No stupid questions time: This kind of lurks in the back of my mind and I sometimes find myself hesitating to use the term “female” to refer to female figures in any context. I don’t have to do that, right? Like, would “woman lawyer” be better than “female lawyer” in contexts where specifying gender might be relevant? I would conversely prefer the term “male lawyer” in the same context and “man lawyer” sounds just as odd to me as “woman lawyer”. “Lawyer who is a woman” is a little verbose, too. Am I overthinking this?
Sorry but “woman” is not an adjective and its use that way is grating. You wouldn’t say “man teacher” and it sounds wrong. So does “woman lawyer” or “woman voter.”
The neckbeard/incel thing is using “female” when “woman” would be acceptable and more common, like “look at these females” or something. It doesn’t mean we have to abolish the word “female” entirely from the lexicon.
If you’re talking about animals it doesn’t matter.
Not even that it doesn’t matter, it’s almost entirely the point. The reason why using ‘females’ as a noun to refer to women is dehumanizing is because it’s a noun we use for animals.
Yes you’re over thinking this. A woman lawyer is just a lawyer. Same how a male lawyer is just a lawyer. Unless the gender of the person is important, leave it out of their job title. Use the word actor to describe both men and women who act. Flight attendant for men and women, or receptionist, or any other word. The vast majority of time you can leave their gender out of the description and it’s fine.
My personal take is to just use lawyer, when gender is irrelevant. This may get your audience confused when using “she” in the next sentence. But it could help weaken the stereotypes about genders if we did this more often IMHO.
If needed “female lawyer” or “lawyer who is a woman” are good otherwise.
I work in statistics and we never use girl of woman, only female. The line is vastly different in age and meaning depending on culture, religion, law, or heritage. Even in western societ, 13, 16, 18, and 21 are all valid before tipping to 40, 50, 60, 65, 68, and 70 where the term can be prefixed with some form of adjective.
It’s old-fashioned. Just say female and every culture/society understands you without confusion or insult. Save you embarassing/insulting people while travelling too.
No stupid questions time: This kind of lurks in the back of my mind and I sometimes find myself hesitating to use the term “female” to refer to female figures in any context. I don’t have to do that, right? Like, would “woman lawyer” be better than “female lawyer” in contexts where specifying gender might be relevant? I would conversely prefer the term “male lawyer” in the same context and “man lawyer” sounds just as odd to me as “woman lawyer”. “Lawyer who is a woman” is a little verbose, too. Am I overthinking this?
Sorry but “woman” is not an adjective and its use that way is grating. You wouldn’t say “man teacher” and it sounds wrong. So does “woman lawyer” or “woman voter.”
The neckbeard/incel thing is using “female” when “woman” would be acceptable and more common, like “look at these females” or something. It doesn’t mean we have to abolish the word “female” entirely from the lexicon.
Yeah, that seems to align nicely with the instincts I outlined in my comment. No need to apologize. Thanks!
My personal rule is female adjective is okay, female noun is not.
From what I googled, it’s especially bad when you pair “man” and “female” together, which makes sense to me.
Just don’t use male or female as nouns to refer to humans. That simple. If you’re talking about animals it doesn’t matter.
Not even that it doesn’t matter, it’s almost entirely the point. The reason why using ‘females’ as a noun to refer to women is dehumanizing is because it’s a noun we use for animals.
Best be safe and call them “girl lawyer”
Yes you’re over thinking this. A woman lawyer is just a lawyer. Same how a male lawyer is just a lawyer. Unless the gender of the person is important, leave it out of their job title. Use the word actor to describe both men and women who act. Flight attendant for men and women, or receptionist, or any other word. The vast majority of time you can leave their gender out of the description and it’s fine.
My personal take is to just use lawyer, when gender is irrelevant. This may get your audience confused when using “she” in the next sentence. But it could help weaken the stereotypes about genders if we did this more often IMHO.
If needed “female lawyer” or “lawyer who is a woman” are good otherwise.
I know, use the worst of all options, “lawyeress.” /s
When we’re driving, my wife often acts as a navigatrix
Waiter = Waitress
Lawyer = Lawyress
Lawyer femoid 😒
lawyeoid 😏
I work in statistics and we never use girl of woman, only female. The line is vastly different in age and meaning depending on culture, religion, law, or heritage. Even in western societ, 13, 16, 18, and 21 are all valid before tipping to 40, 50, 60, 65, 68, and 70 where the term can be prefixed with some form of adjective.
It’s old-fashioned. Just say female and every culture/society understands you without confusion or insult. Save you embarassing/insulting people while travelling too.
They’re just called lawyers, unless they’re lawyering with their genitals and their sex is somehow relevant.
There are obviously still contacts where the distinction is important.
Such as discussing discrimination, statistics, etc
Maybe from an equity perspective, but not from a lawyer perspective. So you’d probably say “we need more women in law”.
Because the topic is women. If the topic was lawyering, then sex won’t come up.
Immediate scenario that came to mind here is
“70% of lawyers suffer discrimination in the workplace but only 30% of lawyers face discrimination.”
“single female lawyer fighting for justice and also being single,”
That’s a deep reference. Very nice.
I’m a nostalgia sniper today