Just popping in as a professional linguist, since a linguistic item was brought up: ‘Guy’ is amidst a change, where it has historically been gender-specific (that is, marked masculine), but it is changing into a gender-neutral term. The issue with items in this sort of process of change is that some people will see it as exclusive, and others as inclusive.
Therefore, if you’re annoyed that someone uses ‘guy’ to mean everyone, remember that they’re probably using it to actually mean everyone, and (unlike, say, ‘man’) it isn’t the sort of thing where it’s using the masculine as emblematic of everyone—for such speakers, a woman really, honestly, is a guy (whereas she wouldn’t be a man).
For these people, ‘guy’ is actually identical in meaning to ‘people’, except that it’s marked as informal. For many (almost certainly most, and in fact the vast majority) these people, ‘guy’ meaning ‘human male’ isn’t even an option—the idea that ‘guy’ could be that limited is simply bizarre.
And it really does seem that this is a change in progress that’s steadily progressing—if it annoys you now, I’m sorry, but it appears that you’re either going to have to learn to live with it or be annoyed the entire rest of your life. The only languages that don’t change are dead languages—this is simply one manifestation of English being a living language.
And before you say that it’s simply, say, “rude” to use ‘guy’ that way, I’ll just add that if you do, I certainly hope that you’re using that word with its historical meaning of “reflecting characteristics of rurality” rather than the much, much newer meaning of “impolite”.
@wustl93 -FWIW, I’ve lived in CA most of my life–I’ve never heard the phrase until the debate was started here on CC. My H who was raised in NY and lived in CA for his whole adult life says he’s only heard it said by political commentators.
“You guys” was also non-gender specific growing up in NorCal in the 80s. It could be used when addressing a group of females. However, if you said “I was talking to a guy who…” that would indicate a male.
“You guys” would have bothered me less, having lived in both “Youse Guys” and “Y’all” territories.
You’re right dfb. But get this: he also sent me a pm addressed, “Hey Man.”
(Nice kid, it turns out. I pointed it out and he humbly apologized. All’s ok.)
@dfbdfb I wish you’d popped in on the thread complaining about calling California “Cali.” Especially as I brought up calling Philadelphia “Philly” and I know you spent time there.
I understand usage morphs. But there’s a level that’s interesting and another that’s just sloppy, picking up a lower sort of slang.
Btw, when my girls started calling me “Dude,” I politely suggested at least “Dude-ette.”
“Dude” is also used to refer to males, females and mixed groups as well. Somehow I find that tougher to process than “guy” used that way. Chick on the other hand seems to be confined to female.
Yea, I don’t respond when I’m called dude, babe, chick or any of those assorted terms. It throws me tho, especially when addressed by a younger person whom I like in that manner.
I’ve also commented that I am not a “Dude” and been told its a generic term. Well maybe by younger posters, but we are not all younger posters either.!
Context matters for guys/dude/man - I use all three with my female friends (including my girlfriend), but I wouldn’t use it with someone I don’t know or just met. I think that is a part of what’s going on here as well. Certainly a newer evolution, well explained by @dfbdfb
I have yet to hear of a term originally applied to females being adopted as a term that supposedly applied to people of all genders. I am therefore skeptical of claims that the use of formerly male terms to include females is wholly benign.
Well, @Consolation, natural language change isn’t really benign or malign—it just is.
But there are terms that have gone from feminine-marked to generic, mostly occupational terms (teacher has at least nearly entirely lost its gender marking, and nurse is heading that way). They’re rare, but they most certainly do exist.
Also, just for fun, the word man was originally ungendered and became masculine over time. Old English had masculine wer and feminine wif, and man meant all people. Over time, man started referring also to just men—but then wer dropped out of the language (except for the word werewolf) and wife’s meaning changed to what we now know as wife.
I think @Consolation has a point that the turn of a male term to all genders enforces the male default and superiority in societal connotation, which I think is a fair criticism of the evolution itself.
Language evolution doesn’t happen outside of context and is why minority groups reclaiming words is important, like queer, which has been quite successful in my view.
This is all on the morality of the change, not the current state of it. Going back to guys/dude/man, there isn’t the negativity of “boobs” , and generally they are used in inclusive ways, so I think it’s bit more gray and acceptable in the context of friends. For me, it implies endearment to them as a friend and is synonymous with “pal” or “buddy” in terms of words not traditionally gendered. I don’t think it’s something to be used outside of that, say for example, when a professor is addressing a group of students, or with a stranger. In the end, it’s such a minute thing and I think people are more focused on words that have negative connotations rather than the ones that can be argued to affect the “male being default” societal idea.
Ahhh, language. You realize some object to posters who misuse grammar, even to the point of calling them out for it? (Recently, several jumping on one for a very common spelling error, likely an uncaught typo.)
And yet, using slang (in-group terms) in how we address strangers is ok? The ‘usage morphs’ stand can only go so far, with me. People pick up terms from common culture, sure. And, some of us do know each other somewhat, from postings. And sometimes, sure, a phrase is used for effect. But we can know when to resist versus when appropriate.
The ones where posters can’t make their points without insulting either an entire group of people (i.e., referring to the entire upper middle class as “ridiculous”) or a specific poster. Why must you call someone “balmy” or tell him to “think lucidly” or call him “mentally slow” or “clueless,” just because you don’t agree with him. Be civil, people, please.
I’d just like to point where I think the current growth of “Hi guys” is coming from. I think it’s coming from the little messages at the end of YouTube videos, where the group in the video thanks you for watching and asks you to subscribe. For example, I think it’s there in Pentatonix videos, and I’ve been seeing it in others. It’s clearly not intended to be exclusive of anybody, but it’s true that it is a broadening of a term that was previously primarily addressed to males.
