Grammar and Terminology Question

[Starkess]

Woman as an adjective just grammatically does not work.

But I don't have much of an aversion to the word female as a noun either, so poor grammar is more likely to set my teeth on edge than using the word female in either case.

[Datepalm]

I'm with X-Ray and Ini here - it's more correct, and flows better as an adjective to lawyer, than woman. 

Moreover, I think the reason 'female' in a lot of contexts sets our teeth - rightly - on edge, is because it's evolved to be used especially in regard to gender in/equality discussions. The use of female/s as a noun feels like it's evolved to be objectifying - like discussing women on a dating site as 'females' - its icky. But its still hanging on as an adjective, especially more formally of if wanting to emphasize a gender issue. Like Theda's example about the engineers. "Female engineers are now 40% of the profession" - sounds fine. (though not "females are 40% of...") "The male engineer was younger than the female engineer"* - overly strict and kind of silly. 

*actually, that now sounds a bit of a trap to me, because you couldn't really say "the man engineer is younger than the woman engineer" either. To my ear, mixing it up actually has the most neutral sound, while still also drawing attention to itself - "the male engineer is younger than the woman engineer." - female is loaded in context of women, man is ridiculous in context of, uh, males. It may be a bind. 

[Happy Ent]

Thank you for this thread. I’m not a native speaker, but am in the position of often correcting other non-native speakers. I always cringe when a conference chair announces that we’re happy to have attracted a female as Keynote speaker. 

(Typically, this is announced in heavily accented English, and the subtlety is probably and understandably lost on the speaker depending on his or her native tongue. But I’m happy to see my own intuition about this confirmed.)

Just for the record: “male” as a noun is fine, right?

[Xray the Enforcer]

I typically don't use "male" as a noun, except when IDing birds. (e.g. "Xray what kind of Northern Cardinal is that?" "That's a juvenile male.") 

[Happy Ent]

5 minutes ago, Xray the Enforcer said:

I typically don't use "male" as a noun, except when IDing birds. (e.g. "Xray what kind of Northern Cardinal is that?" "That's a juvenile male.") 

Ah, but that’s not my question. My question is whether you would be taken aback by seeing a phrase like “a white male” or something  like that (when speaking of a male homo sapiens sapiens)  in public discourse.

I absolutely assume that your own usage is, as in all other things, impeccable.

[Xray the Enforcer]

It would depend on the context. If it were a police or doctor's report, "white male" or "white female" is acceptable. If I were reading or editing a profile about you for some hypothetical magazine, though, I'd prefer "Happy Ent, a white man who might also be a tree," even though according to Merriam-Webster I could say "Happy Ent, a white male who might also be a tree," and be grammatically correct. So, yes. I would be taken aback by the use of "male" as a noun, because in most cases (and especially when speaking of individual persons/trees) the man/woman-as-a-noun construction does not sound as clinical or alienating as male/female-as-a-noun. 

I know that "it depends" is not a very satisfactory answer. I guess my main point can be summed up thusly: what is strictly grammatically correct may not always be the best choice (especially if there are others that are also grammatically correct but sound better), but something that is grammatically incorrect is almost always the wrong one.  

[Mlle. Zabzie]

At the end of the day, I wrote around it:

 

"As a woman who is a home-grown equity partner in a transactional practice area, I am often asked for advice by associates regarding the paths available to them at [FIRM], and I believe that my perspective has helped us to attract and retain women."

 

And yes, have the same feeling about strict grammatical correctness vs. best choice.  We have a fierce debate about the propriety of the third person singular "they."  I actually think in a century or so that will be correct (and maybe in two "he" and "she" may go the way of "thee" and "thou.")

[Iskaral Pust]

I agree with Xray on this overall.

Your rewrite is a decent compromise although I would be slightly wary of leading with your identity as a minority and then adding your position.   It could be perceived negatively that you are asserting an entitlement from that minority status rather than from the much more positive statement of being an homegrown equity partner who overcame the many obstacles faced by women and who represents a positive role model that the firm wishes to encourage.  As is, it depends on how it is read. 

Best of luck with your review. 

[Happy Ent]

+Iskarial. Just drop “As a woman,” and the sentence stands just as strong.

[Xray the Enforcer]

Hmmm. I think it depends. If the firm has a strong commitment to diversity and inclusion, then Zabz' sentence as it stands likely won't be a problem. 

[Mlle. Zabzie]

8 minutes ago, Xray the Enforcer said:

Hmmm. I think it depends. If the firm has a strong commitment to diversity and inclusion, then Zabz' sentence as it stands likely won't be a problem. 

I would say that we are at least trying to have a strong commitment to diversity and inclusion and that it is a "high priority" item.  My sponsor pretty much told me to hammer this point a little bit.

 

(And thank you all - very helpful)

[Xray the Enforcer]

 and good luck!!

[Nas!]

I'm surprised that your firm doesn't have you self-assess your self-review.  That's very short-sighted of them.  I pose the following question in the book about management that I am currently writing, and I think it is apt here: Why do 50% of the work when you could do none at all?

[sologdin]

maybe go latinate with muliebral or neologistic greek with gynical, if proper adjectival forms are required?

and of course adherence to arbitrary grammatical rules is less important than rhetorically successful signification.  

[Starkess]

12 hours ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

And yes, have the same feeling about strict grammatical correctness vs. best choice.  We have a fierce debate about the propriety of the third person singular "they."  I actually think in a century or so that will be correct (and maybe in two "he" and "she" may go the way of "thee" and "thou.")

Singular they has been around for many centuries and is a totally valid construction!

[Nas!]

I'm 100% in favour of gender neutral pronouns, but "they" has always seemed weird and clunky to me.  I won't use it. 

[Altherion]

1 hour ago, Starkess said:

Singular they has been around for many centuries and is a totally valid construction!

It's such a weird convention. "Somebody left their book here" sounds perfectly normal to me -- if I read it, I would not even notice. On the other hand, "Alex left their book here" and "the doctor left their book here" are hideous abominations that would almost certainly interrupt my flow of reading and make me think that the proofreaders messed up. Of course, the same grammatical rules should govern all three, but my mind just doesn't work that way.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

10 hours ago, Altherion said:

It's such a weird convention. "Somebody left their book here" sounds perfectly normal to me -- if I read it, I would not even notice. On the other hand, "Alex left their book here" and "the doctor left their book here" are hideous abominations that would almost certainly interrupt my flow of reading and make me think that the proofreaders messed up. Of course, the same grammatical rules should govern all three, but my mind just doesn't work that way.

I think it will be totally normal to see this in 100 years and no one will blink.  He and she will look archaic.

[Weeping Sore]

Sorry I'm late to the party but "woman equity" sounds like an asset a pimp would refer to when applying for a loan...

ETA: I think the initial weirdness arose from stringing two adjectival nouns in a row "home-grown woman equity partner" the mind wants to have "home-grown" describe "woman" or once we realize woman is being used adjectivally, to have it describe equity. Maybe we need to revive the prefix she-, as in "she-partner"

[mouse]

I would say, "Frequently, associates seek me out for mentoring and sponsorship, soliciting my advice as a woman who rose through the ranks to equity partnership in a transactional practice area."