137

Context

I work for a global tech company as an engineer. I was working in the UK up until very recently until I moved (with the company) to the Netherlands. Both countries are very tolerant to the LGBT community. However, we also operate in countries that are less tolerant (such as areas of the US). I don't make an effort to hide - if someone asks, I'll usually say. The same with people asking about boyfriends and so on - I'll just correct and move on. No big deal.

Problem

The situation is that my boss feels it is appropriate to out me as gay to anyone she meets in the company. This has been via email, weekly stand-ups etc. I've brought it up with her before, trying to explain that I am not comfortable with this. In particular, I am not happy that she is outing me to our US colleagues. It is also not her business and frankly, I'm astounded that she feels it appropriate to share this. I purposefully did not tell her for a long time and would dodge any questions she asked.

I am not sure what to do here.

I am hesitant on involving HR at this point, especially after moving to a new office (this involved signing a new contract - I have no probationary period on this contract and have a continued service clause).

I have tried to subtly bring it up to her that I am not comfortable with this but she says that she doesn't even consider it to be an issue as 'she is so okay with it'.

How can I get my boss to stop outing me to colleagues and understand why this is a problem for me? Any guidance would be great here as I am not sure what to do, and am not sure if this is a legal issue or not (especially as I have moved country during this time).

Community
  • 1
Dax
  • 1,047
  • 2
  • 7
  • 5
  • 59
    She says she is okay with it, but her behavior clearly says the opposite. – LP154 Apr 18 '18 at 08:45
  • Is she doing this more as a point of pride (e.g you being her gay buddy) when she says it, or out of resentment of you being gay (i.e in an effort to embarrass you)? – Hex Apr 18 '18 at 08:56
  • 2
    I'm getting the feeling a lot of people don't understand the issue. The way I see it is that OP's boss has no problem with OP being gay. This is fine. The issue, however, lays in the fact that the boss tells everybody that OP is gay. This sort of seperates her from i.e. straight people. As if she is different. You don't go pointing out people with a different skin color either and say "you're so ok with it", do you? – Edwin Lambregts Apr 18 '18 at 09:36
  • 126
    @EdwinLambregts I think people understand the issue just fine. I'm not gay but I would be uncomfortable if my boss told everyone that I'm attracted to petite blond women (just an example, not necessarily true). Regardless of specifics, a manager bringing up sexual preferences of a subordinate is grossly inappropriate (in most industries). –  Apr 18 '18 at 10:42
  • 22
    Has she ever explained why she feels the need to out you to everyone? If it is such a non-issue for her, then in theory it shouldn't occur to her to tell people. – David K Apr 18 '18 at 11:48
  • 91
    Out of curiosity, how are you being introduced? Like "Also on the line is Dax, he's our gay senior network engineer." – LVDV Apr 18 '18 at 13:56
  • 12
    Could you provide a broad example? I agree it's wrong, but am struggling to understand how she could bring this up so easily in conversation. – Tom Apr 18 '18 at 14:25
  • 78
    I think your boss think it's "cool" to know a gay person. The only thing I don't understand : when and how does she mention you're gay in e-mails and stand-up meetings. When is this "on-topic" in work-related e-mails. I've never, in my 20yr carreer, seen a mail where the relational status of an employee is mentioned. – pistach Apr 18 '18 at 14:26
  • 10
    This question needs more context on HOW you are being "outed". Is it that in casual conversation that the boss happened to mention something you shared to her about your family life (he and his boyfriend just got a pug as well), or is she going out of her way to mention that you are gay? Are you expecting her to keep your "secret" from others? How can she know the extent of what you want kept from others? – Keeta - reinstate Monica Apr 19 '18 at 14:26
  • Isn't it illegal? I know for sure it is in my country (Italy) but it should be similar in other EU countries as well. – Andrea Lazzarotto Apr 21 '18 at 21:22
  • 3
    I think the problem here is that your boss is using you as a means to say "look how inclusive and modern our company is". Best case scenario she's incredibly naive and thinks she's being helpful, worst case scenario she doesn't care about your feelings and really does just want to use you as some kind of chess piece in a big game of marketing. – Pharap Apr 22 '18 at 15:55
  • 1
    @LVDV I think she is their senior network engineer. – mcalex Apr 23 '18 at 03:46
  • 1
    I'd tell her, in no uncertain terms, "that is MY personal information, and it's MY decision if I want to share it. It's none of your business - and it's not appropriate for you to share it with anyone else." That's a clear way of setting a line in the sand, and your boss should know not to share that information in the first place. I'd also report it to whatever government agency may be able to vouch for you - as that can very easily be seen as a form of harassment. Also, forward those emails where she said it to your private email address (if possible), so you have some CYA in place. – user3685427 Apr 23 '18 at 07:51
  • Maybe she thinks she's helping you by outing you so that you don't feel like you have to hide who you are? I wouldn't think it's mallicious, but then again it would depend on how she said you were gay. – mickburkejnr Apr 23 '18 at 09:54
  • @mickburkejnr First, she isn't hiding it from anyone, she is just a professional whose sexuality has nothing to do with her job performance. "Helping" someone by outing them, repeatedly, against their wishes, is an absolutely disgusting behaviour. If you thought you could discuss my sex life in front of customers, I can guarantee you wouldn't do that more than once. – gnasher729 May 17 '20 at 12:17
  • @gnasher729 sex life isn't the same as your orientation. Like I said, we don't know how it's being said. You don't know, for example, that she had someone close to her that didn't felt they couldn't be honest about who they are. That happens all too painfully often. If it was malicious then of course HR should've been involved. – mickburkejnr May 18 '20 at 14:32

15 Answers15

153

You need to tell your boss in no uncertain terms that she should not be outing you.

Try something like:

I'd appreciate it if you didn't mention my sexual orientation to other people. It's a sensitive subject and if I feel that I want to let other people know, I'll tell them. Please leave that decision up to me.

If that doesn't work you may have to escalate, perhaps by requesting a formal meeting with the two of you and HR to discuss it. A meeting rather than a complaint. HR should be able to offer your boss some advice at that time.

Paula Hasstenteufel
  • 103
  • 2
user
  • 6,451
  • 2
  • 14
  • 33
  • 38
    I might also add in something to butter her up "I know that me being gay is a non-issue for you, and I am very grateful for how supportive you are. However..." – David K Apr 18 '18 at 12:00
  • 162
    @DavidK I wouldn't butter anything. This person doesn't need a gentle nudge - they need a firm pushback. I'd appreciate it... is a request. What they need is to be told firmly - this is not a request. OP needs to firmly insist that they stop doing this now. The gentle approach has failed. – J... Apr 18 '18 at 12:03
  • Some people really needs examples to get a clue: Joe is a 50 old guy still lives with his mother. Alice is a single with no kids but keeps 20 cats. A cowork cannot point out people based in those (very personnal) quirks, this is unprofessional Instead your boss can out things like... Joe is an excellent DBA and very knowledgeable, Alice is a great engineer with a MIT PhD – jean Apr 18 '18 at 12:22
  • 10
    @DavidK Might be a good approach in some cultures (maybe even in most), but I would advise against it in the Netherlands. We are well known for being direct. "I'd appreciate it..." is fine. If that does not work, be more demanding. *disclaimer: This is off course still a generalization, that is more true in some regions then in others, but it is a well deserved stereotype. – Jeroen Apr 18 '18 at 12:36
  • 12
    @Jeroen and J.., I'm not saying the OP shouldn't be direct. I'm suggesting adding that in addition to the direct statement. If it were me, I would probably say "I know that me being gay is a non-issue for you, and I am very grateful for how supportive you are. However, please stop telling everyone that I'm gay. It is my decision who I want to be out to and when. I'm not asking you to hide it or pretend you don't know, but I also don't want you to announce it either." – David K Apr 18 '18 at 12:43
  • 18
    @J... I might be making an assumption here, but if someone quickly announces to everyone that someone is gay, and when asked about it says it's not a problem because "they're so ok with it", I imagine they're overly concerned about being intolerant. Telling them point blank that OP acknowledges their well-placed intentions might help them be more receptive to what OP has to say, instead of just preparing to defend themselves. – Lord Farquaad Apr 18 '18 at 12:56
  • 4
    You could add a "It' would be weird if I were to introduce you as straight every time, why should being gay be different?" – Martijn Apr 18 '18 at 13:11
  • 3
    @LordFarquaad Frankly, an adult without the sense to understand why this behaviour is completely unacceptable needs a cold water approach. Negative reinforcement has a powerful ability to shake people out of the clouds. This manager clearly has no problems empathizing, what they need is perspective. Acknowledging their good intentions will only encourage them to stay stuck in their self-assured, comfortable, and dreadfully wrong current perspective. You don't reward behaviour you intend to change. – J... Apr 18 '18 at 13:18
  • This seems like a good initial approach, but OP has unsuccessfully brought up this with their boss before, so how is this phrasing likely to help where the earlier attempts to bring this up didn't? "I'd appreciate it" implies that you have a preference for their behaviour, not that you're explicitly requesting that they stop doing what they're doing. Something a bit more explicit like "Please do not" seems preferable if there were previous failed attempts to stop the behaviour. – Bernhard Barker Apr 19 '18 at 09:36
  • @Dukeling I think most English speakers don't try to parse statements quite that literally. It's just a way to soften the request, which isn't really a request because failure to comply will result in escalation. – user Apr 19 '18 at 09:39
  • 5
    @J...: On the contrary - people are generally more responsive to suggestions if the suggestions allow them to view themselves in a positive light. Simply saying "What you are doing is bad/intolerant/unhelpful" will likely elicit a response of "No I'm not bad/intolerant/unhelpful because ". The advantage of prefixing with "Thanks for being supportive, but could you ..." is that it (1) it primes the person to be receptive to what you're asking (because it enhances their self image), and (2) it sets up a context where, if they heed your request, it will enhance their self-image further. – psmears Apr 19 '18 at 15:10
  • @psmears you mean "to the contrary". – user Apr 19 '18 at 15:39
  • 4
    @user: Thanks, but I don't believe I do - for example, the meaning I intended is the one listed here under "on the contrary", and not the one under "to the contrary". Do you have a reference that suggests otherwise? – psmears Apr 19 '18 at 15:48
  • s/I'd appreciate it if you didn't mention/Please stop mentioning/ – R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE Apr 19 '18 at 16:41
  • 2
    @J... I like the cold shower approach. Literally. A bucket of cold water / ice should be enough. On the question "Why did you do that?" the answer would be of course "Why, I have no problem with it." – ypercubeᵀᴹ Apr 19 '18 at 20:27
  • @psmears Yes, but this isn't a casual situation, nor one where OP should be appearing to be offering constructive criticism - their manager's actions were way out of line and they need to be made to understand that they've crossed a very, very serious line. – J... Apr 19 '18 at 20:42
  • @DavidK "I know that me being gay is a non-issue for you," - really? Does she also tell everyone about other employees about their being hetero? Obviously, she tells everyone about his being gay because it is an issue for her. – rexkogitans Apr 20 '18 at 10:07
  • 1
    @J... "I'd appreciate it if..." is pretty direct in the US, not sure about the Netherlands. Even though it's framed as a request, it's understood as a command. But we frame it as a request because demanding is considered impolite. – LastStar007 Apr 20 '18 at 10:12
  • 2
    @J... I don't disagree that this boss needs a firm hand. But offering a concession before stating the problem makes the boss more receptive to OP's request/demand, whereas if OP came out of the gate swinging, the boss is likely to get defensive. – LastStar007 Apr 20 '18 at 10:14
  • 2
    I wouldn't even say it's "a sensitive subject." I'd just say "it's irrelevant, it has nothing whatsoever to do with work." – T.J. Crowder Apr 23 '18 at 07:33
  • David K: In the Netherlands, you are not supposed to be "supportive", you are supposed to get on with your own life. Being gay is supposed to be a non-issue. It's non of the manager's business whatsoever. – gnasher729 May 17 '20 at 12:20
52

She says it isn't an issue for her. But it understandably is for you, and rightly so - her decision to openly raise this is completely illegal. Sexual Orientation is treated the same as race, gender or age discrimination, it is protected by LAW as it is called a Protected Characteristic, within the EU. She wouldn't out you based on your religion or race, but yet she is doing this based on your sexual preferences - it's the same thing.

What your boss is doing is a form of discrimination and, as you surmise, could potentially invite discrimination and/or harassment due to your sexual orientation, which is illegal.

Her stance that "she's ok with it" is somewhat questionable, as that seems slightly suspect to me. Regardless of her thoughts on the matter - it certainly doesn't make it OK for her to discuss this. At all.

I appreciate your reluctance to do you, however other than a direct request to her, the only other option you have is to talk to HR immediately, they will take stuff like this seriously. As you have already asked her to stop, and she is ignoring your request "because she doesn't have a problem with it" - then you need to escalate this up the chain. Involving HR is the next logical choice. Irrespective of what she thinks, outing you against your wishes is unacceptable.

From your initial post, I feel that this has been happening before you transferred, rather than after the transfer. Is this the case?

AdzzzUK
  • 5,893
  • 4
  • 21
  • 25
  • 25
    Can you add some reference for saying that this is illegal? In which country? OP says they were in the UK but are now in the Netherlands. – David K Apr 18 '18 at 12:01
  • 24
    "She wouldn't out you based on your religion" - so is letting caterers know that an employee eats Kosher or Halal illegal discrimination in your universe? I've never heard a suggestion that simply mentioning a protected characteristic could be de facto illegal discrimination in any jurisdiction, ever; the closest thing to that I know about is common HR guidance in the US not to ask about such characteristics in interviews, to avoid any appearance of discriminating on the basis of the characteristic - but that falls short of a mentioning protected characteristics being innately illegal. – Mark Amery Apr 18 '18 at 12:20
  • 31
    @DavidK It is most definitely illegal in The Netherlands. Where I work someone was fired last year for exactly this. You don't "out" someone else.That is harassment. – Tonny Apr 18 '18 at 12:24
  • 18
    @MarkAmery Of course mentioning it when appropriate or relevant (like your food-preferences example) is not illegal. But the key-word here is appropriate/relevant. Blabbing to everyone in sight "hey look at my colleague here, she is a lesbian" for no good reason at all is harassment and possibly discriminatory as well. – Tonny Apr 18 '18 at 12:28
  • 14
    @DavidK If the boss is not referencing other people's orientation, only Dax being gay, then this is discriminatory - and thus illegal. Of course, if the boss goes around doing the same for everyone ("Dax is Gay, Sisko's straight, Garak's asexual and Rom is married to an alien") then that's highly unprofessional, but any potential illegality would fall under Data Protection policies for protected characteristics – Chronocidal Apr 18 '18 at 13:06
  • 4
    @MarkAmery I can confirm that mentioning an employee's protected status in an inappropriate context can certainly be considered workplace harassment. In the food examples you list, presumably the employee would have previously informed their employer about their food requirements; an employer assuming that because an employee was Jewish that a special meal was required might not be actionable (maybe), but it certainly isn't appropriate (not all Jewish people keep Kosher). – Beofett Apr 18 '18 at 13:27
  • 4
    @Beofett "I can confirm that mentioning an employee's protected status in an inappropriate context can certainly be considered workplace harassment" - sure, with that rather significant qualifier thrown in, I imagine you're right that in many jurisdictions that have workplace harassment laws such behaviour would be legally problematic. That's not what the answer I'm replying to says, though - it says that outing someone as having any protected characteristic is "completely illegal", without any further qualification or nuance. – Mark Amery Apr 18 '18 at 13:44
  • 4
    @Tonny ... first you say that outing somebody is "definitely illegal", then you say in your next comment that "of course" there are circumstances where it's not illegal. You don't seem to be able to agree with yourself, here. – Mark Amery Apr 18 '18 at 13:48
  • 2
    @MarkAmery I'd say the missing qualification is without permission. In the context of this question, I'd say its pretty clear that permission has not be given. I agree that clarifying that in this answer would be useful. – Beofett Apr 18 '18 at 14:03
  • 2
    @MarkAmery Please read carefully what I wrote. Outing someone (without their consent) is something totally different than asking for Halal/Kosher food when making arrangements for a dinner. – Tonny Apr 18 '18 at 14:08
  • 4
    @Tonny Huh? Telling a caterer "Bob is Jewish, so make sure his meal is Kosher" isn't "something totally different" to outing someone, it literally is outing someone. You may think - and I would agree - that it's a kind of outing that's generally morally fine and socially accepted, but that's a separate point. – Mark Amery Apr 18 '18 at 14:15
  • 1
    @Chronocidal and Tonny, I'm not disagreeing with the assertion that it's illegal - I have no doubt that it is. We have a Back it Up policy here, particularly when it comes to legal matters. Future readers need to know the relevant jurisdiction and be able to reference the original document to determine how the laws might apply to a subtly different situation. – David K Apr 18 '18 at 14:53
  • 3
    @Tonny "Where I work someone was fired last year for exactly this. You don't "out" someone else.That is harassment." - I agree it's likely harassment (at least morally if not legally). But this answer claims it's illegal discrimination, which is something entirely different. David K was asking for references backing that up (rightly so, I share his skepticism), and you didn't provide any. Furthermore, your anecdote of someone being fired does not prove illegality. – marcelm Apr 19 '18 at 09:41
  • 3
    @MarkAmery an individual can choose to eat a Kosher diet without being Jewish. Specifying that they're eating Kosher because they're Jewish introduces information which is inappropriate in this context. – alroc Apr 19 '18 at 11:19
  • 1
    @MarkAmery I believe in this case the appropriate action is to say "Bob requested a Kosher meal", but only if that is what was requested. – kleineg Apr 19 '18 at 15:19
  • @MarkAmery are you saying that it's ok what her boss is doing? Because it most definitely is not. OP has already confronted the boss about this and she decided to anyway keep telling everyone. That's not ok in any country, regardless of laws. The boss behavior is unacceptable. Period. – xyz Apr 20 '18 at 12:09
  • @MarkAmery in Italy at least (but I assume the rest of the EU has similar rules) your religious belief is like your health, your political stance or your sexual orientation. Confidential information. A company cannot reveal to other people whether you are christian, you have cancer, you voted for that guy or you like females. It's illegal. https://www.wikiwand.com/it/Dati_sensibili – Andrea Lazzarotto Apr 21 '18 at 21:42
  • @alroc Many muslims would order kosher food when halal food isn't available. – gnasher729 May 17 '20 at 22:30
45

There is a concept in linguistics called implicature. This is based on the fact that when we say something, not only the content of the words, but the fact that we are saying it communicates meaning. By saying that you are gay, your boss is communicating not merely that you are gay, but that she thinks that it is relevant. Someone in the comments compared this to telling a caterer that someone keeps kosher, but that does not have the same implicature. Telling a caterer that someone keeps kosher has little implicature beyond "You should have non-kosher options". Randomly telling people that you're gay has the implicature that identifying gay people is important.

My next paragraph is going to present what I have surmised is going on. This is what I think likely is the case; I by no means am assuming that it definitely is the case. Rather than qualify each sentence, please mentally prepend "likely" to the following sentences.

You don't object to people knowing you are gay. You at some level realize that your boss is not merely telling people that you are gay, but implicitly asserting that it is important that they know that you are gay, and it is this that makes you uncomfortable. While you have detected this implicature, you aren't fully consciously aware that you have ascribed a meaning other than the literal one. When you talk to your boss, you object to her literal statements, and you implicitly consider yourself to be objecting to her implicature. However, you boss is insisting on addressing your objections merely on the literal level. You are trying to tell your boss that there's something wrong with the idea that it's important for people to know that you are gay, and your boss is, rather than addressing that issue, simply insisting that she doesn't think there's anything wrong with you being gay.

You need to take this implicit implicature and make it explicit. Instead of saying to your boss "I don't like it when you tell people that I'm gay", say "I don't like it when you tell people that it's important that they know that I'm gay". She will then likely deny that she has said that, so you'll have to have a discussion about how language actually works.

What she is doing is discrimination and sexual harassment. If she insists on continuing, a complaint to HR is warranted.

Acccumulation
  • 5,298
  • 1
  • 11
  • 19
  • 4
    I came here pondering the philosophical issue of whether someone should keep a secret for you in which you state you openly share that secret. This answer captures the issue formally in the first paragraph. Nice argument! – Cort Ammon Apr 19 '18 at 20:32
  • This clearly sets out the miscommunication that has occurred. Addressing that is the best way to resolve the issue without escalating, assuming the boss has good intentions. – D Drmmr Apr 20 '18 at 10:56
  • Logical answer! – xyz Apr 20 '18 at 12:12
  • 4
    If your boss doesn't understand the ideas in this answer, refer to your boss as your heterosexual boss so they can hear how weird that sounds. – zahbaz Apr 20 '18 at 22:06
  • I like this answer because it helps me understand my own behaviour. If I send a staff member to visit a client, I would not normally mention that the staff member is black: except possibly if they are being collected at the station, in which case physical appearance becomes relevant. – Michael Kay Apr 21 '18 at 23:23
  • 1
    This is not sexual harrassment. – reinierpost Apr 22 '18 at 11:40
  • @zahbaz Not "my boss is heterosexual" but "my boss claims to be heterosexual". – gnasher729 May 17 '20 at 12:24
  • @MichaelKay There was a company releasing a laptop with a new feature - facial recognition to unlock the laptop. Unfortunately it turned out their software didn't only not recognise black users, it didn't even notice they were there. It would have been an excellent idea to make a call "could all black employees please come and test this software". Would have saved a lot of embarrassment. – gnasher729 May 17 '20 at 12:27
32

It does not seem like she is doing it with bad intentions; I would rather think that she believes that she is even trying to make sure you know "you are protected".

I would approach this directly to her. Not subtly, directly. Make a stand to make sure she understood that:

  • You don't want her to talk about your sexual orientation. It is your privacy and right to tell about it to whoever you want to.
  • She should consider the fact that if it was as normal to be gay as to be heterosexual she wouldn't be saying it; unless she mentions "hey, here is Robert; he is hetero, FYI". That probably does not happen, does it?
Mr Me
  • 1,656
  • 12
  • 14
  • 6
    I would upvote this twice if I could. I wonder if it's just my imagination, or are there not a lot of questions saying "I have tried to subtly bring up" something, and then the questioner seems to be stumped when it didn't work? Not everyone understands subtle, and sometimes it can be interpreted in more than one way, so if subtle doesn't work, try clear and direct! – Thomas Padron-McCarthy Apr 19 '18 at 08:07
  • 2
    Not seeming like it's said with malicious intent doesn't matter, the OPs manager shouldn't be doing it, regardless of their intentions. – MattR Apr 19 '18 at 12:29
  • 2
    I agree that not everyone understands subtle. Subtlety is definitely the wrong way to go in the Netherlands. The Dutch are famous for being blunt and direct with each other and they expect you to say what you want directly without any sort of subtle hinting. – Kevin Peter Apr 19 '18 at 16:29
  • Intention is irrelevant. – xyz Apr 20 '18 at 12:10
  • @xyz Oh, is it? So much for being nice. I like people being nice. Sometimes people don't know how to be nice. I like them trying anyway. – Mr Me Apr 20 '18 at 12:33
  • I agree that it's not just possible but likely that her intentions are not bad. One possibility is that it's someone who is uncomfortable with homosexuality, but who realises that she must do her best, and is overcompensating. "Hey guys, Dax is gay, and look how I don't have a problem with that". @xyz Intention does not change the fact that the problem needs to be solved, but it's hugely relevant to finding the right way to solve it. But definitely, it needs to stop. – Dominic Cronin Apr 21 '18 at 19:30
18

Building on the already excellent answer from Accumulation:

What did you imply by saying that I was gay?

What if you had said:

"By the way, in case you didn't know. Dax is white." Now, do you realize how weird that sounds?

And yes, I realize that you didn't mean anything by it.

In fact, I'm not blaming you, I'm only wanting that you stop doing it.

Again, I agree with that explanation, but I still want you to stop doing it.

Again, I want you to stop doing it.

Following the advice of Manuel J. Smith from his book When I Say No, I Feel Guilty

The part in bold is the "broken record" technique. It's not meant to be annoying. But it's meant to keep on going on forever until the other person gives up. And it's worded as a want because no one can claim to know what you want better than you do.

The part in italics is called the "fogging" technique. The idea is that you latch on to any kernel of truth that you can find into what the other person is saying and accept it. It could be part of an explanation, an excuse, an insult, it doesn't really matter. You can usually find a kernel of truth into what they're saying. And whatever rock they throw at you, you behave just like the fog and you accept it.

But here is the important part, you accept part of what the other person is saying, but you don't stop there, in fact, you never stop there, you always keep on going with your broken record afterward.

And that throws the other person for a loop. Usually, they're used to manipulate people by arguing a point and winning that point. But they don't know what to do once the person keeps on agreeing with their points (or part of their points), but still refusing to give up on the larger desired action.

But even if that doesn't work for you, or if you just get fed up with the discussion.

You could just say:

Now will you stop bringing this up, or do I need to talk to HR about this issue?

I was hoping not to have to talk to HR, but if we can't break this impasse ourselves. It may be good to bring in a third party.

But please don't bring up this last option as a bluff. If you bluff, she may just call you out on it. If you say it and if she calls you on it, you must follow through with it and contact HR.

There are some people that are so stubborn, they'll shoot themselves in the foot no matter what. If you're dealing with such a person, it's not your behavior that caused them to get in trouble, it's their stubborn behavior that caused them to get themselves in trouble.

None of what happens after that is your fault.

Stephan Branczyk
  • 58,781
  • 29
  • 128
  • 208
  • 1
    I'd argue that the whole point of the broken record is to be annoying, because that way people will get the message through their (presumably thick, if you're resorting to it) skulls. The big key with that is that, if they protest -- "but Jessie is okay when I point out that he's gay", "I'm not a homophobe", "I have gay friends", whatever excuse they use -- you use the same line. Don't rephrase it. Just repeat the exact words over and over and eventually they'll pay attention, if only to make you shut up about it. –  Apr 22 '18 at 21:13
  • 2
    @NicHartley Actually, I made a mistake, I'll need to rewrite that part. It's possible to take the "broken record" metaphor too literally and to start sounding like a child (or an actual broken record) during those discussions. As a boss dealing with a subordinate, sounding like a child might not be a big problem. But as a subordinate dealing with a boss, if you start sounding like a child, your boss will start treating you like a child and that's definitely not what you want. In other words, you can be annoying, but up to a point, otherwise, that may backfire. – Stephan Branczyk Apr 23 '18 at 06:26
16

She doesn't consider it an issue? If I was in your place, I would consider it an issue, and I would consider it sexual harrasment. What matters if whether you consider it an issue, her opinion counts for nothing. That's a basic principle in all harassment cases: It doesn't matter whether the perpetrator considers it to be harassement, what matters is what the victim thinks.

Talk to HR. Tell them that you repeatedly told the woman that you want her to stop, and that she refused to. You might tell her first that you will complain to HR about her if she ever does this again, but the fact is that she is your boss, she should know better, and if your boss (not any random coworker) does this, HR is always the appropriate place to go.

RJFalconer
  • 2,259
  • 2
  • 15
  • 14
gnasher729
  • 169,032
  • 78
  • 316
  • 508
  • 4
    In the US, outing someone at work is sexual harassment. Not sure about the UK. – Todd Wilcox Apr 18 '18 at 13:32
  • 13
    "That's a basic principle in all harassment cases: It doesn't matter whether the perpetrator considers it to be harassement, what matters is what the victim thinks." - That is simply untrue; what matters is if something is considered harassment under the applicable rules or laws. For example: if a co-worker simply says "hi" to me every day they arrive at the office, and I feel that's harassment, that doesn't mean it would be ruled as harassment by HR or a court judge. Harassment cases can be quite complicated, and defining it as "it only matters what the victim thinks" is misplaced. – marcelm Apr 19 '18 at 11:27
  • 2
    (note: I'm not saying the case of the OP is or isn't harassment, and I'm not saying harassment shouldn't be taken seriously - I'm arguing with your blanket statement) – marcelm Apr 19 '18 at 11:28
  • I think she should skip HR and go directly to a lawyer. This boss needs to be taught a lesson. – Vector Apr 19 '18 at 22:52
  • 4
    It doesn't matter whether the perpetrator considers it to be harassement, what matters is what the victim thinks. Absolutely untrue, and one of the more horrifying 1984-esque claims that have risen up in recent culture. The law and company policy dictates what harassment is, not what you feel. – The Anathema Apr 20 '18 at 19:30
  • @Vector I disagree, if only because it makes things much more tense. HR has the option to simply let the person know (if it's never been an issue before and they're known to be receptive) which solves the problem just as neatly. Suing, meanwhile, could result in the person being fired -- many companies just divorce themselves immediately from the risk -- or the OP being fired, for causing trouble. –  Apr 24 '18 at 22:49
  • @NicHartley - the boss should be fired, and the OP cannot be fired for raising a valid complaint about harassment in the workplace - at least in the US there are legal protections for that. – Vector Apr 25 '18 at 14:31
  • 3
    @Vector The OP can be fired for suing their boss; that's not "raising a valid complaint", because that requires going to HR. Also, really? The boss should lose their livelihood -- and probably struggle to get a job in the future, for a very long time -- because they're doing something that they don't realize is bad? If you attribute to malice what ignorance could explain, you'll meet a lot more evil people than there really are. Of course, it's possible that the boss is aware, in which case you're absolutely right, they should be fired. If that's the case, they'll push back. –  Apr 25 '18 at 14:36
15

Hoi Dax, welkom in Nederland.

As a Dutchman I can tell you that being gay here is widely accepted. There are also many laws and regulations to make sure that you can be whoever/whatever you want to be, it's up to you.

What's not OK here is what your boss is doing. Someone in the comments asked whether your boss does it out of pride or spite, in Holland: it doesn't matter. It's even illegal for her to do what she's doing without your express permission.

To help you out some additional information, I hope you've been upping your Dutchness ;)

rkeet
  • 1,794
  • 12
  • 20
11

You worte that our boss also outed you via e-mail. I suggest, after the next mail in which you are outed, you reply (to your boss only) with:

Dear boss, I appreciate you introducing me to X. As we've discussed previously, please don't include my sexual orientation in these introductions. Thanks and kind regards, Dax

This gives you a paper trail should you decide to go to HR with the issue and tells your boss that there is a paper trail.

If you don't want to wait for the next outing via e-mail, talk to her and summarize the points important to you in a short e-mail:

Dear boss, thanks for the quick meeting just now, let me summarize:
It is not acceptable to me to be outed by someone else in a professional setting, the decision to disclose - or not - my sexual orientation or other personal information to a client, partner or contractor mus be left to me.
Something nice about your boss
You're happy to do your part in maintaining professional relationships to clients/partners

I would guess that, without spelling HR, the fact that you create a paper trail will be understood as a warning shot by your boss. If that fails, or rather if your boss fails again, this will help you in dealing with HR.

mart
  • 2,842
  • 3
  • 20
  • 25
  • 4
    Paper trails are inestimably valuable if ever there are downstream effects to one’s professional life as a result of fallout from this situation. It is much easier to show the email trail than to try to paint the entire picture of the situation using just memories. The second email after the first reinforcing the request will be as important if not more than the first - because it becomes the evidence that the boss ignored the first when/if they never respond. Of all things get an email trail. – Praxiteles Apr 20 '18 at 01:43
5

I am not a lawyer.

In most data privacy laws sexual preferences are a "special category" of private information so you absolutely have the legal right not have that information shared. Your sexuality has nothing to do with your ability to do your job so it is completely irrelevant to any company announcements. There is little to restrict any recipient of those emails from sharing that email further (perhaps innocently because they want to share some other aspect of the email).

If she says that she is comfortable you can say that you're glad that she's comfortable with your sexuality but you're not comfortable with the information being shared as you want to retain the freedom to choose who knows that private information. If pressed you don't need to justify your stance just reiterate that you'd like her to respect your wishes because it makes you uncomfortable.

If that still doesn't work you should look for another approach, you are probably best placed to decide whether going to HR is the best approach. If you know someone in HR perhaps you could have a face to face or telephone conversation with them and ask them what to do, you can ask them not to do anything without asking you first.

Stephen Paulger
  • 159
  • 3
3

In the workplace, when people share things about me that I wouldn't want shared so openly, I warn them about their behaviour, no matter who, as soon as possible. This has worked every time I used it.

One situation that I recently encountered was about my weight. It's no secret that I have gained weight and that I'm doing it to avoid certain compulsory service requirements in my country. Though, this is something I don't like to share with people I don't like.

The HR has such people and one day, one of our most experienced and somewhat older members have told about this matter to the person in HR. It wasn't a malicious behaviour though, it's just that I didn't answer their question about why I gained weight and he felt the need to explain.

Right after the person from HR was gone I have told him "Mr. X, please refrain from telling anything about me to the HR in the future. It's an important matter to me." and he understood and replied affirmatively. Ever since, he has not told a thing about me to the HR.

Anyway, the point is, if you want a certain behaviour from someone, you need to tell them that it is important to you and what you want them to do about their behaviour. If you do and they still insist that they're right to do what they're doing, or in your case that they have no problem with it, then the issue should be escalated, within the company or out of the company, as necessary.

John Hamilton
  • 226
  • 5
  • 13
3

I find, as a rule of thumb it's best to not piss off your boss even if you're completely right. So I agree with the answer by 'User' but also with @David.

I had a teacher years ago who taught us the "Shit Sandwich" technique: when you have to deliver something potentially unpleasant, wrap it in two positives. Maybe...

"It's great that our workplace is so open and understanding...
So I need to respectfully ask that you STOP discussing my sexuality with people...
I'm really happy we have the kind of work relationship that I can talk to you about this."

Another expression that comes to mind is, "you'll catch more flies with honey than vinegar."

ashleedawg
  • 426
  • 2
  • 8
2

Alternative Solution:

Send the boss a link to this page!

It will show that you're serious about this being a concern, as well as the fact that you want to handle it in a professional manner and that you're worried about the boss's reaction if you brought it up.

Possibly best of all, the opinion isn't even coming from you; your boss will be presented with the opinion of a "random sampling" of Stack Exchange users, and then be able to make her own decision how to react!

Perhaps it's a slightly passive-aggressive approach, but I actually think it's one worth considering and could be appropriate in this case.

ashleedawg
  • 426
  • 2
  • 8
  • This would be really effective if the manager happened to stumble upon it (say, by noticing it on the Hot Network Questions list) but sending it directly is probably less so. – wizzwizz4 Apr 20 '18 at 18:58
  • @wizzwizz4 How would it be less effective? Some of these answers are almost suggesting that the OP be flat-out rude to the boss in order to get the point across. – ashleedawg Apr 23 '18 at 00:15
  • I have a feeling that that would make the boss start off with a cross emotion which would not work well. Also, instead of the behaviour where the boss knows that the OP probably doesn't know that the boss has read it, the boss will exhibit the behaviour of somebody who believes they are expected to change their behaviour which puts on additional pressures which might cause the boss to react strangely, even in the opposite way. – wizzwizz4 Apr 23 '18 at 06:34
0

I agree with other answers that you need to direct about this. You could also ask her what she would think if the next time you are in a similar situation, you introduced her by saying: "Hi, I'd like you to meet my boss. She's straight."

Hopefully, the obvious awkwardness of this hypothetical introduction would drive home the point to her.

Kevin
  • 6,270
  • 2
  • 23
  • 28
  • 7
    "She says she is straight". – gnasher729 Apr 19 '18 at 20:50
  • 2
    Not that I'd do it and certainly not recommend doing, but adding something like "I believe she's straight, but given it's no-one's business I don't think that it's appropriate to mention to other people when I first meet them" would get the point across rather succinctly. – Jane S Apr 20 '18 at 00:45
  • 4
    A mentor once said, be assertive before you need to be aggressive. This approach could be viewed as passive-aggressive and gives away the moral high ground of the OP. This could definitely sour the relationship in the workplace. – Praxiteles Apr 20 '18 at 01:48
  • @gnasher729 -Honestly, my first though on reading the question was that the boss is overcompensating for her own closeted self-shame. – ashleedawg Apr 20 '18 at 06:40
  • @Praxiteles For some reason, I thought she had tried the direct approach and it hadn't worked. Rereading the question, that is not the case. Editing to reflect that the direct approach should be used first – Kevin Apr 20 '18 at 14:41
  • @gnasher729 isn't that like saying "she says she's gay"? Not every straight person is a closeted gay person. – DaveG May 16 '20 at 16:04
-1

Before the following:

  • if it exists ask your worker representation at your company

I think there should be some clarification on where the conflict could going. I would send a mail (BCC HR, and CC her boss) - take care that no information on you being gay is contained like:

My sexual orientation is personal information. You obtained knowledge in your function as my manager, and I would not have shared it if i knew that i would become a topic of your exchanges with persons outside the company. If my manager comes across personal information about me, I expect confidentiality. Storing/sharing it electronically by email is directly in the realm of regulations imposed by the GDPR. I do not and did not give my consent that this information would ever be stored electronically on our email server or your personal computer, neither that it would be shared with anybody (not even inside the company); even less people who i have no direct work or personal relationship to. It is not only highly irrelevant to the business purpose and makes us look nonprofessional in my eyes; it directly makes me and potentially others personally feel uncomfortable. Moreover it may affect my reputation, leading to a direct economic disadvantage for me. Since you don't typically include the information about heterosexual employees in the email that they are heterosexual, I also consider it a discriminating behavior.

In our previous conversations you seem to have failed to understand and acknowledge my authority over my personal data and the potential impact which this may have on my career, your career, the relationship with our customers and the company. So i ask you to respect the boundaries which I determine here. Please moreover take care not to continue to violate my personal sphere when quoting or forwarding your old emails for any purpose. I hereby demand that emails containing this information are made unavailable to the extend practically economically possible.

Sascha
  • 17,910
  • 2
  • 39
  • 67
-4

First advice

Don't talk about you being gay at work. In an ideal world, you would be able to talk about it without anyone judging you or think it is an abnormality. But you are not in an ideal world, so when someone asks about your personal life and you don't trust him/her enough, say something like "I'm sorry, but it's not work-related" or "I'm sorry, but it's not your business". If you talk about it like it's not a big deal (and it shouldn't be), there will always be someone like your boss that will find it weird and disclose it to everyone.

Second advice

Document every mail your boss sent. Talk to her. Tell her you are not confortable with her telling personal informations to everyone. If she jokes about it, tell her you are feeling harassed and be firm about this. If she doesn't stop, go to HR and file a complaint. It is harassment, and you should not let it go.

LP154
  • 4,448
  • 21
  • 34
  • 1
    Documentation is a very good idea. I´d add to that, note every verbal incident,(Time, Date, who was present, exact wording of the offending sentence) this really helps if SHTF. – Daniel Apr 18 '18 at 08:53
  • 1
    Downvoted, mainly because this issue sounds more like a proud co-worker and not sexual harassment. Claiming something to be sexual harassment when it clearly isn't can get people into all heaps of trouble on both sides. – Hex Apr 18 '18 at 08:55
  • 2
    Maybe sexual harassment is a little "strong" but it is, IMO, a form of harassment that should not be ignored. I will edit out "sexual" from my answer – LP154 Apr 18 '18 at 09:31
  • 7
    @KingGraham What this woman does meets my definition of sexual harrassment spot on. What would she say if the OP told everyone how often she has sex, and with him? Your sex life is nobody's business unless you decide to tell them. – gnasher729 Apr 18 '18 at 09:38
  • 2
    @gnasher729 that's borderline sexual harassment and a bad comparison, spreading rumors persistently to target someone sexually vs telling people someone is gay due to pride/interest are two different situations. This is just harassment and inappropriate, please don't water down the definition of a very serious accusation as it doesn't help actual victims be believed in future. – Hex Apr 18 '18 at 09:55
  • @LP154 cheers, downvote removed – Hex Apr 18 '18 at 09:57
  • 8
    Downvoted. The advice should never be to hide your sexuality, it's a protected attribute and a core part of who you are. No-one should have to avoid the normal types of conversation people have about their families and relationships. The problem is entirely with other people and they are the ones who need to modify their behaviour. – user Apr 18 '18 at 10:38
  • 4
    Telling people "This is not work related and none of your business" probably won't go over well in the Netherlands. – Erik Apr 18 '18 at 10:56
  • 2
    @user I think you misunderstood the answer. As I said, what you explain is true in a perfect world. But in the real world, we can't force everyone to change and there will always be a person that will act like OP's boss. OP should not hide his/her sexuality but he/she can do this in order to avoid being confronted to this kind of person regularly. Of course, I'm not saying OP's behavior about his/her sexuality is wrong or that it caused the problem. – LP154 Apr 18 '18 at 11:13
  • 6
    -1 Telling the OP not to talk about being gay is just as bad as telling the OP they should go around telling everyone. For many gay people who have been in the closet for most of their lives, it is unimaginable and emotionally painful to even consider hiding who they are again. This is NOT YOUR DECISION. Deciding who to be out to is a personal decision that every gay person has to make and will vary from person to person. – David K Apr 18 '18 at 11:58
  • 2
    @DavidK No need to be agressive, I never "decided" anything, an advice is not a decision. Moreover, I never said anything about hiding OP's sexuality or who OP is, just disclosing it to trustworthy persons and not to everyone. Sexuality is something personal and talking about it at work is not mandatory (if it is, quit your job), so avoiding the subject can be a solution. – LP154 Apr 18 '18 at 12:10
  • this site is for helpful advice, not harmful suppression. – dandavis Apr 19 '18 at 01:27
  • 1
    Probably being down-voted because you triggered a bunch of people by suggesting the OP be more careful with what personal information is disclosed. There is a valid point there, but I have a feeling people are responding emotionally to that. – Cypher Apr 19 '18 at 19:53
  • 1
    Your second point about harassment is spot on; for the U.S., anyway. We receive biannual harassment training for management where the company brings in lawyers that specialize in workplace law, and this is exactly one of their examples of sexual harassment that they provide. However, this may not be quite the same in the Netherlands, which I know nothing about. – Cypher Apr 19 '18 at 19:57