Just looked it up and the entire first page of searches is about how ‘guys’ is masculine and insensitive to women. I disagree. I think the masculinization of the term is like an unneeded extra filter placed over ‘guy’ but the term itself is innocent. Guy Fawkes was a real person. He did something that caused him to be a symbol of the common person. There is nothing gendered about that. It’s the patriarchal culture that then assumed ‘common person’ refers to males. When I think of Guy Fawkes, it is his actions, not what’s in his pants, that is important. So, while there are many needlessly sexist and sexual phrases in English, I do not view ''Guy" as one of them and, instead, view it as a victim of the patriarchy just like you and me. It isn’t an inappropriate phrase to change or remove, it’s one to reclaim for all people; which is exactly in the spirit of the symbol of who Guy Fawkes is.
I try to be cognizant of my crowd and I have found using Folks is a better wording.
I have an aversion to folks. It’s too colloquial. If I don’t know you and don’t associate with you don’t lump me in as one of your folks. Folks implies familiarity. Use people. It’s neutral. Just my take, one thing that strongly came out of the mid to late aughts used a lot by Bush and Obama that I really disliked in their communication. My folks are my parents/family. Your folks are your parents/family. “Folks” in general feels slimy like you want to be my family but are just a con man.