As an enthusiastic chess player, I have been waiting many years for activists to move on the innocent coloured pieces. Those activists just want an argument, they don't even know what they are talking about.
Way back when chess appeared in Europe, the pieces were made of solid stone.. and how many different colours of stone are readilly available? Ever heard of white, and black, marble?
The pieces may have been made of wood where dark colours were available, i.e. ebony vs. pine... although that's not a geographically realistic combo, you get the idea.
Today, it's just traditional to use those colours.. though browns are fairly common, as are reds, and transparency.
The reason one colour always moves first, is because the two sides deployments are different. Each side is a mirror-image of the other, and in the interests of fairness, the same side always has to go first... the rule is entrenched, traditional, and universal.
Players swap sides between games. So both players play as white, and both play as black.
Many players prefer to play as black, because they feel it has an advantage... black can select the optimal opening move specifically to take advantage of the white player's opening move... whereas the white player starts blind.