I was really rude and possibly discriminatory to my boss. What should I do?

[Iottie]

NC.

I was in our Monday team zoom meeting. We somehow got onto the Roe v Wade ruling.

My boss is extremely right wing. He was saying how he supported the ruling, it should have never been made in the first place, life begins at conception, bla bla bla etc.

I am the only woman on the team and I was getting more and more irate. I blurted out something I probably shouldn’t have. I can’t remember exactly but it was something along the lines of:

“Well, what’s it to you? You’re a gay man so it has no bearing on you whatsoever but it is going to impact millions of often poor and vulnerable women. Men should have no say over women’s bodies.”

There was a really awkward silence before we moved onto another topic.

Right, so I could have been more polite and nuanced in my point, but now I am terrified I discriminated against him by referencing his sexuality.

I know I really shouldn’t have mentioned it - I could have said the same thing without bringing it up but I just got more and more wound up by a bunch of men agreeing with each other instigated by him.

As I mentioned my boss is really right wing so I don’t think he’d report me for being discriminatory as he calls diversity and inclusion bollocks anyway. But if he does I know I could be in big trouble.

What do I do? I don’t know if I should message him apologising but that might just bring more attention to it…?

It seems to me that either it's OK for both of you to air your views, which is what happened, or it's not OK for anyone to air their views. I don't know which is appropriate in your set up.

Just because you don't agree with him it doesn't mean that he mustn't express his views (depending on the situation), but he must accept that if he is free to express his, you are free to express your, opposing, point of view.

This is a good idea.

I can see why you'd bring his sexuality into it. Two gay men can't have an accidental pregnancy. It does bring up an interesting point for gay men and surrogacy. What if a surrogate was at serious risk and the dads refused to support a termination. Could surrogates in states where it's now banned be imprisoned if they travel to a state where it isn't?

He did though.......or is that different?

I think "You’re a gay man so it has no bearing on you whatsoever" was uncalled for. I hope everyone in the meeting knew he was gay, otherwise you've outed a colleague and that's unacceptable.

Abortion is a women's issue. Men are affected by abortion to an extent - both straight, gay and any other orientation - but they're not the ones who potentially have to grow a human inside them, regardless of whether it is medically safe.

You're right that a gay man will never have an accidental pregnancy arising from casual sex. A straight man might, and he might therefore be very interested in abortion being on the table, but ultimately, it's not his choice as to what happens.

Men of any sexual orientation could have a child by surrogate. It's possible that too many embryos might take, and it might not be safe for the surrogate to continue with all of them. It might be the safest decision for the surrogate to selectively terminate, to give some of the embryos a chance of making it to term. Not terminating any could put the surrogate and/or the most viable embryos at risk.

Whilst the surrogate could end up in medical danger and the risk is all on her and not any man, you can't say that the men won't be emotionally invested in whether any healthy babies are born.

So... they are affected. In the same way that straight men are affected. Which is to say, they are a bit, but ultimately, no man is ever the important person in the scenario. The woman grows the baby, so she should always get to decide. If the pregnancy will endanger her health - physical or mental - she should get to put her medical needs first. And I don't mention things like not wanting a baby because I think that falls under mental health too. I think any woman who does not want a child who is forced to have a child will end up with poor mental health. It's just appalling.

Which is all a very long way of saying that the OP wasn't wrong to suggest that this is a women's issue that will put countless women in danger (as an example, how many women are going to get beaten up now by abusive partners trying to induce a miscarriage?) but by mentioning her boss's sexuality, she's muddied the waters and weakened her stance.

They absolutely can and do become fathers, but I do think it is much less likely that they will be personally / intimately affected by abortion laws.

Not that it particularly matters but is his sexuality something he is fairly open about? It’s not like this is the first time he’s been referred to (by himself or otherwise) as gay? Like you said I doubt he will report you and he should possibly know better than to bring up such a difficult subject, even if politics are regularly discussed.

No, it's a terrible idea. You have absolutely NOTHING to apologise for. The guy sounds like a Neanderthal chump.

Men won't give 2 shits what the impact is for women, whether it's their surrogate or any other woman. They get to literally walk away if they so choose if anything doesn't go to plan. No criminal record, no damage to their body, no trauma.

You're absolutely wrong. His gender and sexuality has zero bearing on the issue, which is one of rights, namely when does one become recognised in the law as human and therefore entitled to human rights.

All you did was show how weak your position is if you had to resort to becoming personal.

And to all those saying abortion is a woman's issue, the converse argument is that it's a human issue, as abortion means killing a (potential) human.

He would be in as much trouble as you if he raised it, which he probably won't.

Keep a note of what happened, plus a list of people who were also in the zoom meeting.

BTW I think you did absolutely the right thing. He brought it up, he's more senior than you so should have been at the most balanced and aware that there may be other views in the team. As the only female in the meeting, you called him out on it. Just because he 'believes' in this law change, doesn't mean he is right. And it won't affect him.

@HeadOnShoulders

her position wasn’t/isn’t remotely weak

Don't apologise.

He decided to put his misogynistic sexist 2 pence in where it didn't belong.

The organisation certainly isn't diverse from how you described it.

I think the only way you'd be unreasonable here is if you outed him with that comment. I agree though, gay men are the least affected by that court decision.

Your boss was completely wrong to share his personal beliefs during a work meeting. Also as a woman you were absolutely right to call him out and to feel outraged by his behaviour.

Ignore the one who are trying to say you were out of order.

He is gay, that is a fact, and he won't ever face the issue of getting someone pregnant directly through sex, another fact.

And I say that as someone who identifies as Queer.

Yes, gay men can have children but that is going to involve a woman getting into a voluntary agreement to carry a same sex couple child. The issue of abortion is unlikely to come up unless there is a health issue attached to the pregnancy and even in this case the woman's right to choose comes first.

We really need to stop finding excuses for men, gay or straight, to believe that they have a say over women's bodies.

@HeadOnShoulders

YOU ARE WRONG

his gender does have bearing.

he is a man.

men have zero say on women’s body’s. Absolutely none.

for too long we have tolerated men feeling they have the right to give their opinions on things that have fuck all to go with them I.e a woman’s womb.

OP’s collegue needed to have wound his neck in in that meeting and shut the fuck up

OP was absolutely in the right. The more of us that speak out the better

Here, here!

The only thing that could be 'Wrong' os mentioning that your boss is Gay.. As you know, Gay men DO have children, but yes, as a man, he is never going to be in need of a morning after pill, or early termination, so it is very unlikely to affect him.

Hope you don't get into hot water., @Iottie .

It's definitely a retrograde step for USA.
Abortions won't be any the less, they will just be forced underground, and be much more dangerous, but hey, the ''Pro Lifers'' won't care...As soon as a baby is born, they lose all interest in it..apart from maybe wanting to see that child sold for profit via private adoption agency.

Seconding anyone who advises you to make a contemporary note of the first meeting even if you don't need it.

Don't apologise.

I'd be talking to HR about being in a meeting full of men discussing the removal of women's rights and why it's a good thing. Unacceptable.

Is he openly gay? Would he describe himself as such?

If so, you’ve just had a frank exchange of political views on a topical issue. No more, no less than that. You haven’t been either rude or discriminatory as far as I can see.

I only voted yabu because of bringing his sexuality into the argument, but otherwise it was bad form on him to be publicising his views, especially as in his position as a manager he could have to deal with such personal topics with employees.

You were quite right, a woman's fertility is not the business of any man.

Then try to give a winning argument using logic (rather than dogma) and without resorting to personal attacks.

Usually the arguments for abortion are that the fetus is just part of the woman and isn't yet considered a human being, and as such it's her choice. And the argument against is that a fetus is a human being, albeit in early stages of development, and therefore shouldn't be killed.

Neither side has a knockout argument.

It's women who get pregnant, so it's not a human issue, it's a women's issue.

I think in todays climate- where we are meant to be on guard to adhere to HR speak- I think you were both in the "wrong". I'm weary of this heavy-handed HR culture personally, but it is what it is. As I do not think it encourages genuine inclusion and diversity and does not do anything to stop actual bullying (route of most discrimination) in the work place. Which is the reason allot of the original legislation was put in.

And may be called up for it- depending on the culture of your organisation.
I'll be surprised if you were sacked over it.

What I would do, is let it blow over. He may not report it. Learn to be more mindful and careful next time

Write to yourself, (an email?) exactly what happened, date time so you are clear just in case he did say something reported on you.

Do not go to HR first, unless you're sure he'll report you.

Do not apologise, just be nice to him, talk about something else...so he knows that you're still on good terms.

And certainly do not put anything as an apology in email, writing sent to him.

If he does report you, just be honest- that you were emotionally hurt by the argument, for personal reasons, and you spoke , without thinking. As you felt the argument was sexist towards being a women, and you felt uncomfortable about being the only woman in a group of men holding objectionable views on hard won birth control rights that you've been personally affected by.
At the precise moment you didn't think what you said was discriminatory in the context of the conversation.
But in hindsight realised it could be seen in that way, and apologise for any hurt feelings to your boss.
You would like to move on, you've learnt your lesson and will not get in impassioned debates at work.

Can anyone in HR advise?