Line Manager just "come out" as Non-binary

[SpinningTooFastWantToGetOff]

My line-manager emailed everyone in the office last week to say she was non-binary and we should use they/them pro-nouns.
Today I inadvertently called her she in an email to a colleague in another office, but line-manager was copied in, plus her line-manager. Are you keeping up?
My line-manager responded to the email and added at the bottom a reminder about her pro-nouns.
I do not believe in the gender identity ideology and so object to being told to speak in an unnatural and incorrect way, but what I am incandescent about is being called out in front of 2 other colleagues.
Am I over reacting?

Findumdum1

My only experience of trans people are people who present or try to present in what is considered by many as a typical binary way. For clarity those who wear hair styles, clothes and looks that are typically associated with men or women. So for me personally misgendering would be to call me he or him. Now, personally what people call me when I'm not there is their business and is likely to say more about them than me so I don't really mind. I'd personally prefer it if they can't use my preferred (not compelled) pronoun that they use my name. I don't think I'm unusual in amongst trans people in having that opinion.

In my office, it is a fundamental requirement that we are all of independent thought but my experience has been that people have been accepting. I think it is a difficult one as I transitioned some years ago in a different job and naturally people knew me before so some perhaps found it difficult to let go of the past but in the new job where people had only knew me as I am now I think decency and respect for dignity found a deliberate misgendering difficult to support so I can't say it's happened to face at least.

The world is changing, for better or for worse and inevitably with that language develops. So, reality supports that people are now using numerous gender identifiers, that doesn't mean to say sex as a class isn't less complicated but our world is a bit more nuanced than 'I am Tarzan you are Jane' today. New words are entered into the OED every year. There is a book about the development of language over time by Bill Bryson which I can recommend which may have some pertinent points with regards to this situation. It's easy to read as its laced with some low level humor too.

Going back to the original issue, I don't think this particular case in isolation is controversial enough to demand that the OP shouldn't make an effort to respect dignity and keep the integrity of their own opinion intact.

Yes, I've read that book. I am interested in linguistics, hence why I find the grammar-mangling of the pronoun thing both laughable and a bit dangerous. We all know the power of compelled speech and how it was used to such devastating effect by the Nazis.

Your point is very valid though. I dont think this is a trans issue. As you say, the vast majority of trans people want to be seen to be as close to their desired sex as at all possible, preferably without anyone knowing there was ever anything different. So like you, I have worked with some transwomen and know a couple who all are delighted to be referred to as she or her, and indeed all universally are (except by my 80 year old mother who keeps calling my sibling's trans friend by her male name that she knew her as for many years. She laughs it off, good naturedly).

I wonder if you feel annoyed at the non-binary, gender fluid types that are jumping on the bandwagon without, lets face it, going through anything near what you've been through in terms of cognitive dissonance and feeling uncomfortable with yourself, and diluting it all with the ze/ver nonsense. I would.

When we talk about how language evolves over time, does that include when words have their definitions changed and people are castigated if they don't follow a new religion?

Terfsandwich

Not being a signed up member of the TWAW/TMAM opinion I'm happy with the original definitions. My experience is personal, it matters not whether people believe it or not. It's happened, I navigate life as quietly as I can and find most take me as they find me and offer me a dignity that 20 years ago I wouldn't have thought possible. I can say though that my condition as medically diagnosed and treated is very different from any religion I've encountered. I'm always willing to have my opinion changed though.

Sex as a class isn't less complicated but our world is a bit more nuanced than 'I am Tarzan you are Jane' today

The thing is sex class is very simple. It is either male or female, he or she. It is personal identity that is a lot more nuanced and mutable. 'Tarzan and Jane' are not related to sex as such but to gendered constructs - which is what 'gender identities' seem to be playing with.

Going back to the original issue, I don't think this particular case in isolation is controversial enough to demand that the OP shouldn't make an effort to respect dignity and keep the integrity of their own opinion intact

Relationships are two way affairs..........and as with your example of identities forged at different times in your life, how people think of you, and refer to you will be flexible according to the nature and history of their relationship to you, and what has been so far negotiated between you.

If people feel compelled and controlled it is not a great basis for a mutually respectful relationship. It is more akin to narcissistic control: www.helpguide.org/articles/mental-disorders/narcissistic-personality-disorder.htm

Findumdum1

I think your experience is probably a typical one. As time goes and hormones and surgeries do their work things become easier and misgendering much less of an issue. That's not to say I think of myself as no different than you and I do respect the need for boundaries. For example I'm a fan of standalone accessible gender neutral toilets. I do use the ladies if there is no other choice but, if I can avoid a queue and have a bit more space I'm all for it.

I don't feel annoyed at non binary people, mainly because I've experienced people feeling annoyed at me. I don't wish that on anyone else and I know from experience that if you aren't trans it must be quite a thing to get your head around that we would medicate and surgically alter our bodies to calm our brains down. That said, they didn't arrive at the current pathway without many years of trying to align the brain with body first.

Personally, I'm happy to go with the flow in this case but I can see there is another side to it. Hopefully, there will be a middle ground which allows both parties to feel okay.

Personally, I'm happy to go with the flow in this case but I can see there is another side to it. Hopefully, there will be a middle ground which allows both parties to feel okay

I think that middle ground has to be third spaces........and perhaps the concept of a 'third sex'.......with its own discrete identity. All else is a form of colonisation, and certainly infringement.

I don't wish that on anyone else and I know from experience that if you aren't trans it must be quite a thing to get your head around that we would medicate and surgically alter our bodies to calm our brains down

There are other examples, apart from 'being trans': situations in which people are so unhappy with themselves and their self image that they seek to radically alter their body - either through surgery - or other means.......to align with how they feel about themselves; or to reflect feelings of unhappiness and desire for change.

The increasing number of people addicted tocosmetic surgery for example........And I recall some of the young women at the de-transitioners event in Manchester, recounting their prior experiences of anorexia - and how similar the attitude and feelings towards their body was with both 'conditions' ( being trans and being anorexic).

Justhadathought

You're right, I'd never support compelled speech. Personally, I may have mentioned I'm non binary and left people to their own devices. Most of us are capable of dechipering a genuine error from an act of nastiness.

I used to think sex was really simple and I do believe that there are mainly two with a minority of intersex conditions in between. However, if my blood were taken and my hormone levels looked at they would, although I am not reflect those typically associated with the female sex. Surgery means that my ability to produce a male level of testosterone should be gone. My genitalia and to an extent my secondary sex characteristics would do the same. I'm presuming I'm not intersex but I don't know for sure so I expect my chromosomes would say I'm male. This leads me to think it's in a minority of cases not as clear cut but, I do agree my sex will be important to my health in later life. That doesn't mean to say I wouldn't be foolish to miss out on the breast screening programme.

Relationships are two way affairs and thankfully they are based on far more than our biological sex and respective gender identity. Living a life where they are not aligned can be a bit of a balancing act at times, medical advances have eased that path somewhat but, to not balance them in the face of natures reality would in my opinion be foolish.

NASUWT Trans Equality in Schools and Colleges
Advice and Guidance for Teachers and Leaders was published in 2017

(extract)
"Supporting Dual-role People
Some people manage their gender dysphoria by living as a man or a woman in different aspects of their lives. For example, they may work in a male role but socialise in a female role.
Although the protected characteristic under the Equality Act is gender reassignment, it is best to assume that dual-role people are covered by perception that they might transition.
Like everyone else they deserve to be treated with dignity
and respect.
In practical terms, there should be no issues unless the different aspects of their lives overlap in some way. For example, a male teacher might want to attend a staff party as a woman. In that case they would probably prefer to use a female name and feminine pronouns, and they should be allowed to use the toilets appropriate to the gender in which they are presenting.
As referenced on page 4, it is always far better to ask the person concerned before applying any arbitrary label to them. "
www.nasuwt.org.uk/uploads/assets/uploaded/085066bb-c224-40de-b79e2a1358801ee9.pdf

recent thread about Dr Hayton's (advisor to the policy toolkit above) recent article acknowledging the role of autogynaephilia as a driver for some males who identify as transsexual/transgender :
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3812773-Impressive-new-article-by-Debbie-Hayton

Relationships are two way affairs and thankfully they are based on far more than our biological sex and respective gender identity. Living a life where they are not aligned can be a bit of a balancing act at times

The thing is even people who live in conventional heterosexual relationships will suffer difficulties and personal dissonance with themselves and each other, when it comes to expectations around gender roles......even if on the surface there is initial agreement.

The nitty gritty of everyday life brings out all sorts of unconscious scripts and expectations of what men and women 'should' do, or behave like. Gendered roles very often impose upon people - even against their own character, personality or nature.

As an aside I find the statements such as above, "they would probably prefer to use a female name and feminine pronouns" frustrating in their inaccuracy. The person is not preferring to 'use' feminine pronouns, they (& by implication the NASUWT) would be 'preferring' others such as colleagues, parents & governors to use female pronouns when referring to the individual more commonly understood to be 'cross-dressing'.

stats I used to think sex was really simple and I do believe that there are mainly two with a minority of intersex conditions in between.
Intersex conditions are disorders of sexual development that are specific to sex. Not in between.

Why do people have to tell everyone at work something so personal?
I'm genetically-biologically female and content with that, I wouldn't go to work and announce it, it would be daft.

Intersex is a different matter to trans, if someone suspects they are intersex there can find out. There are not many intersex people in the world but they do exist, there's quite a lot about and by them on the internet including a well known sportsperson (so well known I can't think of their name), and an artist.

We're all different, viva les differences but in every day working life we don't have to share everything, what's the point?

That's bullying in my workplace. Do you feel bullied OP?

Yes.

Angela met with the committee earlier this week. They explained our position and, after listening carefully, the committee understood and were happy with our approach.

Actually, in that example, "committee" is a singular noun, and should take the singular verb:
"Angela met the committee earlier this week. It explained its position, and after listening carefully, it understood and was happy with our approach"

HTH

justhadathought

Firstly, if my iPad changes your user name to anything different please accept my apology, I am having very personal battle with the machine.

As for third spaces, whilst I am happy to use them and I am going to go out on a limb and say many others would be too I don't like the idea of being compelled to use them. To me it sort of gives rise to an idea that I am fundamentally so potentially dangerous that I can't be allowed in a space that fits my needs. For example, we compel certain known sex offenders to not have any contact with children and they may not be allowed to live in certain places or go to certain spaces. For some less understanding than you this could lead to them thinking they have the right to take preemptive vigilante action against trans people and what better place to find them. For balance it is not lost on me that GRA reform could also produce a similar situation the other way which leads me to struggle to support it other than if it were to be around cost and simplicity of the procedure for example, the GIC consultant in consultation with your surgeon and GP are adequately placed to say whether you meet the criteria for a GRC without a faceless panel. I'm far more interested in improving healthcare for those that need it.

I'm sorry that you feel an infringement and I hope the occasions I do use the ladies, I walk in put my head down and get it all over and done with as quickly as possible and even now hope to god no one notices and I don't cause discomfort. I think most trans women feel like this. Being outed in the toilet is the stuff of nightmares.

On your other point, it's interesting that other conditions aren't treated with medical validation though. Perhaps it's because it's not inherently life threatening to treat us in the way they do and there is no reliable evidence to support a dearth of negative outcomes post transition. That's not to say there aren't some and de transitioners are an important source of evidence that the clinicians can use along with lots of other variables to improve trans healthcare. The trouble is at the moment the health service has much bigger fish to fry and rightly so. It's definitely possible to be on the autistic spectrum and trans and relieving either one can reduce the effects of the other although I'd very much guard against disregarding one in favour of the other. I've got to be honest, I often wonder why. I think my life would have been easier had there been a simple answer. Perhaps one day but I don't think in my lifetime.

Such fuckery. Not letting a simple slip-up slide after you were only just informed of her wish, after being used to using 'her' smacks of her being a drama llama who was eagerly waiting to jump on your 'mistake'.

Angela met with the committee earlier this week. They explained our position and, after listening carefully, the committee understood and were happy with our approach.

Actually, in that example, "committee" is a singular noun, and should take the singular verb: "Angela met the committee earlier this week. It explained its position, and after listening carefully, it understood and was happy with our approach"

Isn't that a clear example of the confusion caused though?

I'm reading the example to say "Angela met the committee earlier this week AND ANGELA EXPLAINED ANGELA'S position. After listening carefully THE COMMITTEE understood and was happy."

They and it and messing with grammatical construction leaves everyone bewildered as to whether Angela or the committee are explaining their various positions.

What the f does it matter if she identifies as "non-binary" (whatever the hell that means) ? What the f does that have to do with her job? Why the f is she announcing this at work?

Now I am getting angry about this shit being shoved down our throats everywhere.

There is a lot about me and my "identity" that no one in my profession knows or will ever know. You know why? Because it has nothing to do with my work!

I work with people who regularly choose to declare their pronouns. They look like idiots, stating the obvious. "Hello I am Jane. My preferred species is human. My preferred eye colour is brown. My preferred pronouns are she/her." Total and utter bollocks.

OP, I would do as others have suggested and just use the manager's name instead of bending to her ridiculous whim.

People who used to have sympathy for truly marginalised communities are quietly reacting in the voting booths to this shit embraced by the identity-obsessed Left.

People may go along with the pronouns at work to keep their jobs and to not become social pariahs, but proof of the backlash is in Parliament.

I mean, it doesnt cost you anything to respect their request. You can "not believe" whatever you wish, but the mature, respectful thing to do is to make the effort to treat your coworked (manager!!) with decency and sensitivity. That means respecting their pronouns.

Yes. But I would also say to the person that you will always attempt to consciously use her preferred pronouns, but hope that she'll understand the occasional slip while you get used to it, and when you might occasionally be writing 'on autopilot'.

She might well be more forgiving that the person who corrected you.

Also you need to separate the fact that you don't like this woman, from what you've been asked to do.

I find it odd you'd refer to anyone as 'she' in an email.. surely you'd use a persons name?! Especially if they're in the trail themselves.

"Angela will get back to you on this, as she is taking over this project."

To me it sort of gives rise to an idea that I am fundamentally so potentially dangerous that I can't be allowed in a space that fits my needs. For example, we compel certain known sex offenders to not have any contact with children and they may not be allowed to live in certain places or go to certain spaces.

Maintaining single sex spaces is based on Safeguarding principles. A female space should provide safety, dignity & privacy to females. It does not suggest that all males who are by definition excluded are sex offenders or individually a direct risk of predatory behaviours.

A teenage girl is currently taking Oxfordshire County Council to court for removing this safeguard through their transgender school policies. She is supported by Safe School Alliance.

BBC 'Oxfordshire County Council's transgender policy faces court action'
6 February 2020
(extract)
The legal action was initially going to be made on behalf of an Oxfordshire parent Victoria Edwards, a teacher, and the girl, but will now only be made on the girl's behalf.

Ms Edwards said: "It is she whose dignity and privacy are being violated by this guidance. It is she who is at risk of emotional and physical harm, and it is she who is representing the interests of all children and young people, not only in Oxfordshire but throughout the entire country." (continues)
www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-51389520
thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3815846-Can-we-all-get-behind-Girl-A-and-show-support

It's bloody confusing and I won't do it.

Yes it can be. It can lead to something not plain English.

Philips’ wants you to send Philips a copy of that report so that Philips can deal with it. Philips says that Philips wants it by end of day.”

I would write:
Philips’ is asking for a copy of that report from you so it can be dealt with before the end of the day. Is that ok?