Asklemmy

43978 readers

575 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

177

What is a gender neutral replacement for man, guys, buddy, etc? (lemmy.ca)

submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

410 comments fedilink hide all child comments

So I've realized that in conversations I'll use traditional terms for men as general terms for all genders, both singularly and for groups. I always mean it well, but I've been thinking that it's not as inclusive to women/trans people.

For example I would say:

"What's up guys?" "How's it going man?" "Good job, my dude!” etc.

Replacing these terms with person, people, etc sounds awkward. Y'all works but sounds very southern US (nowhere near where I am located) so it sounds out of place.

So what are some better options?

Edit: thanks for all the answers peoples, I appreciate the honest ones and some of the funny ones.

The simplest approach is to just drop the usage of guys, man, etc. Folks for groups and mate for singular appeal to me when I do want to add one in between friends.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 17 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I agree. It's the plural of "you" that should be the official standard, since it disambiguates "you." It can even be broadened to include larger groups via "all y'all," as in, not just y'all in talking to, but all y'all in the house.

It can replace "guys", but not "man," though.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 8 months ago

The plural of you is yous or ye. In Ireland at least.

[–] ArbitraryValue 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

"You" is already plural and I'll never yield this hill to anyone. However, I'm open to bringing back "thou".

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Well, you don't have to yield, because it's correct. My issue isn't that you isn't plural, it's that it's both singular and plural, and therefore ambiguous. IDGAF whether we normalize y'all, or thou in the other direction, or yous as someone else mentioned... but "you" needs to pick a fucking lane.

[–] Makeshift 1 points 8 months ago

Thank thou for being someone other than myself that’s annoyed at English having the same dang word normalized for both singular AND plural for such a common and important word.