[RandomInteger4]

"Guy" and "guys" are not the same, at all. The s appended to the end, along with the context, drastically changes the semantic meaning of the word. This is how language works. Even an unchanged word can have totally different meanings depending on the context. You argument here is a strawman that ignores context to the point of pedantic absurdity.

[hug]

> The s appended to the end, along with the context, drastically changes the semantic meaning of the word.

Yes, words have meaning that change depending on context. That's how English works. It's a bit like how "man" can be used to mean the entirety of the human race, but "man" is in no way a gender neutral term.

To the same end, "guy" is considered by some to be quite gendered, and "guys" is often not, but even with the plural, asking a heterosexual man "how many guys have you slept with?", is often perceived very differently to asking "when did you guys get married?"

The problem here is that the first question, sans context, is going to be interpreted by a number of people to be exclusively male, and essentially never interpreted as exclusively female.

This isn't pedantry, it's just the way the word is perceived.

[manigandham]

Except "guys" and "you guys" is not the same. The latter is neutral, the former isn't.

[hug]

It’s not neutral, it’s gendered and used as a neutral.

You admitted, yourself, that the word itself it gendered.

The fact that it is default-male and used as neutral is the entire argument.

[manigandham]

You seem to have ignored the comment.

"you guys" is two words, and when used together is entirely different than the single word "guys". Otherwise people would just use "guys".

[hug]

If it appears that I ignored your comment, it's because I was assuming you weren't making the mistake you now appear to be.

Your argument seems to be that the inclusion of the 2nd-party plural "you" somehow removes the gendered nature of the word, which is not the case for this word or for any other.

I assume you believe that "boys" is gendered, and I assume you will admit that "you boys" is still gendered.

You admit that "guys" is gendered, but you will not admit that "you guys" is still gendered, without being able to provide any sort of evidence as to why.

The second case is identical to the first, the only difference being your specific idiolectical definition, which unfortunately is not generalisable to the English language as a whole.

[manigandham]

Please don't make wild assumptions. This isn't a trial. There's no evidence or admittance of anything needed.

These are accepted grammar rules. "you guys" as a second-person plural term is accepted as gender-neutral. "guys" in the third-person is not.

Arguing that the 2nd-person usage is not neutral is the new challenger position and you would need to provide the argument for why the accepted usage should change for the rest of us.