Your argument is dubious for two reasons:

1. You assume that “guys” is the male equivalent of “gals”. It’s not — the latter is much more strongly gendered. Your argument is circular, because you assume that “guys” is gendered as one of your axioms.

2. You are talking about “hey guys”, whereas I was talking about “you guys”. The whole point of my post was that you can’t understand the meaning of “you guys” simply by referencing the meaning of “guys”. They are completely different words, and their only relationship is historical, even though one is a substring of the other. Even if “hey guys” is mildly gendered (which I’m not sure of, but I’m at least willing to believe it’s possible), “you guys” absolutely isn’t, empirically.

You guys is a gendered term and a perfectly reasonable axiom.

And because it's used by everyone, I submit this is true in the court of public opinion.

If you’re not being sarcastic, “you guys” is never (and I know how strong that word is) gendered. It’s literally a synonym for “you all”, ‘y’all’, or ‘you’ (plural).

Are you a native speaker? I’m genuinely curious because I can’t imagine this not seeming ubiquitous to a person that’s grown up in American English.

I have to admit I don’t understand your point or what you’re trying to say.

> "You've now 'elevated' the women to men"

No elevation is happening. There is only inclusion and gathering together all members of the group regardless of gender. "Guys" performs this function effortlessly, without harm.

Gals always = girls. Guys does not always equal boys. That's language at work, an evolution which shouldn't be policed by language activists, instructing us what words are permitted.

If "leader" is part of the origin of "guy", that makes it even more suitable to gender neutral use in modern times. It's healthy when language is allowed to evolve and operate in varying contexts. Gatekeeping and policing words is to create problems and tension.

Traditional English has three genders: Male, Female, ???:

He/she/it They/they/they Guys/gals/guys

(Unfortunately, incorrectly using "it" to refer to a human is considered derogatory. All the other cells I listed were considered fine 20-30 years ago, and generally still are.)

"It"? I don't think so. It is "they".

> I could not see the person; [he,she,they, not "it"] was/were hidden in shadow.

I have a friend who always says “hi women” when meeting up with our group, no matter the genders of the people present. Nobody is getting offended.

so what should we use instead of the word "mother nature"? This implies fathers as lesser people, right?