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?

Wotcha
Source is linked under your post with the question.
(Also see the BBC article I have linked & quoted for context)

"It costs you nothing" is an incredibly insulting and demeaning phrase. It devalues the opinions and feelings of the person to whom it is spoken. It is a chiding, superior, condescending turn of speech used to invalidate and dismiss another person's reality. It is also a phrase that is a dead giveaway that a trans rights advocate wants to tell women what they need to do and how they need to be controlled. It is a dead giveaway.

In the workplace agreeing that an employee is 'non-binary' so either both male & female or neither male or female has wider implications.
How should employees who identify as 'non-binary' use sex-based facilities or record sex-based data?

This is also quite an interesting thread discussing where apparently avoiding using pronouns (like in some of the ways suggested above) is Bad

"Explicitly avoiding using someone’s pronouns because you are uncomfortable is a way of refusing to recognize their identity and is a violation of the Code of Conduct"

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3717750-StackOverflow-CoC

I think call people what they want to be called. My children use shortened version of their birth names but I’m always so grateful when doctors or teachers use their preferred names.
I’m happy to go with whatever name or pronoun suits the wearer. It doesn’t change biology but if it makes them more comfortable 🤷‍♀️

You didn't do what you were asked in a communication that included other colleagues, and the manager corrected your error in her response. Her action was perfectly reasonable, and not something for you to be "incandescent" about.

Forward it to HR with a short and factual email which points out that being non-binary is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act and could they advise on how best to deal with this

If I were in HR I'd tell you that the Equality Act is irrelevant and you should do what your Line Manager asks you to do, in accordance with your employment contract.

It doesn't always make sense to use pronouns anyway. Earlier in the week, I was writing a note to my manager, along the lines of, "Spoke to Mark and Pete. He said..." I rewrote it, as it wasn't clear who "he" was.

I do use "they" as an undetermined third person pronoun, such as, "if the customer reports a problem, ask them the following questions..." Otherwise, everything defaults to male (especially as many of my colleagues don't have English as their first language, so are used to an undefined third person singular taking masculine forms.) It may be a male dominated sector, but I am not going to let them entirely forget we women are also around.

I don't think anyone has declared their pronouns at work; it's going to be interesting to see the reactions if they do. I don't think my explanations of why some senior American managers should be referred to Ms X and Ms Y rather than Mrs X and Mrs Y was fully understood (though we're rarely that formal that it comes up,) so I would expect pronoun announcements to cause bafflement.

I'd be half tempted to change mine as a laugh, just to see the reaction, but I think it's important to be she for them to be reminded there is one woman in the department, even if I am the only one. Perhaps I can persuade one of my male colleagues to do it...

It doesn't always make sense to use pronouns anyway.

Pronouns are a part of English language & have been since Anglo Saxon/ Old English. Personal pronouns are taught in Primary school to children so they dont keep repeating the same nouns.

It doesn’t change biology but if it makes them more comfortable 🤷‍♀️

But it doesn’t does it? Because when you use a third person pronoun to talk about someone they aren’t even there. So the only way it makes someone uncomfortable is if another person who was there snitches on you and tells the non-binary person you misgendered them and they would apparently feel uncomfortable about that after the fact.

“Hey, I need to tell you something, NotBadConsidering called you “she” earlier. I thought you should know.”

“Oh no, I feel sad and uncomfortable knowing that people talk about me in a way I don’t approve of when I’m not there, but this only applies to the pronouns, not any other aspect of my workplace performance or personality which society has currently deemed to be ok to discuss when I’m not there. I need to complain to HR. Thanks for this, without a network of informants policing the rest of the office’s language on my behalf I would never have known about NotBadConsidering’s serious transgression.”

I get confused by this terminology. Surely the words they/them are meant to used in reference to more than one person? Eg, the children are hungry, they want a snack, give them an apple.
Wouldn't the correct gender neutral word be it?

But it doesn’t does it? Because when you use a third person pronoun to talk about someone they aren’t even there

That's probably true in most cases but obviously isn't always. I can tell my father a story about my mother while she's standing in the room with us, for example.

"Oh hi Dad, yes the film was great, not sure Mum liked it, she fell asleep after half an hour, didn't you Mum? hahaha"

I get confused by this terminology. Surely the words they/them are meant to used in reference to more than one person?

They're also used when sex is not known. For example:

If a child pushes in line, take them to the back of the line and explain why they must not do that again.

Wouldn't the correct gender neutral word be it?

The pronouns are whatever that person wants them to be and no one else gets a say and no one can dare object. Accuracies around language no longer apply. Non-compliance is not an option and can result in loss of employment, +/- re-education in the Gulag.

Its definitely not inclusive.

Singular they is the use in English of the pronoun they or its inflected or derivative forms, them, their, theirs, and themselves (or themself), as an epicene (gender-neutral) singular pronoun. It typically occurs with an unspecified antecedent, as in sentences such as:

"Somebody left their umbrella in the office. Could you please let them know where they can get it?"
"The patient should be told at the outset how much they will be required to pay."
"But a journalist should not be forced to reveal their sources."

To be fair, some people also object grammatically to They for when the sex of the subject is unknown and would rather to either use He as an all encompassing default, or He or She. I think most of us though would not like that though as it implies the norm is He or it sound like she is a tedious afterthought - He (or She, sigh)

as an epicene (gender-neutral) singular pronoun

Sex neutral. Pronouns in English have always been applied to the sex of a person. If the sex of the person is known the pronouns corresponding to that person’s sex should be used. For example:

“Karen White should be in a men’s prison because he is a rapist and paedophile”.

Karen White’s gender doesn’t matter.

I'm quite liking the idea of

1. avoiding any pronouns whatsoever when referring to your line manager. I'm doing that here to stick within the rules when discussing certain persons and you do get used to it.

2. depending on workplace situation, asking for clarification every single time an internal email using they to refer to a specific individual doesn't scan. (As in the meeting summary mentioned by PP.)

If you're not allowed to use grammatically correct language, which is a dreadful imposition that reduces workplace efficiency, you should at least have the right to ask for clarity in communication.

3. subtly reminding people to leave their private lives at home (if sharing deeply personal things isn't normal for your workplace);

4. declaring yourself non-binary, too. With a bland statement that you would not expect others to adhere to your personal beliefs and that they should continue to strive for crystal clear English in communication.

Because while they may indeed be considered normal language usage when referring to individuals, this is only correct if the individual in question is unspecified/unknown. As a writer and editor who is not a native speaker of English, I would not allow anyone to force me into incorrect language usage.

“They” can be useful to destroy sexist stereotypes when used in the singular like that. For example:

“The plumber is coming today, I hope he fixes the sink”.

“It could be a she, don’t assume!”

But now that advantage is lost because “they” could mean either sex depending on how that person is feeling on any given day.

What I agree with NotBad about they bring used in the singular having been useful at challenging sexiat stereotypes, I think there is also something to watch for about this.

Too late for me to look up all the details, but I recall something following Grenfell (iirc) that suggested that where FireFighter was used people assumed Fire Man, unless Fire Men and Women was used

Pronouns are a part of English language & have been since Anglo Saxon/ Old English. Personal pronouns are taught in Primary school to children so they dont keep repeating the same nouns.

Of course, but they should still only be used if it's clear who/what the pronoun refers to. If the writing or speech is less clear as a result of using a pronoun, then it's better to use a name or noun.

Of course, the point of pronouns is to replace a noun/noun phrase so obviously should be clear.

For some individuals to insist other people use a plural pronoun where a singular would be understood obscures rather than clarifies.
When people have to reframe their writing to avoid offence/censure their fluidity of expression is compromised.
Neither of these outcomes are reasonable.

What a self-obsessed loony.

I think this compelled speech is a form of psychological abuse.

It would hurt my brain to refer to a human as a 'they' or as the sex they aren't.

I also think it's kind of insulting to people who are intersex. Also to people who have conditions like dissociative identity disorder.

It’s plainly ridiculous but by sound of things they’s very flaky and unlikely to last long in the role anyway. Perhaps a good way to handle it would be to ease the worries about incoherence and when you refer to line manager do it as “they (Angela)” in order to add clarification to those who interpret English language in the completely standard and correct way.

The point about about legal clarity is interesting. Plus how could you give a statement using language like this or offer clear witness testimony? You can imagine a million problems with suggestion that more than one person was present or involved or whatever. Hmm.

The only one who's being a self-absorbed whatnot here is the Line Manager. You don't sound like you were going out of your way not to use her pronouns, you forgot while thinking about the content of your message.

Yes, it's a courtesy to use preferred pronouns. But here's the thing: when someone who holds some power over you uses that to compel behavior that can only be freely given, then that's abuse of power.

Which is a lot worse than mistaking the pronoun.

Unfortunately, she sounds like a twit, which doesn't bode well for the future.