In an online conversation, is it okay to use "guys" to address everyone? [closed]

Question

In an online group chat, sometimes I say "See ya later, guys!". Of course, not all of them are "guys". Some are "gals". But for efficiency (read: lazy), I usually just say "guys".

I wonder if this is acceptable in an online culture, especially with the swarm of new gender pronouns that I'm currently oblivious about.

It should only take a little effort to add "gals" to the end of the sentence, but I don't know how to react to those who prefer other gender pronouns.

As additional info, I don't know whether the participants are all males, or there are females participants. We are all just members and don't know each other personal information.

Update: We also not discussing things such as politic, or sensitive issue regarding gender or adult content.

Answer 1

Sure, it's fine to use it, guys!

It's fine as long as it's informal. I use it all the time, even at work among colleagues of either sex. I have heard it being used almost my entire life, every city I've been to, as long as it's informal and it's an English-speaking crowd.

Avoid using guys in formal situations.

Guys -- Oxford Dictionaries

(informal) noun 1.1. people of either sex.
Example: "you guys want some coffee?"

NOTE:

Guy is not the same as Guys. Guys is commonly used to address people of either sex. Guy, on the other hand, not so much. Guy (singular) is mostly for men.

NOTE 2:

a group of people can be guys, even if they’re all female.

^{Vocabulary.com}

Further reading: A dozen posts on ELU

Answer 2

TLDR; yes yes it is okay to greet people in an online discussion with the term guys, but addressing people would depend on your phrasing (as mentioned below). There aren't only gender differences, there are regional differences too (i.e. some places in the US it may not go down well, regardless of gender). If you want to play it safe i.e. a universal term for online discussion (for more regions/cultures), "folks" is more formal, but a good alternative.

---

The term "Guys" is generally accepted as a gender-neutral term depending on the phrasing. How you might ask?

If we take a little insight from How Gender Neutral Is Guys, Really?, we'll find term guys to address a mixed-group of poeple has been around for a while.

This use of guys to address a mixed group has been around for decades. It’s a pop-cultural favorite, propelled to catchphrase status by the exuberant “Hey you guys!” in The Goonies, itself a nod to The Electric Company.

But like I said it does depend on how it's used, "Hey Guys" can be seen as neutral because you're addressing a group of people but a term such as "You Guys" may come across as you overlooking the female participants in such an online discussion.

It depends. Addresses like Hey guys or just Guys are widely felt to be gender-neutral; set phrases like good guys are less so; usages like those guys shift even more subtly male-ward; singular a guy and the guy are markedly male. Then we have the likes of a guy thing and guys and dolls, which explicitly contrast guys to the female gender (and belie the fact that many people identify as neither).

But, let's not take a writer's word for it. I wanna hear what the linguists say about this, more specifically a feminist linguist would be a good place to start.

Written in You don't like being called 'guys'? Come on, people!:

Feminist writer and activist Beatrix Campbell is more critical of “guys”. She said: “I’m reminded of the wonderful Getting On TV series when Dr Moore (Vicki Pepperdine) does her ward round and hails the bewildered junior docs (men and women) as ‘gents’. Gorgeously potty. Calling mixed groups ‘guys’ is also potty, but not so gorgeous. There is, lest we forget, as perfect alternative: people.”

But “people” doesn’t solve this linguistic problem. It’s not used in the same way; there’s a colloquial cool solidarity to ‘guys’. ‘Come on, people’ sounds brusque. ‘Come on, guys’ sounds encouraging.

It doesn't seem to bode well, too often. Safe to say there are better alternatives out there (maybe safer).

What's the verdict?

Well, It's perfectly fine to address a group of mixed-gender people (in regards to saying hello) but I wouldn't go much further than that, There are alternatives to the term and should be used with steed.

If I'm addressing the group, I would personally use "Hey Guys" or "Hey all" or "Hey everyone". But, If I'm using the term as you've described in your question. I would say "see ya later, everyone." or "see ya later, folks"

Even the bottom line of the second article has a funny finish and addresses the term folks also.

It’s a minefield, really. Still concerned about the generic masculine insinuation of “guys” and want an equally informal, warm alternative? You’re welcome, folks.

Further reading:

• Question on English Language & Usage - "Is “guy” gender-neutral?"

Answer 3

"Guys" is often used as gender-neutral.

I decided to look at some data, and came to conclusions opposite that of my original answer. Here's some of what I found (in varying levels of rigor):

• A survey by Mic:

  1,528 18- to 44-year-olds revealed that while 71.8% of people "often" used "guys" to refer to mixed-gender groups, 88.1% "rarely" or "never" referred to mixed groups by female generics such as "gals," "girls" or "ladies."

  The blog post recommends not using "guys", by the way; it seems that "guys" is still used more often than female generic words.

• A solely online survey:

  The main thing I find interesting here is how women and men perceive these words differently: about 50% of men (+ other) think that “Java guys” is gender neutral, while only 25% of women do. There’s a similar split for “Python guy” and “Erlang guy”.

  The big outlier here? The case where "guys" is being used to address a group of people (of the same or mixed gender). In this case, both women and men perceive it as being gender-neutral.

• A senior thesis by Kerry Bodine, supervised by Douglas Hofstadter:

  Overall, Experiment One suggests that "guys" does not evoke more imagery of one gender or the other. Furthermore, the finding from the only story that produced significant results indicates that the expectations to find more masculine imagery associated with "guys" are unfounded.

These are just a few results. The point is that many people of all genders perceive "guys" in this sort of usage as gender-neutral, both in real life and online settings.

Answer 4

I think "okay" will depend on the group. Some people consider "guys" used like that to be gender neutral, others challenge that concept, yet others are offended by an assumption of gender. If you want to err on the side of caution, use a gender-neutral alternative.

For instance, "all" and "folks" fit in well with your example sentence. You could even leave it off entirely, and simply say "See ya later!"

Whatever you choose, I suggest picking one and sticking with it. As you use it more and more, it will become instinct and nobody will think it it sounds odd. I have a couple internet friends who have adopted atypical collective nouns, e.g. "See ya later, kittens!". That might sound funny coming from anyone else, but since they say it so naturally it's just a cute, quirky part of their personality.

Answer 5

I wonder if this is acceptable in an online culture, especially with the swarm of new gender pronouns that I'm currently oblivious about.

The internet is a big place and there is no one 'online culture', the best idea in order to communicate clearly in an online community is:

• Lurk around a little and see what kind of language other people use.
• See what is or isn't appropriate in the chat room.
• If you error - err on the side of caution.

For example - using "Guys" is entirely in place in the Stack Overflow JavaScript chatroom but that is not not the case everywhere:

Answer 6

From the perspective of a woman of retirement age, yes it is OK to call a mixed group "guys". (Further cultural ID: Boswash Corridor, US, middle class, associates all highly educated.)

Furthermore, from travelling in the western US, I can attest that if I, as a woman in a mixed group, had objected to being addressed as "you guys" by a waiter I would have starved to death.

In my cultural subgroup, we would not call a group of women gals, folks is just too folksy, but guys is OK. Among the women I play tennis with, we sometimes call ourselves guys and sometimes ladies, but we never call ourselves gals. A woman would refer to her family, but never to her folks.

Conclusion: Use guys, but if a woman in the group objects, apologize and don't do it again with that group. Never use gals. Even within the US, there are wide differences in language that depend on age, geography, and education.

Answer 7

The term 'guys' is a regionalism, used to mean "a group of people" in much of the US, and (because Hollywood) increasingly throughout the English-speaking world.

In the UK, few communities will tell you off for the term "guys" implying that the group is actually comprised of mannequins designed to be burned on a bonfire; in the US, few will tell you off for implying it is comprised of males.

There are some online subcultures which do object to gendered regionalisms like this - and speaking of regionalisms, I'm not sure why, but this class of communities seems to be very much a California thing. They're not a Left-wing thing, though: I very much doubt you'll ever encounter this in any Austin-based community, for example!

In general, though, any online subculture which has a policy of shaming any terms of regionalized speech such as "youse guys", "guys", "folks", "chaps" or "y'all" is discriminatory, unpleasant, and toxic: such communities are to be avoided and censured.

These communities will typically be exceptionally elitist, but will often claim the policies are there to try to "reduce discrimination": the true purpose and actual effect however, is to alienate, externalize and drive out those who do not speak the appropriate shibboleths. This in turn has a chilling effect on casual speech.

One of the reliable signs of a friendly online community is that regionalized speech will in all cases be embraced and broadly welcomed, and this can even be represented in official policies requiring linguistic tolerance.

Linguistic differences and confusions over terms which are regionally offensive, are not only tolerated but discussed with delight at the differences, rather than offense; intended meaning by the speaker is always given priority over etymology, offensive or otherwise.

So people will laugh at how "a pat on the fanny" is remarkably more offensive in the UK, without censuring the person who said it in the first place.

Such practices strongly encourage people to express their diversity, to feel free expressing themselves comfortably as casual speech, and in turn drives community involvement by those who are not "first-language English".

If someone means to give offense, they can do so just as well using words that carry no negative etymological or phonetic baggage; "you fail to understand common English usage, which reflects poorly both upon you, and upon your teachers."

And people can use words with this negative baggage in non-offensive ways: "The company's niggardly meal allowance has become a tar-baby. Call me a blackguard, but I'll use the money for fags and a picnic for the guys instead!" (though since this sentence has been deliberately crafted to have a high density of potentially-offensive terms, so could be taken as a deliberate troll). Any community which takes offense at any of those words in isolation, though, is certainly a community to avoid.

In short: if it causes offense, best to avoid the offended community.

If concerned, pick another term instead: when in doubt, I like to use "peeps".

Answer 8

"Guys" refers to males (see this, principal definition as male, and this.) The general problem is that the English language does not have a universal second person plural pronoun distinct from the singular pronoun "you". Using a colloquial phrase such as "you guys" is subject to negative connotations based on the origins and history of the phrase. In your original citation, I'd recommend saying "See you later" or "See you all later."

Answer 9

The term "guys" can be considered gender neutral in contexts, such as this one, that support such an interpretation.

So it is fine to you use "guys" to address "people" in this context.

Answer 10

It's a difficult phrase to give advice on. I am comfortable saying that the vast majority of individuals have no problem with a mixed group being addressed as "guys." It's a linguistic pattern that's hundreds, if not thousands, of years old which has appeared in many languages. Indeed it's one of the examples used when pointing out that languages evolve to do what they will, not to follow rules. The rules of grammar follow the language, not the other way around. Gender agreement is a rule that was invented to describe languages which had common traits linking which word you use to the genitalia of the individual.

However, in the current cultural environment, there is a minority who are vocally offended by such words. They consider it incredibly offensive that the "masculine" word overrides the "feminine" one (nevermind that masculine and feminine words are "rules" created to describe the language, not rules to define it), and that such behavior is so ubiquitous that we don't even think about it.

So it's really up to you and your group. If you're in an environment where you are willing to offend those who are easily offended, using the very well accepted phrasings such as those using "guys" is going to be reasonable. If you wish to please everybody, you could try using some of the other suggestions such as "folks" or "everyone," but you run the risk of offending an even thinner-skinned group: those who are offended that the first group is offended by language. There are those who see any attempt to adjust the English language to force it into being more "gender neutral" as offensive, and most of the time this means they trigger on absolutely everything except the most standard colloquial wordings.

One solution which does succeed at avoiding offending everyone in many situations is to drop the word entirely. Instead of saying "See you later, guys!" simply say "See you later!" The addition of "guys" is actually redundant, and only serves to emphasize the idea that you are thinking about those specific individuals while you are writing/speaking. There are cases which are more difficult, especially involving pronouns, but in many cases you simply don't need a word at all.

Or you can simply only operate in circles that use Chinese. Chinese is an example of a language that does not have strongly gendered words. Most of their pronouns are already gender neutral, so the majority of these sticky situations go away! I'm sure this is highly impractical, but I wanted to point it out as a modern example of a language that does not need grammatical gender. The rules follow the language, and Chinese simply didn't need that rule!

Answer 11

Guys is probably somewhat okay but better avoided, as it will be felt to be gender-assumptive (hence exclusionary as well) by at least some people, quite reasonably.

Guys and gals definitely is not okay (both binary and highlights gender which isn't actually relevant).

Alternative wordings for the greeting "Hi ______ !" :

Folks. Everyone. Friends. Gang. Team. Fellow
addicts/lunatics/gamers/trainspotters/whatever.

Answer 12

I wonder if this is acceptable in an online culture ...

This doesn't directly answer the question about "guys", but if it troubles you as to whether or not it is acceptable you can easily work around it. For example:

gtg cya

...

See you all later (or "I'm off now, see you (all) later")

...

What's everyone doing? (rather than "what are you guys doing?")

Answer 13

Great question, and the fact that you are asking it suggests that perhaps a small inner voice says there could be a better choice. Online forums are quite often dominated by people who find the term "guys" perfectly natural and justifiable, as evidenced by many of the other answers. As a non-member of this persuasion, I can tell you when you are the only [whatever] in the room, being addressed this way tends to highlight your difference.

Just imagine the reverse situation - you are the only man in a large group of women, and the greeting is Hello gals! Would that feel weird? I've witnessed it happen to a few men and it's very interesting how quickly they feel out of place or uncomfortable, the more so because it's an unusual experience for them.

Why not try to move the online civility needle just a tiny bit, by saying Hi everybody, instead? We are all people, humans, embodied souls, and using a more inclusive term speaks volumes and the tiny bit of effort will be much appreciated. "Hi guys" is just a habit, one that can easily be changed, and I think should be.

Thank you for asking.

Answer 14

It's a microaggression.

Using a male collective noun to refer to a group implies that you think the 'default' member of the group is male, and any exceptions aren't important enough for you to break your habits and use a more accurate, more inclusive term.

In isolation, this is 'not a big deal'. It's not abuse, it's not a slur, it's not deliberate and conscious exclusion. But microaggressions happen all day every day, from a thousand different sources, and taken together, they form an exhausting background noise to the tune of 'if you are not male, you are not one of us'.

The reason it's considered socially acceptable is because the people who are bothered by it don't want to speak out. They run the risk of being labeled 'abrasive' or 'uppity', and even if you stop, their life won't perceptibly improve until everyone stops.

No one will call you on it, but you can do better.

Answer 15

It is perfectly okay to use guys.

If you feel weird about it, use other words like

Okay everyone listen up

See you all later

If you want to be formal, well okay,

"ladies and gents lets start our discussion"

Answer 16

TL;DR: Yes, it's fine... if you're a guy!

Your question is a good opportunity to introduce the quite recent idea of speaker-corresponding gender. (This is an approximate literal translation from French "Accord au genre du locuteur" and a better English speaker than I might know a more exact translation.)

The stance I offer you is a quite new and opinionated one, but it brings the benefits of building many bridges between otherwise divided groups.

This whole "rule" of grammar is:

When addressing to or talking about a person (or group) whom gender is unknown to you (or not uniform in the group), use pronouns and nouns which would be suitable to qualify a person (or group) of your own gender.

This has various pros:

• It allows you to address groups or talk about unknown people without making assumptions.
• It ensures that on average, people or groups of undetermined gender will be referred to with every gender, in a proportion representative of their occurrence in the population.
• It is not binary and allows for other genders expressions.
• It allows you to broadcast your gender in a subtler way than if you were speaking about yourself.

This particular last point is extremely useful when the speaker is often misgendered.

Two things to keep in mind:

• This last point is fine and dandy if the speaker is ok with their gender being disclosed. This grammar "rule" maybe a poor choice if it's not the case.
• As you can tell from my previous sentence, I believe it's up to everyone to choose the set of grammar rules they live by, at least regarding these currently-evolving topics, as long as they are explainable and provide society as a whole with some benefits.

Answer 17

There are a number of (laziness-friendly) alternatives available. Use ppl, peeps, y'all, or folk as alternatives that don't even go near gender issues.

Or there's the perennial (Australian?) youse as in: "C youse l8r". Can't get much shorter than that.

EDIT: Should have looked through the other answers first. Jack Acne beat me to it, but I added more alternatives.

Answer 18

To add an alternative answer in amplification of the "it depends" tone of some of the answers given above - some groups of people will not like it. Whether that is likely with the group you deal with is something you are better able to judge than we may be.

But, for example, I am rather older than the 18 - 44 demographic and I am also a British English speaker. When I grew up "guys" carried a fairly strong male tone. While language evolves, it is hard for me to be addressed as a "guy" and not feel gendered in a way that I might not with another term (someone in my dialect 20 years younger than I am might have said "peeps" for instance).

So, I rather dislike it. I suspect that is more likely a feeling to be shared by people not in the core dialect group for "guy" as gender neutral (others have suggested a US usage) or older people.

As always this is a matter of judgment. It is clear that many do hear it in a gender neutral way. I would still suggest thinking about something which doesn't appear odd to anyone.