If you had an African American on your team, and someone asked you to change the terminology because they could see it was causing discomfort, would you feel content to give this reply?
I could take offence by the limited perspective you put on the word relating it to only African Americans, there are many from Europe who fall in the sex slavery trade who are not black.
In Australia the word 'root' has sexual connotations, so if I was to work on your team would you be happy to change this word, so no more root access, root directory, if I said it was offensive ?
Words can be offensive, but generally they are offensive because of the context. For example, should it be offensive for me to say the night sky is black, black is an offensive word but it is also a valid contextual description.
I am not speaking hypothetically, I am asking about how someone else would feel and respond in a situation I have experienced directly.
Can you explain how my perspective is 'limited'?
It seems to me that you have simply misunderstood the question.
If the reply is fallacious, then show that it's fallacious. If it is fallacious then it shouldn't be used as an argument irrespective of whom it's aimed it. If the reply doesn't contain some logical flaw, then it simply doesn't matter whether its opponent is black or white or anything else: neither truth nor logic are subject to whether people like them.
Truth an logic are only one dimension of communication. Why would you choose a more offensive way of saying something over a less offensive way?