Just looked it up and the entire first page of searches is about how ‘guys’ is masculine and insensitive to women. I disagree. I think the masculinization of the term is like an unneeded extra filter placed over ‘guy’ but the term itself is innocent. Guy Fawkes was a real person. He did something that caused him to be a symbol of the common person. There is nothing gendered about that. It’s the patriarchal culture that then assumed ‘common person’ refers to males. When I think of Guy Fawkes, it is his actions, not what’s in his pants, that is important. So, while there are many needlessly sexist and sexual phrases in English, I do not view ''Guy" as one of them and, instead, view it as a victim of the patriarchy just like you and me. It isn’t an inappropriate phrase to change or remove, it’s one to reclaim for all people; which is exactly in the spirit of the symbol of who Guy Fawkes is.
Just looked it up and, historically, the most primitive portions of a population are often unable to evolve their way of thinking.
It seems your mind is unable to look past the consideration that maybe the way guys has evolved to being used today is more relevant to the way the usage of the word guys has evolved multiple times historically.
So bless your heart. I’m sorry YOU cannot view past the evolution of the word and sorry YOU have somehow become the victim of the patriarchy.
For the other half of the population being called something they are not, they’re just going to have to stop victim blaming because the thousands of years and ongoing misogynistic views are definitely not subtly reflected in the way we use language.
Oh and sorry if my language offends you. I did not mean it too and if you feel victim to it, in reality, I’m the victim for you feeling offended.
got to the second sentence and didn’t bother reading farther lol. looks like someone had their oatmeal pooped in this morning. blocked. weird when ppl hit the internet in a rage.
the wisdom here is: Dont let aggressive people drag you down to their level.