Enby they/them pronouns - what's the law on this?

@Scout2016 gender identity ideology has never been put to the grainger test as they know it would fail.
I really wish that somebody would put it to the testosterone then we could assign it to the dustbin as NWORIDS.

1. I go mute sometimes because the part of my brain that does words just stops working. Other times, the completely wrong word comes out. This is part of being autistic for me. It's getting worse as I go into perimenopause.
2. I'm not sticking to "they" even for unknown people, again I think related to autism meeting perimenopause. I already find myself saying "he" when someone cuts me up at a junction, when I don't actually know the driver's sex.

To switch out such a fundamental and unconsciously selected language component as a sexed pronoun for one that is counter-intuitive is way too big of an ask for me, because of a disability from birth being made worse by my sexed biology.

You asked whether other people, some of whom have actual protected characteristics, find themselves subject to "preemptive worrying" from line managers.

Yes, they are, and unlike the OP's concerns about an enby whose identity has no legal recognition, some of that "preemptive worrying" could be seen as illegal discrimination, hence the reference to Pregnant Then Screwed.

However, a failure to carry out some "preemptive worrying", aka "due diligence checks" and "taking advice", could also result in illegal discrimination if the line manager does the wrong thing out of ignorance.

Sorry @SirChenjins if I am repeating other posters, I don't have time to read the thread but have been looking into this as may also have an NB on my team, although I'm not a manager. (My manager is full of Kool Aid). This case is relevant

https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/h-lockwood-v-cheshire-and-wirral-nhs-foundation-trust-and-others-2401211-slash-2024-and-2407178-slash-2024

This found that non binary is not a protected characteristic (ie not under gender reassignment).
Legally you can't be NB on documents either and thete have been 3 court elated cases, Ryan mentioned earlier and someone wanting to be X.

As far as I know, while GC beliefs have been found worthy of respectb/ protection, I'm not aware of any cases establishing the same of GI beliefs, but someone will know.

I don't know. A lot of the people I've heard talk about when they "realised" they were non-binary basically just recount hearing that NB was a label used to describe people who didn't conform to sexist stereotypes. And they thought, "Oh that's me!" and proceeded to embrace the rules of their new cult with vigour.

I'm paraphrasing of course but that is what it boils down to. The one I remember listening to on the radio talked about her epiphany because she'd heard or read about it and things like not wanting to wear dresses or makeup but also not being into stereotypically male clothing either sounded just like her. So she missed the step where she applied any critical thinking to the concept of non-binary and instead "came out".

There's no philosophical depth to it, just "I relate to this personality description so I must fall into this fictional category too". Like being a Swiftie, but accusing people of genocide if they say they're not a fan of her music.

I don’t think it’s true that everyone (or even most people) who consider themselves non binary think they ‘don’t have a sex’. For some it’s a way to describe their relationship with their sexed body. I also imagine there will be a range in terms of how demanding they are. Some will be reasonable. Someone tried to make the parallel with vegans. I guess for this it would be the difference between a vegan insisting a work meal took place at a vegan restaurant, a vegan who wanted a restaurant with lots of options, a vegan who was happy to go somewhere with one option and one who said “it would be good if we could go here, but if we can’t I get it”.

Surely the whole point about claiming to not have a sex is about demanding things from others. What other point is there?

Thanks for explaining what nonbinary means. So it's just about not feeling "aligned to gender expression of that sex".

And in 2026, that means that we're supposed to pretend that this person doesn't have a sex. Not that she's exactly like a huge proportion of the rest of the population, who aren't so self-obsessed that they think they invented gender nonconformity.

Yep, I'd probably avoid using pronouns. You've got people on here who, among other things, would actively, for example, say "Lovely to meet you both" to an individual because she is using a 'plural pronoun'. That's going beyond not being forced to say something. It's being a dick for the sake of it.

And we are still, in case we forget, talking about someone who it is assumed will demand certain things, compel speech and kick off if anyone 'gets it wrong', but hasn't actually requested anything.

That’s actually a really good analogy.

I swear a lot. I’ve worked with people I know hate swearing. In those circumstances I think before I speak. Is that an undue burden?

Would you insist that those people do swear at work?

Trying to avoid saying something is one thing but actively being forced to say something is very different.

When you are talking about different beliefs, which is what gender ideology is all about, it is important not to impose one person's belief upon another. Everyone is entitled to their own belief.

The important point is how that belief is expressed. Forcing someone to state words that are against their belief is not an acceptable expression of belief.

Even judges in law courts have said that it's appropriate for each counsel to use the language they are comfortable with and have not enforced pronoun use.

So far, no one has sued the judges or counsel for harassment for not using preferred pronouns.

Only in the way using any word or phrase you aren't used to using does.

Yes they do, and you know it.

Short hair, innit?

I think if it were a deliberate decision they would have been more consistent.

As an aside, I don't think Garman was an artist herself.

Your point?

We don't need to see someone's genitals to know their sex. Most of the time, their (real-life photo, unfiltered) face is enough, even when haircuts and clothing are cropped out.

Given the other features of the gallery (endless pride stickers, women's toilets for "all who identify as women"), I'd say it's pretty deliberate. Ironic that a gallery named for two women artists, who from all I can see were just heterosexual women of no gender identity at all, changes their pronouns.

I swear a lot. I’ve worked with people I know hate swearing. In those circumstances I think before I speak. Is that an undue burden?

Avoiding swearwords and using a wrong-sexed or plural pronoun for a known individual are not comparable. Until extremely recently, no one was offended by correct-sexed pronouns. People have been offended by swearing for a very long time.

Women with young children?

Pregnant Then Screwed just entered the chat.

Oh right. I see what you mean. TBH, I think it’s just really badly written. They seem to be trying to jam everything into single long sentences.

My DD (adult) is nb - I don’t use pronouns when they/she is about. I use ‘she’ when taking to dh, but DS usually uses ‘they’ - at work it’s def ‘they’ but then dd has never been a ‘she’ to them.
if I had an enby person at work I’d comply w their choice to be a ‘they’ - it’s v different when it’s your family - very complicated and emotional.
So - a colleague I’d call them whatever they wanted as I have no emotional attachment to them.
if say ‘they’re over there’ or ‘they’ve gone to lunch’ etc.