Despite these changes, am pretty sure not many commentators are going to use the terms. It's just more convenient sticking to the terms that have been used for almost a century now.
Personally believe the ICC is trying to appease the feminist agenda by introducing these terms.
More like the "equality agenda", my friend! 'Convenience' and 'tradition' are the biggest roadblocks to progress. The insatiable lust for the testosterone has got to stop!
Our brains are malleable, and they will eventually re-adapt themselves to new terminology if its given enough exposure. Yes it is going to start off with resistance where folks dont want to wrap their heads around it. But persistence will eventually make them do it.
Some on social media have been arguing that "hu-man" includes women and thereby "bats-man" is inclusive of them too. But in cricket, its also connotated as "batsmen" where the "men" makes it completely male specific. I know "human" and "mankind" are gender neutral words, but this is more of a strong statement to ensure that the imp is given to all gender cricket. Keeping them separate and calling them "batswoman", "fields woman" doesn't work. Bring the lingo into men's cricket to normalize it, and things change.