Though we in the U.K. are apparently less sensitive since we still call it Rape. I'll call the oil Rapeseed, as it does on the bottle, but if i'm pointing out a vast field of yellow I'll call it Rape.

Less knowledgeable youth in Canada & the United States will have no idea what you're referring to; Rapeseed, and Rape, which I personally have never heard, has been completely replaced.

Similarly in Canada, the Sushitna river has been changed to Susitna.

It may be worth noting that "Canola" is a specific kind of rapeseed, so it's not just a politically correct substitution (though branding concerns may have been part of the motivation for the very different name). Prior to Canola's creation in the 1970s, rapeseed oil was not generally edible (it was most useful as an industrial lubricant).

This answer isn't correct at all. "Canola" was a trademark name, derived from "Canada" (where the company was based and where it was bred), and the reason rapeseed is commonly called canola now is a product of the history of that trademark during a time of market growth. It was never "changed to canola to protect people's sensibilities about rape", it was just a trademark name that stuck and then followed the product into the US and elsewhere.

@JasonC But the other meaning of "rape" may well be the reason that the term "Canola" was so widely adopted. There's no organization that could enforce a change from "rapeseed" to "Canola", so it's obvious that that didn't happen.

@DavidRicherby Obvious that what didn't happen? Nothing was "enforced". First of all, canola oil wasn't just rapeseed oil, it was a very specific edible strain that was specifically bred for human consumption and explicitly named canola by the company that created it. They marketed as a unique product, and they named it because that's what you do when you market a product. Secondly, canola is the same as dry ice, heroin, or any other trademark name that became a common word.

@DavidRicherby And more importantly: Cite a single source. And I don't mean a blog written in 2010 retroactively making up descriptions, I mean write a letter to canolacouncil.org if you have to.

@JasonC Obvious that nothing was enforced (because there's nobody with the authority to enforce). You have stated, without citing any sources whatsoever, that the modern usage of canola as a genericized trademark has nothing to do with the unsavoury connotations of the word "rape". All I'm saying is that it's not clear that your claim is true.

@DavidRicherby So first of all, I cited a source that said exactly where the name came from, and note that according to the source I cited, canola oil doesn't even have to come from rapeseed oil, so of course they wouldn't just call it rapeseed. Second, rapeseed oil was already on shelves at the time and poorly received, rebranding is what you do when you market things. But mostly: Are you really going to start a burden of proof argument? We both know where it lies. I'm not the one making a claim here. The author of this answer is.

The author of this answer seem to be confusing "rapeseed would be a poor name for a product in 2017" with "in the 70's an organization sat down and decided rapeseed should be renamed to canola due to its offensiveness" (which doesn't even make sense, as again, rapeseed oil is still a real product, canola oil is a mix and isn't just rapeseed oil, canola and rapeseed are different things, but we'll ignore that), and cites no sources, whatsoever. This answer is wrong in like 9 ways.

@DavidRicherby naturalnews.com/034733_canola_oil_rapeseed_food_labels.html, for one, and I didn't even mean to find that. The FDA banned rapeseed oil for health reasons, it needed a new name. And "The term canola was coined from "Canadian oil, low acid" to convince consumers that this oil was safe to eat.". Again, this answer should be shot and put out of its misery.

@JasonC You cited a source that says that Canola was a trademark. You have not cited any source that backs up your claim about why that trademark name came to be applied to a whole class of products.

@DavidRicherby I've cited I believe 4 so far. Then there's canolacouncil.org/oil-and-meal/what-is-canola. And the history there. And the FAQ there. And literally every other source that talks about the history of canola ever. Now go find one source about the use of the term "rape" and political correctness. I don't know what is wrong with you at this point but you're just being silly. Do you know what canola oil is? It's name and applicability is currently regulated by the Canola Council of Canada, and rapeseed oil is not edible. Hopefully this needs no further explanation.

See also en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_burden_of_proof, and leave me alone. Don't make me do your trivial Google searching for you when I'm not even the one that made a claim. If you're going to gripe about missing sources in claims, you should be targeting Dan White and the social irresponsibility of posting completely BS answers on Q&A sites, not me. If your claim is that me regurgitating google links in comments is the difference between readers being able to make their own critical judgments on this answer or not, well, that's a bigger problem, and isn't my responsibility.

@DavidRicherby Just reading the "Canola" article on Wikipedia is enough to realize how wrong you are. There is no excuse for not cross-checking yourself with Wikipedia

@JasonC We seem to be talking at crossed purposes. You are telling me why the Canola Council of Canada decided that "Canola" would be a good name. I never disputed that. I am asking about why the general public now uses the word "canola" to refer to any edible rapeseed oil, of which there are many.

@Agent_L The Wikipedia page seems to say nothing about why the term has been generically adopted for all kinds of edible rapeseed oil.

@DavidRicherby If you have a new question, you may post one here.

@DavidRicherby First: we don't care on why it was chosen to call a particular brand of rapeseed oil. The discussion is if it ever was used to replace the word "rapeseed" and the article clearly states that "canola" is one thing while "rapeseed" is another. Just like "McIntosh" does not replace "apple". Second: genericization of a trademark is not something that anyone choose to do. It's something that people caught up because they never cared enough to make a difference between "Jell-O" an "jelly dessert", an uncontrolled process that's against owner of the trademark.

@DavidRicherby And the most likely explanation is that "low erucic acid rapeseed oil" is not exactly a thing that's easy to write on your shopping list. Just like we ask for "aspirin" instead of "acetylsalicylic acid", to the point that Bayer lost rights to the trademark.