too but curious if I was supposed to say otherwise and missed a memo.

Honestly, that sounds like a silly argument. Inclusivity is all about interaction in the context of humans; m/f connectors is just an abstract concept loosely modeled on a prevailing (though not universal) pattern. It doesn't claim to be a perfect match for reality.

I think the silly argument here is that things are assigned genetilia on the basis of their functions.

Is there something special about genitalia? Should we deprecate technical terms like "head", "tail", "body", "ingest", "digest", "footer", "backbone", "sniff", "die", "kill", etc? They also reference body parts, actions, or functions. Are animals OK? "watchdog", "canary", etc.

You are missing the point. Terms such as plug - male are implicit of a deeply rooted system we use to reinforce unfair power structures. There's no need for classification in terms of binary, rigid and function based notions of gender. They are more harmful than you realize.