>Being asked to use inclusive language is a weird thing to complain about that is, if you consider the word 'guys' as gender bound and inclusive. Female frien

>Being asked to use inclusive language is a weird thing to complain about that is, if you consider the word 'guys' as gender bound and inclusive. Female friends with myself in attendance are often referred to as 'Guys' by waitresses, waiters, and serving staff nearly anywhere I've gone. A former roommate who worked as a server at a restaurant used the word non-inclusively with the same meaning as 'Folks'. So, first get people to believe the word 'Guy' is inclusive. It's not. It's originally synonymous with 'Fellow'[0], which is also from non-inclusive origins meaning colleague, even if 'Fellow' was attached to males in the 50s and 60s common American English. >I use "folks" and other non-gendered language by my own choice. It's a habit I developed after self-reflection. Am I in a cult? Good. That's a great choice of habit. I commend you. Now, please, reconsider 'Guys', it's not as bad as the (current) common tongue might paint it. [0]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/14/the-origin-of-the-word-guy/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...