Guys, “guys” is perfectly fine for addressing diverse groups

http://blog.metaobject.com/2015/06/guys-is-perfectly-fine-for-addressing.html

by mpweiher • 11 years ago

44 96 11 years ago

blog.metaobject.com

grayclhn7• 11 years ago

I mean, even if you personally feel that "guys" is totally fine for mixed gender groups, it clearly bothers some people. So why not say, "hey, everyone..." instead of "hey, guys..."?

Conlectus• 11 years ago

I think it's just the fact that it takes three times as long.

sp3324• 11 years ago

Your respect for other people is worth less than 300 milliseconds?

grayclhn7• 11 years ago

"Hey y'all..." :)

rfrey2• 11 years ago

Hi, folks.

Hi, everyone.

Hi, friends.

Hi, y'all.

There's something for everyone.

baddox2• 11 years ago

There are probably very few things you can say which do not bother some people.

grayclhn7• 11 years ago

Yes, but there are many things I can say that I'm not knowingly bothering people.

sp3324• 11 years ago

You could at least call people the right name, after they've told you the right name to call them over and over again.

tomsun• 11 years ago

I don't think a lot of people will get offended if you address a group as guys. But if you address a group of girls as "girls", or even "gals", you are walking a fine line.

arca_vorago3• 11 years ago

"So why not"

Why not? Because I'm growing increasingly tired of having to keep up with all the various people who are offended by trivial bullshit so that I can adjust my own language to fit them.

There is no right to not be offended, and I think that fact is a core part of freedom of speech, both Constitutionally and socially.

Edit (the following line is out of place and unwarranted in this discussion but I will keep it in for the sake of posterity.): We live in a harsh world, and there is some nasty shit out there. I think people need to learn to grow a thick skin already.

Don't misunderstand me, I fully embrace peoples right to request people to change some of the common word usage, but I also support the right of people that don't want to do so.

“I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write.” - Voltaire

http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/349

grayclhn7• 11 years ago

I mean... this reads like, "I don't care about offending those people."

sp3324• 11 years ago

I also support the right of people that don't to do so.

But you seem to be against those people accepting consequences of that action. What if I'm offended and decide to stop hanging out with those people, or decide to remind them each time that they are offending me? They should accept my decision and not tell me to "grow a thick skin" and pretend that their offensiveness is my fault.

arbitrage2• 11 years ago

The world isn't completely a harsh place, not even close, and doesn't have to be. Although, you could be posting on HN from a war torn, famine ravaged country, I dunno. Anyway, maybe you could try making the world a slightly less harsh place, if that's how you really see it. And if it is, I'm sorry you've been brought to that conclusion.

"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi

rfrey2• 11 years ago

"There's no right to not be offended"

There's no right you hold for people to not be offended at your speech, either.

dtf• 11 years ago

Maybe we should all do that presidential thing and switch to "Folks..."

smackfu5• 11 years ago

I'd argue the term "PC brigade" is not perfectly fine if you want people to listen to your arguments.

mpweiher8• 11 years ago

The PC brigade won't listen to reasoned arguments anyhow, so no loss.

Zuider5• 11 years ago

Nobody expects the Inqu^H^H^H^H PC brigade! It is probably better not to catch their attention anyway.

xCathedra• 11 years ago

The real issue is that just over a century ago we lost a 2nd person plural pronoun and haven't really found a good subsitute since. When "you" took over for "thou" as the 2nd person singular pronoun we never replaced the original use of "you" with anything. So "guys", "y'all", "youse" are all attempts to fill the gap.

antihero• 11 years ago

Folks kinda works. I usually use "guys" when addressing people, but when being extra sensitive (eg, if I'm addressing a bunch of MTF trans girls), I'll be careful and use "folks".

To make a list, for things that I use in a "Hey ___, ..." context, with varying levels of casual:

    - Guys  
    - Folks
    - People 
    - You lot
    - Motherfuckers/jerks (other insulting term that's obviously not meant in earnest)
    - Mateys
    - Chaps (debatably gender biased)
    - Team (or other factual statement e.g. colleagues)
    - Everyone
    - Dudes (also debatably gender biased, but depends on how well people know you. I call everyone dude, I am probably immature)
    - Reprobates/scallywags/some other sort of old world sounding term.

jnevill4• 11 years ago

Yep. "Folks". I use it in all of my communications to my group (I am not the manager). I've tried others: "Guys" is clearly gender specific, "Ya'll" is pretty informal (although I use it on occasion), "Team" is barf-o-rama.

"Folks" works well. It's reasonably formal but not gross and, best yet, its inclusive.

sardonicbryan• 11 years ago

I just use "Hey folks" in mixed company. I have a strong compulsion to be very accurate/precise about things though.

arbitrage2• 11 years ago

Appeal to dictionary? Perennial favourite distraction and obfuscation technique.

Because, you know, common usage never changes.

jseliger• 11 years ago

I noticed the "guys" issue years ago, when I was teaching and needed to get the class's attention: http://jakeseliger.com/2010/03/21/hey-guys-read-this. I still haven't found a good replacement: "Everyone" sounds a little too formal, and talking to "everyone" using that word makes it sound a little too much like talking to no one.

NoGravitas2• 11 years ago

In my language variety, the issue never comes up. A group of people is always addressed as "y'all". "Guys" would sound weird whether the group was mixed gender or not.

adaml_623• 11 years ago

"Hi everyone".

I like using "Hi People". Because it's kind of nice and acknowledgementy.

I will judge you by all the things you say and all the things you do. But that's human nature isn't it.

Edit: I can't use the otherwise excellent y'all because it's not compatible with my nationality/accent :-)

mikehawkins• 11 years ago

Gah - I'm with you... y'all fits the bill in so many ways - I love the way it sounds when my Southern friends say it. I just can't get away with using it and not feeling a little contrived.

We definitely need a plural, informal you form - like the Spanish vosotros. :)

bopf• 11 years ago

You still have it a lot easier than Germans or French folks for example, where you also need to consider formal (Sie) and informal (Du) forms when addressing people.

jnevill4• 11 years ago

I'm a big fan of "Folks". It's not too informal and not too dressed up. It's 100% inclusive and it doesn't make you sound like a redneck.

anonydsfsfs2• 11 years ago

"everyone" is offensive to people with dissociative identity disorder. Such people have multiple identities (or personalities), so they are not "one". You're basically erasing they're identities by using such language.

DanBC2• 11 years ago

DID does not exist in the Tumblr version that gets talked about a lot. Actual DID is rare and has different forms. The DID you're talking about affects maybe 0.1% of the population.

Women, on the other hand, are about 50% of the population.

insomniac2• 11 years ago

I'm not sure why you think it is offensive or erases anyone's identity. I don't object to it and have never heard anyone with DID object. For the record: my alter personalities don't object to the word 'everyone' either. In fact, it's useful because if there is something important you can ask 'everyone' or 'everyone inside' to listen which is much easier than asking everyone by name. And not everyone has a name or is willing to tell you what their name is or anything else about themselves. We DO strongly object to having people without dissocative identity disorder tell others what our views are. We exist and can speak for ourselves. DanBC - You don't say where you 0.1% figure comes from but 1 in 1,000 is not considered 'rare'. In the US alone that comes to a rather large number. The actual rate is between 1% and 3% - and varies depending on location, with the US having around 1% of people with dissociative identity disorder - for example compared to 0.7% with schizophrenia (source: DSM-5, 2013). Dissociative identity disorder is very often hidden, does not present in a way that people would especially recognize, and is a hidden disorder (like all the dissociative disorders). Stranger in the Mirror: Dissociation - The Hidden Epidemic is one of the better known books about it. Also the name of a website for the book. Tumblr is not a great place to get information about dissociative identity disorder because many people there claim to be 'multiple' or a 'multiple system' but actually state they don't have dissociative identity disorder, and don't experience amnesia, dissociation, or the effects of trauma which is the cause of it.

This is a useful blog addressing myths and facts with dissociative identity disorder. You' ll find good information on webmd, the merckx manuals, NAMI and pretty much anywhere with professionally reviewed articles about mental health. Healthy Place has a useful blog on myths too.

http://www.healthyplace.com/blogs/dissociativeliving/2010/12...

MattGrommes• 11 years ago

It's not about offending people. It's about including everyone. I've taken my daughter to Girl Scout meetings and had to hear 'Ok, moms...' constantly. It doesn't offend me but it doesn't make me feel like a part of the group either.

mc323• 11 years ago

I think you're taking the words too literally. The adult women could be aunts, guardians, sisters, adoptive mothers, biological mothers, etc. We can always seek out ways to find words to be unfit in a sentence, but, the purpose of speaking is to communicate. Normal people will understand that 'moms' in this case means any adult who in this scenario is representing a child in some capacity. It's shorthand.

Sure, the speaker could have included all possibilities when addressing the audience, etc., but why? We know what they mean, they didn't intend to exclude you in any way and as an adult you can process the exceptions (moms, the bathrooms are there) you can figure out where the men's toilet is.

If we concentrate on people's speech patterns, we can always find faults. There are better things to spend your energy on. We could also embark on pluralization vs apostrophe too, it's a noble cause, but we all know what people mean.

murbard22• 11 years ago

I think OP is well aware that the speaker isn't specifically addressing moms and only moms. But even knowing that, it can make you feel less included, which is in itself unpleasant, even if on a more rational level you know that you are included.

mpweiher8• 11 years ago

Hmmm...the post is not about offense. It is specifically about modern use of "guys" being inclusive, and being perceived as inclusive by the vast number of listeners when used in 2nd person plural.

smackfu5• 11 years ago

With the evidence being a survey done via Twitter.

alwaysdoit• 11 years ago

I'd love to see stats broken down by age. Anecdotally, it seems older people tend to see it as less gender neutral, and younger people tend to see it as more gender neutral.

smackfu5• 11 years ago

If you click through, the stats are basically junk. Self-selected survey distributed via Twitter.

murbard22• 11 years ago

What the poll shows is that it's only considered neutral when plural, and in the vocative case.

mpweiher8• 11 years ago

Exactly. Which was the case being discussed. As discussed.

cmdrfred• 11 years ago

Bikeshedding while Rome burns.

nlake44• 11 years ago

Do the platinum rule: Treat and teach others the way they want to be treated and taught.

notacoward2• 11 years ago

...except that you can't know that ahead of time. Some people are unreasonably touchy, or even looking for an excuse to start a fight. I found one among my followers on Twitter the other day, using my positive reference to a group as an excuse to burnish his own Enlightened Person credentials. We can argue over whether they're few or many, but to deny they exist is to leave the realm of rational or productive discourse. The best we can do is make an estimate of how a reasonable person might want to be treated and taught, and that's what the OP is trying to address.

unoti2• 11 years ago

"Guys" is fine, except when it isn't. It's a pain point for some people, and it's reasonable to be sensitive to that.

Yeah, and medieval oppression was actually real, unlike some other "oppression" I can think of.

That crosses the line into the ridiculous, and is precisely the kind of poison we should try to avoid. Oppression means longstanding cruel treatment or control. The author doesn't perceive longstanding class, gender and race based control and oppression over the last few generations in our society. That makes the author maybe not a great source to take advice from on the topic at hand.

jnevill4• 11 years ago

Oh god. So much this. Author is a ding-bat for pulling that terrible argument out. It makes it very hard to take the rest of the argument seriously when poorly thought out garbage like that is introduced. "I don't notice or feel the oppression, therefore it must not exist. Sample size of N=1 is good enough for me". Thick.

mpweiher8• 11 years ago

You really think the "oppression" of women in western industrialized nations today is comparable to the oppression of a conquered people in medieval times?

notacoward2• 11 years ago

The author says nothing about class- or race-based oppression, either to address or dismiss, so that's a bit of a strawman, and the little bit of well-poisoning you do in your own last sentence doesn't elevate the discussion much either. Who is it we shouldn't be taking advice from, again?

hyperpape• 11 years ago

  With the Political Correctness police gaining momentum again after being laughed out of the 80ies

People say this kind of thing, and I know there are terms people have suggested that I find kind of silly.

However, we know better than to call people negros, and most of us know not to call a grown woman at work a "girl", (or a black man "boy").

The principle is pretty clear, we're just haggling over the details.

Essentially no one disagrees that there are some words that are overtly insulting, and others that are more or less subtly patronizing. We (myself) included, just have a knee-jerk reaction that "of course this one's ok". And we're probably right some of the time, but we're wrong other times.

richmarr• 11 years ago

  With the Political Correctness police gaining momentum 
  again after being laughed out of the 80ies

Maybe he has a point, maybe he doesn't, but when he talks like that I'm inclined to wait for someone who's not an ass to make the same argument and listen to that.

bcg1• 11 years ago

This is a great example of mistaking a nuanced social issue with one that has a binary answer. In many social situations saying "guys" is not gender specific... but that does not mean that it is "perfectly" fine to use in all cases. Some people may find it offensive or exclusionary in some cases and it doesn't hurt to be respectful of that.

We should of course be on the lookout for those who would try to chill free expression via enforcing some sort of Orwellian newspeak by making baseless accusations of being offended/excluded/discriminated against... but those people are rare, pretty easy to spot, and outnumbered by good people who have legitimate complaints. And BTW if you want to have credibility when calling out the former, it might be a good idea to be respectful and earn gravitas in the eyes of the latter.

toxican• 11 years ago

This is a great opportunity for "Ya'll" and "Yinz" to rise in popularity.

Zuider5• 11 years ago

Or bring back the original 'ye'. It is still in use in some parts of Britain and Ireland.

js2• 11 years ago

I wonder how generational or regional or maybe even contextual this is? A couple years back, I overheard a young teenage girl address the rest of her female soccer teammates with "hey guys." Is it not exclusionary when said by a girl? When addressed to a group of all girls? When not in a professional setting?

mpweiher8• 11 years ago

It's not perceived as exclusionary by >90% of the people in the informal poll cited.

smackfu5• 11 years ago

"Informal poll" == "possibly true facts"

Jonovono• 11 years ago

I use "Hey, civilians" just to be safe.

Torgo• 11 years ago

I prefer to use "people" but I have also found that I prefer to spend my time around people that wouldn't have cared if I used "guys".

LanceH2• 11 years ago

It's almost like words can take on different meanings depending on context.

jilted• 11 years ago

Question for the Room.

mc323• 11 years ago

While I personally am a little less casual with language and would avoid saying something like guys or gals or peops. Before we get too exact about language, we have to understand how casual language has been accepted in schools and in society.

People will say things like 'thanks man' thanks buddy --when I don't know them well and not their buddy -I could find it offensive, if I were of the sort; It's not as if they don't know my forename. This is what society has allowed, along with the acceptance infantilization of adult behavior. Moms and dads and other adults wanting to appear hipper and cooler by adopting juvenile language --like guys.

So before you castigate people for their unconscious language choices, (lots of women use 'guys' to include both sexes), understand why.

Moreover, as with many words, they can have multiple meanings depending on context. Let's take sanction. We know the meaning given a context. Same with 'guys', or the pronoun 'you'

flippinburgers• 11 years ago

This "right to be offended" train of thought is parroted often by religious groups to try to remove speech and images that they do not like. I've been relentlessly called "too skinny/gay/etc" by people throughout my life and, yet people are getting upset about something that is gender neutral like "guys"? Give me a break. God forbid they actually have to deal with somebody who actually isn't nice or intentionally targets them about some aspect of who they are.

smackfu5• 11 years ago

See, I would have thought someone who has been discriminated against would have more sympathy, not less.

Zuider5• 11 years ago

As someone who has faced racial and religious discrimination, I would say no. I prefer it when people are more easy-going. Fine if you don't like who I am as long as you leave me alone.

I see this as another descent into a general milieu of intolerance and hostility, a kind of madness of crowds that seems to possess cultures every few decades. This rarely ends well.

paulhauggis• 11 years ago

I won't stop using it. I think it's bullshit. I'm honestly sick and tired of the language police trying to change society because they are somehow offended by a word that is non-offensive.

The word "cis" and "mansplaning" are both pejoratives..and it offends me. But it doesn't stop those same people who don't like the word "guys" from using it (and making it normal).

This is my problem with the entire discussion about this. It's not about removing offensive words or "equality". It's only about giving power to one group of people. The politicians love it because whenever there is an US vs Them mentality, they can take advantage and win votes.

ZeroGravitas• 11 years ago

"cis" isn't a pejorative in any sense I've seen it used, can you expand on why you think it is?

GFK_of_xmaspast• 11 years ago

It's as much a pejorative as 'hetero', which is to say not at all.

k__• 11 years ago

A guy I work with also always says "The boys" or "The guys" when referring to his co-workers.

It just feels strange to me, even if they are all guys.

In German we have "Leute" which means "People" but doesn't have a singular.

cmsj• 11 years ago

An interesting experiment to try is to say "girls"/"ladies" instead of "guys" for non-gender-specific uses, and see how weird it feels.

Guys, “guys” is perfectly fine for addressing diverse groups

Related Stories