# For bitching about language pedantry, other posters' language, and language in general **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 16, 2024, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135 "2024-06-16T22:40:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 23
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/441 "2024-07-05T01:25:18Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > From Merriam Webster (emphasis mine): > > > **guy** (noun) > > a > > : MAN, FELLOW > > b > > : PERSON — **used in plural to refer to the members of a group regardless of sex** > > “saw her and the rest of the guys” > > Rather than considering it sexist or “male subsuming female”, how about considering that women are exercising the right to the same slang terminology as men, and have been doing it for so long that it’s now in the dictionary. What you and Merriam write about “guys” is just about exactly what was written about “he” and “him” in dictionaries in 1965 when I was child starting elementary school. You may as well defend “he” as subsuming the female. The only difference is how far behind the times you are: 20 years or 40 years. Not a hill I wish to die on, and any of us can be as blinkered, backwards, and curmudgeonly as we wish. For any reason or no reason. The argument that “guys” / “you guys” is not gendered is simply laughable. What you (any you) are arguing is actually “It doesn’t sound _excessively_ gendered to my old fashioned gender-insult insensitive ears.” To which I reply: “You do you. But don’t be surprised to experience adverse judgment for your choices.” ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/442 "2024-07-05T02:12:06Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > The only difference is how far behind the times you are: 20 years or 40 years. The question is, do dictionaries have the gender-neutral definition because they’ve caught up with contemporary usage, or is it because they’re stuck in the past? My anecdotal experience is that the number of times I’ve seen young women join a group with some variant of “hi, guys”, whether that group is mixed-sex or all women, suggests that the use is extremely prevalent. Also, Google Ngram says the prevalence of “guys” has increased greatly in the past 25 years, which is consistent with my anecdotal observation that women have been adopting it. I think what’s outdated is the idea that “guys” shouldn’t be used in a gender-neutral fashion. Of course it depends on circumstances (it’s obviously very informal) and age is a factor, too. A waiter would certainly never inquire of a table of elderly female socialites, “are you guys ready to order?”. But if it’s a table of high school girls, it’s perfect! Because that’s how they talk. The other thing that strikes me as outdated is that the attempt to discourage the gender-neutral “guys” smacks of just the kind of prescriptivism that many on this board hold in such disdain. If a large segment of the population is using it that way, then who is empowered to declare it wrong, or worse, declare it offensive to the very same folks who are using it themselves? Here’s an article from WaPo that is unfortunately paywalled, but the headline and subhead gives you the gist. Lisa Selin Davis is a writer, essayist, and blogger on gender culture wars. When she says “We should celebrate when words lose their gendered connotations” she’s reflecting exactly my view that the gender-neutral “guys” should be considered empowering for women rather than some silly notion that it reflects some kind of male dominance. > **[Perspective | ‘Guys’ isn’t a gendered word anymore. It’s fine to use with...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/07/07/guys-defense-gendered-etymology/)** > > We should celebrate when words lose their gendered connotations. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 12:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/443 "2024-07-05T12:01:22Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > The argument that “guys” / “you guys” is not gendered is simply laughable. What you (any you) are arguing is actually “It doesn’t sound _excessively_ gendered to my old fashioned gender-insult insensitive ears.” To which I reply: “You do you. But don’t be surprised to experience adverse judgment for your choices.” ⁢ It’s not laughable at all. “You guys” is the plural of “you” in my dialect. Women will say “Whatcha guys doin’?” to other women. It’s not just my area: [![](https://i.imgur.com/jUFTbiog.jpg) ](https://i.imgur.com/jUFTbiog.jpg) Your logic is flawed. You’re attempting to force a level of logic onto language that doesn’t exist. _He_ and _guys_ aren’t the same word. _He_ was gender neutral in academic and formal contexts, to avoid the “incorrect” singular _they_. And these contexts were dominated by men. “You guys” and even “guys” has been used in a gender neutral way forever. Now is it impossible that things will change? Of course not. I have very rarely encountered a trans person online who assumes “guys” is gendered. And “y’all” is spreading, so “you guys” may fall more and more out of favor. But it’s also possible that this is a “womyn” thing, where people decide it doesn’t matter. As it is, I’m going to use what everyone else in my dialect uses. If it trends more towards “y’all,” that’ what I’ll use. But, for now, it’s still “you guys.” ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/444 "2024-07-05T15:19:46Z")
The simplest solution is just to swap out “gals” for guys. When referring to any group–all women, all men, mixed gender, all nonbinary–just say, “Hey, Mike and Bob and Jason, are you gals coming with us to the MMA match?” “Gals” should be gender neutral. “Guys” registers for me like a 4 on the 0-100 “sexist language” scale. But it’s not a zero. It’s certainly a common term and is used in a gender-neutral manner, but has some subtle connotation that I prefer to avoid. (“Dude” is like a 4.5). ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/445 "2024-07-05T15:22:56Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > The other thing that strikes me as outdated is that the attempt to discourage the gender-neutral “guys” smacks of just the kind of prescriptivism that many on this board hold in such disdain. If a large segment of the population is using it that way, then who is empowered to declare it wrong, or worse, declare it offensive to the very same folks who are using it themselves? Only to someone who doesn’t understand what “descriptivist” means. Nobody is claiming that “you guys” is _grammatically_ wrong, which is as far as “descriptivist/prescriptivist” reaches. What’s being discussed here is fundamentally a question of manners, not grammar, and there’s no “descriptivist” position on manners. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/446 "2024-07-05T15:25:48Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Only to someone who doesn’t understand what “descriptivist” means. Nobody is claiming that “you guys” is _grammatically_ wrong, which is as far as “descriptivist/prescriptivist” reaches. What’s being discussed here is fundamentally a question of manners, not grammar, and there’s no “descriptivist” position on manners. Exactly right. And people who use it aren’t morons, and they’re not lazy, and they’re not bad at language, or any of the other stupid stuff that keeps getting thrown around. It’s just a usage with some connotations that I’d rather avoid. If “guys” is at 4 on the 1-100 Offensiveness scale, “cocksuckers” (as a pejorative) is around 90. But the people that use it aren’t morons or lazy or bad at language, either. They’re just assholes. ---
**Author:** ![Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eyebrows_0f_doom/32/3119_2.png) [@Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eyebrows_0f_Doom)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/447 "2024-07-05T15:56:03Z")
Where I live and in my circle of friends and acquaintances (NYC, 30s-40s, various sexualities and gender expressions), I _always_ hear women call groups of other women “guys.” No one uses “gals” in any context. That’s such an old fashioned word. But apparently the men on this board want to dictate what women call each other. ---
**Author:** ![TroutMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troutman/32/6721_2.png) [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/448 "2024-07-05T16:03:18Z")
Nah, I just listen to other people. You know of no women who have an issue with “guys”. Great. I know many women who are fine with it, and many women who find it slightly dismissive of women. As long as there are perfectly fine alternatives, I side with those who prefer something other than “guys”. ---
**Author:** ![Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eyebrows_0f_doom/32/3119_2.png) [@Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eyebrows_0f_Doom)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/449 "2024-07-05T16:10:34Z")
Nah. The only people I see complaining about it in here are men. Who are ignoring the women saying “actually we use it and it’s fine.” Funny how that is. ---
**Author:** ![TroutMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troutman/32/6721_2.png) [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/450 "2024-07-05T16:14:21Z")
I’m sorry, I didn’t realize you know all the women I know. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/451 "2024-07-05T17:13:44Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > “Guys” registers for me like a 4 on the 0-100 “sexist language” scale. But it’s not a zero. It’s certainly a common term and is used in a gender-neutral manner, but has some subtle connotation that I prefer to avoid. That has been pretty much my take until yesterday-ish. I now find myself confronted by good evidence from @wolfpup and @BigT that I might be wrong / hyper-corrective about that. With “hyper-correct” being a reliable synonym for “wrong”. > [@Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](#): > > Who are ignoring the women saying “actually we use it and it’s fine.” Funny how that is. Who are the women _in this thread_ who have made that assertion? Serious question, not a gotcha. I _have_ been paying attention, but sometime I miss something. OTOH … My own occupational experience addressing mixed gender groups new to me is probably wider than most folks. In that milieu there was enough gentle pushback on the collective “guys” that I switched to “folks” and got a bunch fewer disapproving glances and arms folded across chests. Or so it seemed. It may well be that “guys”, very slightly akin to the much more potent n-word, can be safely used by the in-group (in this case women) to refer to one another happily, but it’s transgressive for outsiders (in this case men) to use it to refer to the same group. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/452 "2024-07-05T17:15:44Z")
> [@Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](#): > > But apparently the men on this board want to dictate what women call each other. Which men? Cite? ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/453 "2024-07-05T18:29:43Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > > [@wolfpup](#): > > > > The other thing that strikes me as outdated is that the attempt to discourage the gender-neutral “guys” smacks of just the kind of prescriptivism that many on this board hold in such disdain. If a large segment of the population is using it that way, then who is empowered to declare it wrong, or worse, declare it offensive to the very same folks who are using it themselves? > > Only to someone who doesn’t understand what “descriptivist” means. Nobody is claiming that “you guys” is _grammatically_ wrong, which is as far as “descriptivist/prescriptivist” reaches. What’s being discussed here is fundamentally a question of manners, not grammar, and there’s no “descriptivist” position on manners. I disagree, and I would question who it is that really doesn’t understand what “prescriptivism” means. I’ve added emphasis to the definition below: > Linguistic prescription, also called prescriptivism or prescriptive grammar, is the establishment of rules defining preferred usage of language. These rules may address such linguistic aspects as spelling, pronunciation, vocabulary, morphology, syntax, **and semantics**. Sometimes informed by linguistic purism, such normative practices often propagate the belief that some usages are incorrect, inconsistent, illogical, lack communicative effect, or are of low aesthetic value, even in cases where such usage is more common than the prescribed usage. **They may also include judgments on socially proper and politically correct language use.** > [Linguistic prescription - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_prescription) Furthermore, “manners” – in the general sense, not just about language – is fundamentally prescriptive. It tries to set out rules for “correct” or “polite” standards of behaviour based on various rationales that may or may not make sense. It exactly parallels linguistic prescriptivism, and when we make judgments about what we think a word means and whether or not it should be used, apparently heedless of how it’s **actually** being used out in the real world, we’re absolutely engaged in linguistic prescriptivism. Conversely, a statement like “_guys_ isn’t a gendered word any more” is a descriptive empirical linguistic observation. > [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > The simplest solution is just to swap out “gals” for guys. When referring to any group–all women, all men, mixed gender, all nonbinary–just say, “Hey, Mike and Bob and Jason, are you gals coming with us to the MMA match?” “Gals” should be gender neutral. That’s not a valid analogy because “gals” has never been gender neutral anywhere on planet Earth, whereas whether you approve or not, “guys” in the plural form has been, and for a long time. “Gals” is also a word I don’t hear much any more, whereas for the past 25 years or so “guys” has seen a dramatic upsurge in usage. ---
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/454 "2024-07-05T18:54:47Z")
I use “folks” because it is truly gender neutral, not just mostly gender neutral. It’s safer. I also think it sounds better. 🙂 One thing I always thought was weird; “fellow” as a noun just means any contemporary. A friend, colleague, acquaintance, or someone you just happen to be in proximity to. It’s gender neutral. But the variant pronunciation “fella” or “feller” seems to imply a male. I never understood that. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/455 "2024-07-05T19:35:27Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > That’s not a valid analogy because “gals” has never been gender neutral anywhere on planet Earth, whereas whether you approve or not, “guys” in the plural form has been, and for a long time. It’s like you got halfway through figuring out the point and then quit. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/456 "2024-07-05T19:53:31Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > Conversely, a statement like “_guys_ isn’t a gendered word any more” is a descriptive empirical linguistic observation. No, it’s just wrong. There are a lot of people who do consider it gendered. It may be a minority opinion, but a descriptivist understands that just because a usage is uncommon, does not make it incorrect. “Manners” are a set of explicitly artificial rules designed to ease social interaction. They do not purport to describe a natural phenomenon. Saying that “manners” are “prescriptivist” is tautological. It’s like call chess “prescriptivist.” True, but so what? The whole point of descriptivism is to get away from treating linguistics like manners. Language isn’t determined by artificially imposed rules, but by emergent rules arrived at by subconscious consensus. But there’s nothing in descriptivism that opposes teaching people how those rules work (grammar), or which sets of rules are best suited to which social contexts (manners). There’s no ironic contradiction in applying a descriptivist approach to emergent rule sets, and a prescriptivist approach to artificial rule sets. ---
**Author:** ![BippityBoppityBoo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bippityboppityboo/32/5745_2.png) [@BippityBoppityBoo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BippityBoppityBoo)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/457 "2024-07-05T20:22:16Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > It may well be that “guys”, very slightly akin to the much more potent n-word, can be safely used by the in-group (in this case women) to refer to one another happily, but it’s transgressive for outsiders (in this case men) to use it to refer to the same group. Nailed it. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/458 "2024-07-05T21:19:54Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > > [@wolfpup](#): > > > > Conversely, a statement like “_guys_ isn’t a gendered word any more” is a descriptive empirical linguistic observation. > > No, it’s just wrong. There are a lot of people who do consider it gendered. It may be a minority opinion, but a descriptivist understands that just because a usage is uncommon, does not make it incorrect. We could argue forever about how common or uncommon the gender-neutral usage of “guys” is. That’s not the point I was making in that response. I was objecting to the accusation that I somehow “didn’t understand” what prescriptivism was when I said that disparaging the use of “guys” in the gender-neutral sense was linguistic prescriptivism. It absolutely is, because as in the definition I quoted, prescriptivism is not limited to edicts about grammar and it absolutely can include prescriptive judgments about things like social propriety. But as for how common that usage is, as I said, I hear it all the time, and when a respected writer, essayist, and feminist with expertise in gendered language and the politics of gender nonconfomity tells us that “guys” has now fully evolved to be gender neutral, I’m inclined to believe her. > [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > It’s like you got halfway through figuring out the point and then quit. No, your point was quite clear, and it was made here where you expressed your reluctance to accept a very common and well-established meaning: > [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > It’s just a usage with some connotations that I’d rather avoid. That’s fine. You do you. But you’re making a value judgment, not an empirical observation. If you’re making it for yourself, cool. If you’re making it for others, you’re being prescriptive and judgmental. > [@LSLGuy](#): > > It may well be that “guys”, very slightly akin to the much more potent n-word, can be safely used by the in-group (in this case women) to refer to one another happily, but it’s transgressive for outsiders (in this case men) to use it to refer to the same group. Maybe, but I don’t so, though this is just conjecture on my part. I won’t try to address the sociology of Blacks calling each other the n-word, but there’s definitely some significant social psychology going on there. Whereas “Hi, guys” is just cheerfully playful and IMHO has no greater significance than that. In an appropriately informal setting it sounds better than “ladies”, “gals”, “girls”, or “folks”. But “informal” is key here. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/459 "2024-07-05T21:21:26Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > No, your point was quite clear Thanks! I agree it was quite clear. Our disagreement is whether you understood it. You didn’t. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135/460 "2024-07-05T21:44:48Z")
Here’s an interesting though distinctly non-scientific survey someone did that may shed some light on the nature of the disagreement here. The sample size was about 2300. In casual informal greetings like “Hey, guys” or “Hi, guys”, virtually everyone regarded “guys” as gender-neutral. The problem arises when “guys” is used in other sentence constructions. And I must acknowledge that when I said I hear it all the time in the gender-neutral sense, I was subconsciously thinking in the terms of greetings, not general speech. The conclusion is that it’s undeniably gender-neutral in greetings and similar forms of address (“you guys”) but not when used in arbitrary sentences. “I’m going out with the guys” understandably had the lowest gender-neutral rating – almost everyone thought it was male gendered in that context. In retrospect it should have been obvious, but context is really important. [![](https://jvns.ca/images/guys-guys-guys-chart.png) ](https://jvns.ca/images/guys-guys-guys-chart.png) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135.md?page=22) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-bitching-about-language-pedantry-other-posters-language-and-language-in-general/1003135.md?page=24)