• miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 months 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
        ·
        11 months 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
      ·
      11 months 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
        ·
        11 months 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
      ·
      11 months ago

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

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