וַיִּ֩חַר֩ לְאַבְנֵ֨ר מְאֹ֜ד עַל־דִּבְרֵ֣י אִֽישׁ־בֹּ֗שֶׁת וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ הֲרֹ֨אשׁ כֶּ֥לֶב אָנֹ֘כִי֮ אֲשֶׁ֣ר לִֽיהוּדָה֒ הַיּ֨וֹם אֶעֱשֶׂה־חֶ֜סֶד עִם־בֵּ֣ית ׀ שָׁא֣וּל אָבִ֗יךָ אֶל־אֶחָיו֙ וְאֶל־מֵ֣רֵעֵ֔הוּ וְלֹ֥א הִמְצִיתִ֖ךָ בְּיַד־דָּוִ֑ד וַתִּפְקֹ֥ד עָלַ֛י עֲוֺ֥ן הָאִשָּׁ֖ה הַיּֽוֹם׃
Abner was very upset by what Ish-bosheth said, and he replied, “Am I a dog’s head from Judah? Here I have been loyally serving the House of your father Saul and his kinsfolk and friends, and I have not betrayed you into the hands of David; yet this day—over this woman—you reproach me!
(The above rendering comes from the RJPS translation, an adaptation of the NJPS translation. Before accounting for this rendering, I will analyze the plain sense of the Hebrew term containing אִישׁ—in this case, its feminine form אִשָּׁה—by employing a situation-oriented construal as outlined in this document, pp. 11–16.)
The noun phrase הָאִשָּׁה has an ambiguous reference, partly because as a genitive it is not clearly referential. One defensible construal is that it points to an individual (namely Rizpah), regarding her in terms of the situation previously depicted by Abner’s master, in which she is an essential participant. As such, the present usage is unremarkable and purely descriptive.
The other possible construal is that it refers to a type (which in this case, given no further stated criteria, defaults to the category of women). On such usage, see my comment at 1 Sam 9:9. The phrase עֲוֺן הָאִשָּׁה is otherwise unattested, so there is no evidence that it was a fixed expression, and no evidence that it was used disparagingly about women.
As for rendering into English, the NJPS ‘yet this day you reproach me over a woman’ presents the reference as being to a type, where womanliness is what’s at issue. These factors unfortunately allow for misogyny to enter the picture, by making it sound as though Abner is contrasting Rizpah with men, or otherwise dismissing or disparaging her womanliness. In the absence of evidence that such was Abner’s intention, it seems safest to opt for an individual construal.