Language should INCLUDE, not exclude.
"Guys" is often used to address groups.
But common usage does not make something universally inclusive.
"Guys" is not an inclusive default.
A dictionary can explain how a word is commonly used.
It does not get to override someone's experience of being excluded.
"Everyone says it" is not an argument.
Language has always evolved. Words and phrases that were considered acceptable decades ago are now recognized by many as harmful, outdated, or unacceptable.
We changed those words because people spoke up.
When someone says, "I don't feel included," the response should not be a debate about why they should feel included.
Listen.
Learn.
Understand.
Move forward.
Old Defaults, New Reality
Many language defaults developed during periods when men were often assumed to be the standard.
"Dear Sirs" was once a common formal greeting because business, government, and professional spaces were often treated as male spaces by default.
"Thank you, sir" is still sometimes used automatically because respect was historically tied to male titles and authority.
But a default is not the same thing as inclusion.
When someone says, "I am not a sir," the response should not be an argument about how commonly the word is used.
Especially when you rely on someone's expertise, guidance, or technical skills, dismissing their identity while expecting their help creates a contradiction.
Respect should not disappear when someone's knowledge becomes useful to you.
The response should recognize that language can change to better reflect the reality of the world we live in today.
Women and other people who do not identify with those terms have always existed in these spaces.
The issue is not that anyone is trying to erase language.
The issue is that language should not assume one group is the default for everyone.
Inclusive language is not about being difficult.
It is about recognizing that the world is larger than the assumptions built into older habits.
Conversations Seen Too Often
Person A: The term "guys" does not include me. I am not a "guy".
Person B: "Guys is gender-neutral."
Person A: "Some people don't feel included by that term. I do not feel included by that term."
Person B: "Here's the definition. 'You guys' is commonly used as gender-neutral, but some people find it exclusionary because of its masculine roots."
Person A: "Exactly. That is the point. I find the term exclusionary."
Person B: "I didn't understand the nuance. English isn't my first language. Don't discriminate against me because English isn't my first language."
Claiming Authority
Someone explained that the term "guys" does not feel inclusive to them, and instead of listening, you tried to correct them on the meaning and usage of the very language they were using to explain their own experience.
You positioned yourself as the authority on a word while dismissing the person telling you how that word affects them.
Dismissing Someone's Experience
A dictionary definition was presented as if it could override someone's actual experience of feeling excluded.
A word can have a common usage and still make people feel excluded.
Saying "guys" is neutral does not make it neutral for everyone. If someone tells you a term does not include them, the response should be to listen, not to explain why their experience is wrong.
It is especially contradictory to dismiss someone's experience with language while still expecting that same person to provide technical knowledge, guidance, or help when you need their expertise.
Respect should not become optional when someone's identity is inconvenient, while their skills and contributions are still valued.
Moving the Goalposts
After attempting to explain the language to someone else, the argument shifted when the conversation became uncomfortable.
The discussion moved from dismissing someone's experience to claiming a lack of understanding when challenged.
Lack of understanding does not excuse dismissing someone's experience.
The Double Standard
English being someone's first language was never the issue.
The issue was the double standard: claiming authority over the language, dismissing someone else's experience, and then retreating to "I didn't understand" when challenged.
You cannot demand patience and understanding for yourself while refusing to offer the same to others.
For Those Struggling to Catch Up With the 21st Century
Women and other non-"guys" ARE ON THE INTERNET.
We have been here all along.
We build.
We code.
We create.
We mentor.
We lead.
We BELONG anywhere we want to be.
The fact that some people are still surprised by our presence is not our problem to solve.
The internet has never belonged to one group of people.
Language should reflect that reality.
Language evolves. Why not evolve with it?