Substitution/replacement arguments

Is there a fallacy that covers the reply to a comment with something along the lines of "Replace the word men with black men and see how you sound"

It seems like they're trying to evoke an emotion and a response of "oh, I must be a racist, then...I concede the point" instead of addressing the original claim.

Is there a category for this type of approach?

I would say the closest is the false equivalence . "Replace X with Y and see how you sound" where X and Y are not the same in the context of the argument and change the argument substantially.

(I've seen this a lot too, by the way).

It's not necessarily a fallacy. It's more like reductio ad absurdum where a person attempts to expose a double standard. When used correctly, it asks the right questions - for example, "why is it okay to say X about A group, but not okay to say the same thing about B group?"

E.g. a statement made about white people, where someone states, "replace white with black and see if it's accepted." The implication is that 1) saying the statement about black people would be considered bigoted, therefore it shouldn't be said about whites.

P1) Statement X would be considered bigoted if said about black people.

Implicit P) The statement is bigoted regardless of who it is said to.

P2) Therefore the statement is bigoted towards white people.

Implicit P) Bigoted statements are also wrong factually/morally

P3) Therefore the statement is wrong (factually or morally).

You can contest any of the two implicit lynchpins of the syllogism. And if they are false/unreasonable to assume, you would, far from being guilty of double standards, simply be applying rationally different standards and actually expose a fallacy in the opposing argument.

The first implicit premise being false is an example of accident fallacy (apply the same standard to all groups, when they should be held to different ones)

The second implicit premise being false is an example of appeal to consequences (statement is factually wrong because I find it upsetting)

In short, depending on whether the difference in standards is justifiable, this is either a valid reasoning technique, or a fallacious implicit argument.