“You guys” is the plural form of “you” for most speakers of colloquial American English, and is completely ungendered, in an empirical sense: if you observe native speakers speaking naturally and colloquially, you will find that everyone who uses it (regardless of gender) uses it consistently to address groups of multiple people (regardless of gender).
It’s derived from the noun “guy”, which is indeed often gendered. But etymology doesn’t determine meaning. Otherwise we would have to conclude that “woman” is male-gendered because it etymologically derives from “man”.
Making “you guys” taboo seems to be a cultural phenomenon specific to certain industries. I’ve asked several of my friends, and never encountered one outside of tech or academia who thought “you guys” was problematic at all. In fact, the vast majority had never even heard of the issue or imagined that it could be controversial.
> etymology doesn’t determine meaning. Otherwise we would have to conclude that “woman” is male-gendered because it etymologically derives from “man”.
Man was not gendered when "woman" originated. In Old English, the words for men and women were "wer" and "wif", while "mann" described any person. Over time, wifmann became woman, and for whatever reason, wermann didn't end up becoming a word.
Other examples of trouble through etymology might include "virtue" and "world", which both derive from "wer".
Yes, but if you use "y'all" it either means that you don't think southerners are idiots, or that you are ironically acting like you don't think they are idiots.
1. You assume that “guys” is the male equivalent of “gals”. It’s not — the latter is much more strongly gendered. Your argument is circular, because you assume that “guys” is gendered as one of your axioms.
2. You are talking about “hey guys”, whereas I was talking about “you guys”. The whole point of my post was that you can’t understand the meaning of “you guys” simply by referencing the meaning of “guys”. They are completely different words, and their only relationship is historical, even though one is a substring of the other. Even if “hey guys” is mildly gendered (which I’m not sure of, but I’m at least willing to believe it’s possible), “you guys” absolutely isn’t, empirically.
If you’re not being sarcastic, “you guys” is never (and I know how strong that word is) gendered. It’s literally a synonym for “you all”, ‘y’all’, or ‘you’ (plural).
Are you a native speaker? I’m genuinely curious because I can’t imagine this not seeming ubiquitous to a person that’s grown up in American English.
No elevation is happening. There is only inclusion and gathering together all members of the group regardless of gender. "Guys" performs this function effortlessly, without harm.
Gals always = girls. Guys does not always equal boys. That's language at work, an evolution which shouldn't be policed by language activists, instructing us what words are permitted.
If "leader" is part of the origin of "guy", that makes it even more suitable to gender neutral use in modern times. It's healthy when language is allowed to evolve and operate in varying contexts. Gatekeeping and policing words is to create problems and tension.
Traditional English has three genders: Male, Female, ???:
He/she/it
They/they/they
Guys/gals/guys
(Unfortunately, incorrectly using "it" to refer to a human is considered derogatory. All the other cells I listed were considered fine 20-30 years ago, and generally still are.)
It’s derived from the noun “guy”, which is indeed often gendered. But etymology doesn’t determine meaning. Otherwise we would have to conclude that “woman” is male-gendered because it etymologically derives from “man”.
Making “you guys” taboo seems to be a cultural phenomenon specific to certain industries. I’ve asked several of my friends, and never encountered one outside of tech or academia who thought “you guys” was problematic at all. In fact, the vast majority had never even heard of the issue or imagined that it could be controversial.