• miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        I haven’t seen it used much in a non-gendered way, so I guess that’s why it has a clear masculine ring in my head

        • JoShmoe@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          It is very common to hear girls use the term guys, and for people to address a mixed party as “guys”

      • Lem Jukes@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Just like ‘mankind’ right? (/s)

        Sure, language is changing and guys has been veering neutral since the 70s. But claiming the word is outright “non-gendered” is incorrect imo.

        • Senshi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Kind of a bad example, because mankind very clearly stems from ‘humankind’. And people are lazy and prefer using short words. The unfairness is rather that women got stuck with the words requiring more characters. But that is a phenomenon of the English language and not present in others.

          However, in most languages the words for man/male are closer to human(kind) than female/woman, which very clearly shows the historic patriarchal influence, coming back around to your point after all.

      • hughesdikus@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not technically. Practically. In real world. As slang.

        Cause technically and by definition, It’s still very much gendered.