Word psychology, what's really in a name?

A bit word of word psychology.....and why new words may or may not be needed.
I began this life with a name; "Stacey". Without fail, every time that name was used a sum of feelings would be summoned. The insecurities of youth would always set the stage for how what was about to be said to me would be received. Then I happened upon something magical: in exploring paganism I was encouraged to come up with a "magic" name. I was moved to choose Crystal. First it was Crystal Epona (Epona being the Goddess I could relate to) and then I was given "Morningstar" in place of Epona. Ms. Crystal was highly respected for her knowledge and courage and effective communication skills. An exasperated "Crystal...." held no power over me, for Ms. Crystal knew her own being and there was nothing derogatory to be said of it. Now if someone used an exasperated tone while stating "Stacey", that would have been a different story. Eventually, Ms. Crystal was the only experience that resonated with me and even the name "Stacey" could no longer be used to summon insecurities. So, I let go of the Ms. Crystal construct and resumed using my given name. I spent too much time having it proven to me I have plenty to be proud of to even entertain the implication that I do not.
I see this alot with common names women are called. The energy with which they are stated is inherited and ingrained in our DNA, as are the responses. These names, however, were originally compliments, high status, or simply neutral. Some examples:
Virgin. Virgin never meant a woman who had never had sex. Virgin meant a woman whose body was not occupied by a child: not pregnant or nursing. So, every woman, whether having had sex or not was a virgin unless she was pregnant or nursing a child. That changed to "untouched by a man" and highly prized and then to an inferior state of inexperience no teenager wanted to be in.
Whore. A whore was any woman who was not committed to a man. The virgin who had never had sex, was an adult and independent was a whore. Whores did not exchange sex for money. Eventually they became prized and so men would offer them gifts and money so the whore would choose them above other men and then it became sex for money and negative when virgins were newly defined and sought after so men could control biological parentage.
Cunt. From the words like Kunta (ironically also Qua ran-yes, the Islamic holy book). A cunt was the word used to identify a wise woman, a holy woman, a priestess, the most revered people in the community as well as their knowledge (female intuition, women's wisdom, etc.). Anyone would have been flattered if called a cunt. Then the age of religious patriarchy came and no one wanted to be pointed out as the village holy woman because it meant torture and burning at the stake. That's when fear and repulsion became associated with being called a cunt. Cunt, was never an insult. Yet, it was said with tones of condemnation and received with insecurity or anger, becoming the hottest button that could be pressed in a woman.
So, these are all words we have pretty much stopped using in mainstream. They only exist in the stagnant cesspools of misanthropy that cling and linger in the wake of awakened society.
Do we reclaim them now that they are "safe"/"cleansed". What would we replace them with? Person? No, "person" is qualified by being human, in relation to man/males of our species which is labeled as "homo" sapiens, male and feMALE. Virgin, and whore both denote a woMAN's state of being in relation to men/males. Even PRIESTess is a derivative of a male/masculine station.
We could use no names or titles at all. That would mean we could not talk about one another. To get one another's attention, we would have to approach one another. That would lead to all sorts of effort, making the value of each interaction greater.........the picture could wander from there. That would free us all of gossip and other people's perceptions. Is the world ready for such.......
Or, maybe we need new words?