Today is international pronouns day. I have copied the below from Naomi Cunningham on LinkedIn
A quick post for "International Pronouns Day."
If your employer invites you to add your pronouns to your email signature, it should be acceptable simply to say "No thank you." If they insist, that's discrimination or harassment related to your protected dissent from gender ideology: you should not be made to signal assent to a belief-system you don't subscribe to with your every email. But don't be a martyr: a job is usually a better thing to have than even the most cast-iron discrimination claim - which an employment tribunal may get around to hearing in around 2030. So if they insist, you'll mostly have to comply.
What you might do, though, is comply under protest. "This is harassment of me relating to my protected "gender critical" belief/ my protected dissent from gender ideology. I will comply because I have to, but I am upset and humiliated to be made to signal assent in this way to a belief I reject." Then when you leave that post, provided the pronouns declaration has been imposed on you ever since, you'll have 3 months to commence proceedings for harassment, if you want to. A sensible employer faced with such a claim will cough up a modest settlement and learn the lesson.
If you're in the mood to pick a more immediate fight, pick it quite carefully. If your employer permits or encourages colleagues to put (eg) "Prounouns: she/her," and add "Why are these here?" with a link to a little sermon about why it's "inclusive" to add your pronouns, you might want to propose a parallel course: "Pronouns: sex-based," plus "Why don't I declare my pronouns?" linking to an article about why pronoun rituals aren't as harmless as all that. But keep your proposal carefully parallel to what you can demonstrate your employer permits your gender ideologue colleagues to do. So if your colleagues are encouraged to add "she/her" or "they/them" or whatever, then "thou/thee" really ought to be permissible, as should "sex-based." But "get/a/life" is not comparable, and will reasonably enough be considered unprofessional.
"Thou/thee" is my personal favourite, because (a) it's 2nd person, not 3rd, so it actually forces your colleagues to choose whether to comply in their every interaction with you - it's easy enough to swerve 3rd person pronouns in face-to-face interactions, much trickier to avoid saying "you". And (b), even better, it comes with a load of additional grammatical baggage: you can't just substitute it for "you" and carry on, you have to conjugate the verbs accordingly. "Have you got your ergonomic chair yet?" becomes "Hast thou got thy ergonomic chair yet?" "Are you going to the EDI training this afternoon, or are you too busy doing your actual work?" becomes "Art thou going to the EDI training this afternoon, or art thou too busy doing thy actual work?" And yet if your employer is willing (even in principle) to indulge a colleague who expects everyone else to tangle with "ze/zir" pronouns, on what basis can they object to your preference?