There’s an ongoing debate on “guys” being non-inclusive. I don’t personally buy into it, but that doesn’t make it an invalid position. I generally recommend calling people what they want to be called and exercising common courtesy.
There's certainly a history of "guys" being used specifically for men, as in "Guys and Dolls"; however, there is also an (increasing, I think) acceptance of its use in reference to mixed or even all-female groups. But not everyone is equally comfortable with that usage.
In many contexts I think it should be clear enough whether an inclusive or gender-specific meaning is intended, but some people may prefer to avoid any risk of misunderstanding by choosing a different word.
And unfortunately, as seems all to common these days, some may choose to see offence where none was intended.
Dictionary definition aside, the colloquial meaning of "guys" is quite frequently "men". I think the GP was trying to be gender-neutral. I actually have tried to move to "folks" myself for that reason.
It depends on how the word is used. "You guys" is very different, for instance, than just "guys". As it happens, that's the usage in the title of this thread.
I'm not saying there's no reason to reconsider language choices. Frankly, I agree overall that this phrase and its derivatives should probably be slowly retired, if only to avoid the occasional confusion. My point is only that even in colloquial usage there are patterns involving "guys" that are clearly gender-neutral at this point and have been for decades.
>My point is only that even in colloquial usage there are patterns involving "guys" that are clearly gender-neutral at this point and have been for decades.
Yeah, that's fair. I think we can agree that the meaning is ambiguous.
TBH I just figure that "folks" is a change that might, in some cases, make some people feel more welcome, at basically no expense in time, effort or clarity. Seems like a decent cost/benefit to me. But I don't get up in arms about it - this thread notwithstanding. ;)
>Old English used wer and wif to distinguish the sexes, but wer began to disappear late 13c. and was replaced by man.
It would be pretty awesome if we'd kept to the wer/wif tradition. It'd make modern conversations a ton easier. Also, I'm fully onboard with calling males wermen or werman.
Final note, a female werewolf would be a wifwolf.
Sorry to totally geek out but I just wanted to point out the fluidity of definitions.
> Thought Experiment #1: Imagine a room full of men and women. Someone stands at the front and says, “I want all the guys to stand up.” What happens next?
I don't know where I personally land on this debate, but the points are cogent.
Experiment #2: Someone says, "OK, I want you guys to stand up." with no particular emphasis on any word or looking at particular people. Did something different happen? I think that's closer to the original post's usage. If you say it the way it's naturally said instead of the strawman way in this article, it's not explicitly gendered or exclusive, maybe just a little implicitly. Reason enough to dispose with it I guess, but let's argue from reality not a made-up caricature.
This is a really good point. The usage of the term really ads clarity to it's usage.
You guys - gender neutral.
The guys - gender specific.
I think a lot of people who are annoyed by the term guys don't like the fact that there is a word that has both gender neutral and gender specific definitions being used as gender neutral.
Dudes is another one.
Spanish has an explanation for this (which i think is what people are frustrated by).
Ellos => them male
Ellas => them female
Ellos => a group of 10 women with one man in the bunch
I think there's a distinction between 'you guys' and 'the guys', just like there's a difference between 'my baby' and 'the baby' in songs. If I said 'I want you guys to all stand up' I would expect everyone to stand up, if I said 'I want all the guys to stand up' I would expect only males to stand.
That's what dictionary.com says, and that's true in some places, but in other places "guys" is definitely gendered.
Imagine a group of cishet men saying : "I'm off to the strip club to see a bunch of guys taking their clothes off and dancing in a provocative manner."
Does that seem reasonable? If not, then the term "guys" is gendered.
On top of that, most of the women I know feel that "guys" is a term that excludes them. That's enough for me to avoid using it.
The definition of "folks" is "people in general"
I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here.