Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Can the Term "Guys" Refer to Women and Girls?

By Heather Gehlert, AlterNet. Posted February 28, 2007.


Is this a legitimate issue or has feminism gone too far?
Advertisement

Going out to eat with my father is always a tense affair. For the five or ten minutes it takes from the time the host or hostess seats us to the time our server comes to take our order, I sit quietly, feeling anxious and wondering how our waiter or waitress will greet us.

Will she say, "How are you all doing today?" Or, "What can I get you folks to drink?" If we're near our hometown in the rural Midwest, there is a good chance she'll say the latter, but, more often than not, we hear: "Hi, my name is Jamie, and I'll be taking care of you guys today. Our specials this afternoon are smoked salmon, parmesan-crusted tilapia ..."

"Excuse me," my dad cuts in, his eyes narrowing to a glare, "but I only see one guy here."

My stomach drops and I stare at the table in front of me, trying not to roll my eyes. The lecture never takes more than a minute, but it's still excruciating.

On rare occasion, a waiter or waitress will argue back, saying "guys" is a gender-neutral term. But, most of the time, he or she just stands very still, jaw dropped, looking stunned.

Because this exchange never leads to a thoughtful discussion of gender and language, I long ago dismissed it as one of my dad's quirks -- a one-person tirade to laugh at and let go of. Besides, one of my father's biggest heroes is Bill O'Reilly -- not exactly a portrait of feminist ideals.

Yet, for whatever reason, now that my dad and I live in different states and I see him only once or twice a year, I'm noticing how often men and women use the phrase "you guys" to refer to both sexes. It happens in restaurants, at council meetings -- even in grade-school classrooms.

And so, a voice in the back of my head is starting to say, Maybe he has a point. Maybe this isn't an arbitrary battle over an arbitrary word.

A cursory glance at blog postings shows that the use of the word "guys" is much more discussed and much more controversial than I had realized.

Giving credence to my dad's argument, dozens of postings read something like this: Try walking up to a group of men and women and saying, "Hey, girls, how's it going?" The reaction won't be positive. The men in the group probably won't find the feminine label amusing -- and certainly not arbitrary.

So why is the reverse acceptable? Why is "girls" gender-specific, but "guys" is not?

"Is it because men are not considered gendered, like white people do not consider themselves a race or European-Americans ethnic?" writes Farrah Ferriell, an instructor at the Women's Studies Program at Western Kentucky University. "I say yes ..."

A few posts down on the same site, Kathy Ferguson, a teacher from Hawaii, writes, "You know, I think I find myself in the "get a life" camp on these questions. ... '[Y]ou guys' [can be said] with affection. Words don't have inherent meanings, after all; they have the meanings that usage gives them, and are not necessarily stuck in past patriarchal contexts. I also find that I have many more important struggles in my classrooms than these."


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: feminism, gender, language

Heather Gehlert is a managing editor at AlterNet.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Kuddos to your father!
Posted by: igancedo on Feb 28, 2007 12:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've always thought it a bit strange when 'you guys' was used to address a group of women, but I used to blame it on English not being my mother tongue.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Puhleease! Nothing new here. Posted by: Artkansas
» RE: Kuddos to your father! Posted by: suprmark
Can the Term "Guys" Refer to Women and Girls?
Posted by: RodgerFrench on Feb 28, 2007 12:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a male person who sometimes uses "guys" as a generic term, I appreciate that it does tend to promote masculine terminology as a default mode of speaking. So, thanks for bringing up an important point.

But I must take issue with the notion that the opposite of "guys" is "girls." Not so. The proper term is "gals," since the opposite of "girls" is, of course, "boys." Arguably a silly distinction, but a correct one nonetheless.

And I have no problem with being referred to as "one of the gals" (or "girls"), which has happened on occassion. I take it as a compliment.

Again, thanks for your reasoned remarks.

Rodger French

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

genderless
Posted by: underground on Feb 28, 2007 1:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i've always preferred the word "yous".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: or simply "you". Sincerely, Aouie Posted by: Graydon Wilson
» RE: genderless Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
Waaaay too far
Posted by: Madam Hatter on Feb 28, 2007 1:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good gawd. Does AlterNet post stuff like this just to set up the rabid anti-women-ites? This shit is what gives "feminism" a bad name. Watch the comments fly.

I believe it is more a regional thing. I grew up in the midwest and we ALL called everyone "you guys." Down south, you get "you all," or rather, "y'all." Out west you get both, because it seems no one is from here originally.

But, I have never in my 40-some-odd years, heard anyone object - except perhaps my ancient, sixth-grade English and grammar teacher, who always corrected everything we said anyway.

I'd also venture to guess it's a race-related thing. I don't hear too many blacks calling girls "guys" either.

Regardless, I think it's a ridiculous thing to get bent out of shape about. Back in the midwest, we called rubber-bands "binders" too. It's a quirky regional colloquilalism - nothing more.

When women STILL make 70 cents to every dollar a man does, when poor women can't get access to birth control but Viagra sales flourish, when domestic violence is the cause of 30% of all homicides - as it was in my city last year...

going on about this, is just going way too far.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Waaaay too far Posted by: domenico234
» Dude. Posted by: jmbtvz
» RE: Waaaay too far Posted by: pjwhite
» RE: Waaaay too far Posted by: Guy
» RE: Waaaay too far Posted by: susankuhner
» Waaay behind Posted by: lib3288
» RE: Waaaay too far Posted by: marrieah
and this?
Posted by: talkville on Feb 28, 2007 1:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Each word in a language is significant, and there's plenty of words in the English language (if it exists as a natural communication strategy any more?) Gotta pick battles, it seems. There's lots of great words out there and in use among us - like for instance 'tyranny', 'despotism', 'militarism', (lots of '-isms'!), 'hunger', 'homeless'. And then there's 'guys', 'gals' and 'apathy'...

Can this be what femin-ism has come to? That's a whole lot of struggle (another great word!) for quite a few goals. Maybe a bit of energy elsewhere? This guy thinks it may be worthwhile.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: and this? Posted by: Gender Blank
» RE: and this? Posted by: talkville
» RE: and this? Posted by: staringatthesun
» RE: and this? Posted by: talkville
"Youguys" is not "you guys;" it's short for "you guys and gals."
Posted by: Sojourner on Feb 28, 2007 1:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So some men are "poised to pounce" too? Personally, it all depends on how good the food is. That's why a good cook doesn't have to live on tips.

I think it is up to those who wish to have their sensitivities respected to ask whoever might speak the sound to ask them to please spell it out. Or even better, just ask whether it is one word or two; that makes it simpler.

While this article did not offer a history of experience, my personal expectation of an adept (so, is "attendant" generic?) is that he/she (and does it matter in the case of youguys which it is?) will charm you right out of a bigger tip.

How about, "I am sorry, big daddy, but you are so good looking that you took my breath away" in the case of a waitress (or maybe a gay waiter). And for a waiter, maybe, "With such a plethora of pulchritude present, I felt sure there'd be not the least doubt about that."

Do some women still object to "ladies and gentlemen"? Or am I dating myself as old school? I do know women who object when writers delibertely sprinkle the femine "she" in their work as the generic. It gets a bit comic sometimes, usually. Always?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» whatever. Posted by: Coleman
» Never encourage "waitrons" to spit in your food! Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
After 40 Years Of Feminism...
Posted by: TassieDevil on Feb 28, 2007 2:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After 40 years of feminism, is this the epitome of all it has achieved? What actually DID feminish achieve, besides a lot of male bashing, whinging and unhappy people.
Germain Greer what did you really achieve, besides being well suited to the term 'guy'?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Is it because men are not considered gendered...?"
Posted by: Catherine Martell on Feb 28, 2007 2:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes.

But it's only a symptom of the patriarchy's dominance, not the cause. Making it a phrase that personally I would be unlikely to use (not to mention that it would sound ludicrous in my accent), but also not one I'm going to bother getting all het up about.

Agree with Madam Hatter above - and, indeed, from TassieDevil's moronic comment above, she would appear to be right that this article will do little but unleash the haters. What has feminism (or feminish, if you prefer) achieved? Just as a start, and it goes back quite a lot longer than 40 years, by the way:

1. equal pay for equal work (a right, even if we don't always get it)
2. rape within marriage is now a crime
3. the vote
4. the right to initiate divorce
5. the right to own property
6. abortion rights
7. increased social acceptance of the right to choose one's own path in life
8. equal access to most careers (progress still to be made, but improvement clearly visible)

There are plenty more, but I'd definitely like to hang on to this lot at least, please.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The Despotism of the Peticoat Posted by: MartianBachelor
The Solution To The Problem
Posted by: ZPaul on Feb 28, 2007 3:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Forget about "you guys". Just say, "y`all"!!! It sounds a lot cooler anyway!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Solution To The Problem Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: The Solution To The Problem Posted by: Moore Hognutz
» I confess ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: I confess ... Posted by: ZPaul
Dude
Posted by: candara on Feb 28, 2007 3:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I remember (quite a few years ago) when I was first called "dude" by another female. I was perplexed. I've been compared quite often to a younger Kim Basinger, and didn't think I could be mistaken for a male. I told a friend who said "you idiot, 'dude' could be male or female". I still think of it as male; but I refer to females as "you guys" all the time; and even as "dude" now and then. Just like everyone is now an "actor" instead of using "actress" for females. It simplifies, that's all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Dude Posted by: perri6
» Teenagers call me dude also Posted by: veggiegrrrl
» RE: Whoa, da-who-ude, dudette, sir Posted by: doinaheckuvajob
» RE: Dude Posted by: candara
Youse guys
Posted by: KevinHayden on Feb 28, 2007 3:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We've been through this, with 'chicks' and 'my old lady' which were 60s terms. Ultimately I think such language does matter, though I hardly consider 'bitch' and 'ho' as better.

My late Dad and my Mom, both Dems, found 'you guys' irritating. My Mom didn't like being called a guy. Yet I use it commonly among friends (along with 'youse guys' and 'youse mooks').

Bottom line: it's unprofessional. All people in sales should seek inoffensive words that display respect and a sensitivity, particularly to elders who often resist change.

Is it sexist? It seems more unisex to me, in its intent. I never say 'mankind' but I do say 'you guys', informally, among friends. Except in professional situations, it seems okay to me, but if one of my friends objected, I'd avoid it. I think respect for peoples' preferences is the key.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "Bottom Line" Posted by: Boctaoe
» RE: "Bottom Line" Posted by: Moore Hognutz
» Tips go down? Lame. Posted by: Coleman
As the Man Said...
Posted by: pcushniesr on Feb 28, 2007 3:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Personally, my dear, I don't give a damn."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Redundant word.
Posted by: colinmeister on Feb 28, 2007 3:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The word is not necessary when used by a waiter. "What would you like" is just as clear as "What would you guys like". Unlike French, the English language does not have seperate words for the singular and plural of "You".

Having said this, I resorted to the Oxford English Dictionary, which gives:

guy1

• noun 1 informal a man. 2 (guys) N. Amer. informal people of either sex. 3 Brit. a figure representing the Catholic conspirator Guy Fawkes, burnt on a bonfire on 5 November to commemorate a plot to blow up Parliament in 1605.

This would indicate that in North America it is OK to use "Guys" for a mixed party.

I will not start using "Guys" to address a mixed group, but maybe that's just a "Guy thing" :-).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: edundant word. Posted by: DaBear
» RE: Redundant word. Posted by: fork
Oops!
Posted by: pcushniesr on Feb 28, 2007 3:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It occured to me as I finished my "As the Man Said" comment, that I have never heard anyone say, as a prelude to some profundity, "As the Woman Said..." Have I opened another can of worms here?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Oops! Posted by: sethmo
» RE: Oops! Posted by: morticia
Get a life
Posted by: rwday@cox.net on Feb 28, 2007 3:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wow. It's so wonderful to hear that there are no REAL issues left to deal with. Sheesh. I'm old enough to remember a similar outcry against 'man' and 'mankind'. I didn't care then, I don't care now. I'm not defined by other people's language choices.

'You guys' is a Midwest colloquialism, just like 'y'all' in the South. It's not offensive, except to people looking to be offended.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Get a life Posted by: icj
Diner waitresses
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Feb 28, 2007 4:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I like when diner waitresses call me "honey". The diner experience wouldn't be the same otherwise.

Your dad may get away with talking back to those cutsie little Friday's waitresses...Try it on a diner waitress, and his face will have the imprint of a waffle iron, and a bottle of maple syrup to top it off...if he's lucky.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Diner waitresses Posted by: DaBear
» RE: Diner waitresses Posted by: r.frenchie
Good Grief---
Posted by: gtash on Feb 28, 2007 4:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I work in an office full of professioals, male and female. In deference I call them what they need to be called: kids.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It is definitely a regional variant
Posted by: StoneRiley on Feb 28, 2007 4:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Guys" is masculine or neutral depending on the geographcal region. This is not to say the discussion is pointless - it certainly is not - but the discussion certainly should include this fact. Actually, that would make the discussion more interesting.

Stone Riley
www.stoneriley.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A solution
Posted by: eightbitriot on Feb 28, 2007 5:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I propose a solution to all this identity politicking be we all let the phrase "you idiots" mean "you all." So "Can I get you idiots something to drink?" or "Hey, why don't you idiots follow me?" Idiot is gender neutral, and seems to be more fitting of our character.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Good thinking Posted by: kepstein7777
Wowsa, people are getting way too damn sensitive
Posted by: cyclone2525 on Feb 28, 2007 5:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Shaking my head here as a woman who considers herself a rational feminist. When I was teaching at a University, I regularly said "you guys" and would then say "which you guys better realize includes both men and women in here." Maybe it is a Midwest thing as someone mentioned earlier. Maybe it just rolls off the tongue smoothly. I also have called my female friends "dude." I'm in a completely male-dominated profession now (mining) and I'm used to hearing people saying "alright guys, that includes you Julie." Rather than get all worked up, I just laugh it off and realize that most people don't have these ill intentions and we gotta' learn to cut people some slack already. If it's truly negative, it'll work it's way out of conversation. It just amazes me that this is even a discussed thing on blogs. Sigh.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ms
Posted by: goldie on Feb 28, 2007 5:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The article on guys has struck my pet peeve. I am NOT a guy. I do NOT appreciate being lumped in w/a male term and using that as a generic term makes wimmin just plain disappear! Just like actress has been dropped and the generic term actor (which has historically denoted male) is being used. Is the patriarchy so anxious to rid itself of ALL females that it is using language to do so? I can guarantee, as stated in the article, that if you walked up to a table full of men and called them gals, you'd get some pretty hot replies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» pMs Posted by: tweedster
» RE: Ms Posted by: underground
» RE: Ms Posted by: DaBear
» RE: Ms Posted by: RaW
» RE: Ms Posted by: susankuhner
» RE: Ms Posted by: TassieDevil
» RE: Ms Posted by: dannrusso
Old News
Posted by: DJFedder on Feb 28, 2007 5:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This verbage was a discussion about 15 years ago when I was training at the local Women's Shelter. Since I am a guy (def.1) I remained largely silent because the guys (def. 2) of a different gender had me outnumbered.
However, since then, I have substituted the word folks in my conversation. With some gentle prodding I encourage other folks to do this too.
My fear is this; that someday I may refer to a human whose face and clothing is in a fight to see which can hold more safety pins as a folk: consequently getting smashed over the head with a guitar while epithets about Arlo Guthrie spew forth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

down here in Texas
Posted by: Truffulaut on Feb 28, 2007 6:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have an excellent word to use as a plural of "you" -- "y'all." Loosely translated, it means "you all." (Paul the Apostle used it quite frequently.) I too find it grating to hear someone say "guys" when there are ladies present (although generally I tell women, "I would say 'Ladies First' except I don't know you that well," and they usually smile). I had a sixth grade teacher who said, "Don't call a fellow a 'guy' unless that's his name." But I know people who think that when the kindergarten teacher says, "Okay, boys and girls, line up, boys on the left, girls on the right" for restroom break, she and/or he is being sexist. To my primitive testosteronal mind, it would only be sexist if the teacher said, "Okay, girls who will make 75% of what the boys will make over their lifetime and outlive the boys by an average of 7.5 years on the right, and boys who will be the cause of 89% of domestic violence and 95% of sexual abuse on the left" or something along those lines.

However, I don't usually lecture waiters because most of them are so young they don't know any better. "You" is perfectly acceptable as either singular or plural, and I don't know why anyone would ever say anything other than, "May I take your order?" if it's a restaurant. The "chatty" approach has never made me feel more welcome. The waiters with whom I am friends, and there are many, call me "David," and that suits me just fine. I never listen to or watch Bill O'Reilly, I majored in English, and I have no desire when I talk to sound like the people on Seinfeld or Friends, as funny as they were, or to sound like I'm from anywhere but here. For better or for worse, I'm a Texan; we will just have to deal with it as best as we can.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Your justification for this article is a disgrace!
Posted by: kazz67 on Feb 28, 2007 6:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Just because there's a war in Iraq, does that mean that the divorce someone is going through is any less real or painful?... Or perhaps a better example: Just because slapping a woman isn't as serious as raping her, does that mean we should ignore the former?"
What a cheap and preemptive shot at anyone who dares to disagree with your use of good band-with on such a meaningless article! And how disrespectful to anyone who has been through, or is going through domestic violence and or rape! You really ought to be ashamed of yourself!!!
There is absolutely no comparison between the use of the term 'you guys' as gender-neutral and domestic violence or rape!
Niether is there much of a comparison between the terms 'mankind' and 'you guys'. Lanuguage evolves, it always has and it always will. If it didn't I'd be writing this in the style of William Shakespere.
The term 'you guys' has evolved from the term 'guys and gals' (gals evolved from girls, just to be clear) and IS generic.
Mankind as a term was coined in an exclusively male dominated environment and as such represents the exclusion of women from anything considered spesifically human.
In other words, the term 'mankind' dismisses women as unimportant and insignificant. The term 'you guys' does no such thing.

Maybe you'd be better of writing for some womens magazine rather than, the usually well respected, AlterNet. There IS a place for articles like this. Here is not that place. Alternet editors, please take note.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» No articles left! Posted by: DataDoc
Re "actor," "-ress"
Posted by: tulugaq on Feb 28, 2007 6:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's my understanding, learned from female actors of my acquaintance, that many female actors prefer what is to their ears the gender-free "actor." This is based on the assumption that the "-ess" ending tends to diminish the work of the person performing the work.

The analogy is with "poet" and "poetess." Whose poem are you more likely to think of as lasting through the ages?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» And let's not forget..... Posted by: morticia
» RE: And let's not forget..... Posted by: albrechtkrausse
Job security for English teachers
Posted by: Mamarianne on Feb 28, 2007 6:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The really perplexing problem caused by greater gender awareness comes from pronouns. Back in the day, we were told that "his" and "he" were the generic terms for human (and, boy, doesn't that have deeper meaning!). Thus, the correct way to write a sentence using everyone, anyone, everybody, or anybody was like this: "Everyone must have his turn." When feminists finally made writers aware of gender discrimination, many writers and speakers shifted to the use of the "their" as in "Everyone must have their turn." That, of course, upset English teachers who, rightly, pointed out that "everyone" is singular, but "their" is plural. One solution offered was to edit the sentence to an awkward, "Everyone must have his or her turn." Others edited that type of sentence to a smoother, "Everyone must have a turn." But, hey, you guys, English majors have to earn a living. Thanks, Alternet and Alternet readers, for a pleasant distraction from the on- going and impending disasters that are today's reality.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Correction, if I may Posted by: StoneRiley
» RE: Correction, if I may Posted by: Mamarianne
Damn Yanks
Posted by: FightTheGiant on Feb 28, 2007 6:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"You guys" is just the yankee version of "ya'll" (People in Hawaii for some odd reason also use "you guys" as opposed to "ya'll"). So I think all the "Huwomen" out there should relax.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

this is an important issue!!
Posted by: treefrog86 on Feb 28, 2007 6:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I hear this term ALL over. So it's not just regional and even if it were, that doesn't make it okay. If sexual harassment or "men's only" bars existed only in the Pacific northwest, would they be acceptable JUST because they're regional? I don't think so.

Also, please stop dismissing the effort to create inclusive language as some trivial issue, that there are more important things to worry about. Nearly all of the feminists I know who care enough about women to object to sexist language ALSO work on a lot of other issues (repro. rights, sexual violence, etc.). Changing our language is something we can do fairly easily. It is easier to change our vocab than stop the wage gap tomorrow. Eradicating sexist language is one component of the larger feminist movement. And an important one.

Sociologist Laurel Richardson has demonstrated that when we use "you guys," and "chairman," "freshman," "mailman," and other sexist phrases, people almost always picture a male silhouette in their heads. If we're only thinking about men, this will have an effect on the choices we make. I believe linguists call these sexist phrases "linguistic annihilation" b/c we're erasing an entire segment of the population with our speech.

Would you cringe at "you whiteys" or "chairwhite" or "freshwhite" to refer to both people of color and white people? Do you think people of color would feel included? I don't think so. So let's please not let gender and sexism fall by the wayside.

There are so many choices "you" "you all" "you folks" "everyone" "y'all"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: this is an important issue!! Posted by: TassieDevil
IT'S ANNOYING,BUT DON'T BLAME IT ON THE FEMINISTS
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Feb 28, 2007 6:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It just sort of slipped into the language. But when I hear a woman say "c'mon guys" and then see 3 pretty little girls behind her, it sounds stupid. I guess she's trying to be a cool mom. Somehow it doesn't work at all for adults. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yet another
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Feb 28, 2007 6:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yet another hard hitting article on feminism and women's rights by Alternet...

What should we talk about?

The ignored murders in Juarez?

Maquiadoras who work in the one pair of shoes they can afford while their children sit outside the factory waiting for them (thanks, NAFTA!)?

Sex tourism?

HPV imunizations?

No.... lets talk about whether or not "guys" can refer to women. After all... thats the only one of those (outside of HPV) that actually affects American (read: white middle and upper middle class) women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: AND Yet another Posted by: Saitia
» I just think... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» RE: I just think... Posted by: Saitia
GET a life!!
Posted by: Scott on Feb 28, 2007 6:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Words have meanings and how they are used give them that meaning. So "guys" or "you guys" as a reference in her original post..... is OK.... It is a correct use of the term and anyone who does not see that or agree with that usage in those kind of cases should "just get a life"..... The usage has changed, just as the homosexual- lesbian crowd has changed the use of "gay", so in lots of cases how a word is used, tone, infection, etc. is far more important then the word and its originial meaning.......

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

samdog
Posted by: ERicPott on Feb 28, 2007 6:43 AM   
Current rating: