guys & men & boys

    This is the 1000th post of the blog.
    I was talking with a friend a while ago, trying to explain the difference between a "guy" and a "man." It seemed like a sort of instinctive thing, something that was just commonly understood. Apparently not.

[This theory is rough, and stereotyped, and it came about during a conversation with a very argumentative male friend, so take it with a grain of salt.]

    "Guys" are the category of males who work primarily with their bodies rather than their brains. They "do stuff," like building things or delivering things. "Men," on the other hand, are those males who work primarily with their brains. They push paper - or other people.
    Obviously, there are both guys and men who break those boundaries, exceeding their "limitations." There are men who are also capable of bench-pressing their weight, or who can do other things with their hands/bodies without undue effort. And there are guys who can talk poetry or art with greater facility than I can.
    Mostly, though, it's just about being primarily comfortable in one area or the other.
    There is a third category that supersedes either of the others: boy. Regardless of the other types, if a male is primarily immature and either unable or unwilling to take control of his life, then he is a boy, no matter his age. This is not a compliment.
    There is an equivalent sort of breakdown for females, too. I think that we self-identify, and can be identified, as lady or woman or chick, depending on what these words have come to mean to us. And I know that the word girl, however innocently spoken, does not come as a compliment to me.
    What do you think? Like I said, this is pretty rough, but it's been on my mind for a while and has been argued in various contexts, both sober and very much not. I would be interested in hearing the opinions of those few who are allowed to read here at the moment.
    And, by the way: Happy Thanksgiving, y'all.