staff member says I’m triggering their unresolved trauma, employee calls me his “lady boss,” and more

by Alison Green on October 22, 2024

It’s five answers to five questions. Here we go…

1. My employee says I’m triggering their unresolved trauma

I have a question as to how to manage a direct report who has admitted that they have self esteem issues resulting from unresolved childhood trauma. It is evident in any dealings with them that they struggle with any form of authority being shown — they get upset with a simple question about what have they been working on since our last fortnightly check in, particularly if tasks have not been completed. I’ve always made it clear that due to the reactive nature of their role that I understand that the action plan can be pushed to the side if urgent matters pop up, I just need to understand what they are. These conversations almost always end in emotion outbursts, no matter how I handle the conversation.

It has been getting worse and now I’ve been told that I am a trigger for their trauma but they can only say that there is “something about my style” which brings back issues. I have nothing to work with! I don’t shout, I don’t blame, and I make myself available when required even if I’m busy. Other colleagues and reports have no issues with my style and have advised me that they find me approachable. I have my moments as everyone does when I’m busy because I’m human. But how do I deal with someone who has said I trigger unresolved trauma when I have nothing to work with?

You can’t solve this for them. You should let them know that if they can propose specific changes you could make that would help them, you’re open to trying to work with what they need. (You shouldn’t promise you’ll make changes before knowing what they might be, because some could be unreasonable or unworkable, but you can certainly promise that you’ll hear them out with an open mind and try to accommodate them if you can.) But you also need to be forthright about the reality that they do need to update you on their work and answer your questions about their projects; that part isn’t negotiable. If they can suggest ways to make that easier on them (for example, maybe they’d prefer sending you updates in writing ahead of your check-ins), you’ll try to work with them — but the basic facts of having a manager (that they will need to keep you updated on their work and answer questions) won’t change. Lay that out in a kind but direct way, and let them decide if they’re up for that or not. If they decide they’re not, or that they can’t, there’s no shame in that — but you should be clear that it does need to happen if they want to stay in the role.

Related:
my employee asked me not to give him any feedback

2. Was I wrong to refuse to answer coworkers’ questions about my life?

I just started a new job, and my coworkers are trying to get to know me. One of them asked me, “Are you in a relationship or married?” I don’t see what that has to do with work so I said, “Sometimes.”

Another coworker brought her kid to work. She had to tell her child, “Please stay still, you can’t just run around.” She turned to me and said, “Ahh, kids, ya know? You don’t have any kids, do you?” I said, “I might have kids” She gave me a funny look and said, “You might?” I said, “Maybe, who knows?” Could I get fired for this? How do I fix it?

This is an extremely weird way to behave with coworkers. When you work with people and are trying to get to know them, asking if they’re married or have kids is a normal thing to do. In particular, asking if you have kids is an especially normal question when someone is talking about their own kid. Answering “sometimes” to the question of whether you’re married or in a relationship is actually pretty funny, but “I might have kids” is a weird thing to say in any circumstance.

You asked whether you could get fired for this and it’s unlikely — but what is likely is that you’re coming across as rude and cold to coworkers and making people dislike you (in part because you’re coming across as if you dislike them) and that can have all kinds or professional ramifications, from people not wanting to be on projects with you, to not sharing useful info with you, to having trouble getting promoted, to ending up first on a layoff list.

You don’t need to get deeply personal with coworkers if you don’t want to, but sharing some basic facts about your life is usually a prerequisite for having warm working relationships with people. Feel free to immediately pivot the topic if you want (turning the question around and asking them about their own lives is one good way to do it, as is having some impersonal topics you don’t mind talking about — pets, books, TV, cooking) but if you’re not willing to engage warmly with people at all, yes, there will be professional consequences to that.

Related:
should I put more effort into making friends at work?

3. Employee calls me his “lady boss”

I am a female manager in a technical field. All of my direct reports are men. One of my reports consistently refers to me as “my lady boss.” He does not speak English as his first language and his native language uses gendered nouns and adjectives. He has worked in U.S. professional environments for over 30 years and has worked for me for five years. He is in the middle of the pack in terms of performance.

I don’t love the nickname but I haven’t wanted to make a big deal out of it either, except that I get looks and questions when he refers to me as My Lady Boss in front of our colleagues. How would you address this?

“Please don’t refer me as your ‘lady boss.’ I’m just your boss, or just Jane.” You could add, “Gender isn’t relevant when you identify me, just like you wouldn’t call Bob your ‘man boss.’” Alternately, “‘Lady boss’ sounds like you have an issue with female managers, which I know is not your intent.”

Related:
Employee keeps referring to me as his “manageress”

4. Should I tell the person I’m interviewing with that I’m no longer in good standing at my company?

I’ve been at my current company for about three years. For the first two years, I was considered a star performer. Since then, the company’s financials have soured, the strategy has changed, and so have the expectations for my role. I’ve also been moved to a new team where my manager and I don’t see eye to eye on a lot of things. All of this combined has unfortunately tanked my standing at work, and I’ve now received formal negative feedback on my performance and even had some of my responsibilities revoked.

I’m looking for new jobs, and I have gotten in touch with a former leader of my current company who’s hiring at his new company. He left while I was still a top performer, and I’m guessing he’s willing to recommend me based on that performance. My question is, would it be wise to let him know that I’m no longer doing well? I’m worried that if I don’t, he may reach out to some of our mutual colleagues and hear about it. On the other hand, I’m worried that if I share this info, it will sink my chances at getting hired by his new company.

You don’t need to warn him that you’re not doing well. His experience with you is his experience, and there’s no ethical or professional obligation to disclose that under different circumstances, things went differently. If he ends up hearing about it, so be it, but you’re not doing anything wrong by not volunteering it. (And it’s not at all uncommon for someone to do well in situation X with manager X but not thrive in situation Y with manager Y — and that generally says more about situation Y and manager Y than about the person themselves.)

5. Is a past run for office keeping me from getting job interviews?

I ran for the state legislature in 2020. I job searched in 2021 so I put it on my resume, towards the bottom with other volunteer work I’d done related to my field and only spoke about the aspects of running that relate to what I do for work. I don’t mention the party I was affiliated with or anything like that.

I had it on my resume at the time because it was so close to having run, any google search of my name only brought up information about my run. It didn’t ever feel right mentioning it in a cover letter and I was afraid leaving it off would seem weird once they did a google search.

Now I am putting in applications again. Is it possible continuing to have that on my resume is preventing me from getting interviews?

Now when you google me, there are a few different search results on page one — some related to current and past jobs, some which clearly show I was a candidate.

I absolutely don’t talk politics at work but I worry that having it on my resume makes it seem like that could be a problem. But I worry not mentioning it will come off weird once they search my name. Any advice on how to tackle this part of my professional history while job hunting?

It’s possible it’s concerning some employers. It’s more likely to come up as a concern if you ran on any particularly controversial or inflammatory planks, but even if you didn’t, some employers may wonder if you plan to run again, how it might affect work, etc. Also, by including it on your resume, you’re saying “I think this is at least somewhat relevant to my qualifications,” which may worry them if it the connection isn’t clear.

However, particularly if you were a fairly middle-of-the-road candidate, a lot of people won’t care at all.

Regardless, though, you can just leave it off. It 100% will not come across as weird if they google you and see that you ran for office four years ago but didn’t put it on your resume. There’s nothing shady or odd about not including it on your resume; resumes are marketing documents, not exhaustive lists of everything you’ve ever done. You can simply leave it off and make it a non-issue.

You may also like:
{ 852 comments }

{ 852 comments… read them below }

  1. Daria grace*

    #2, although I tend to be somewhat private about my personal life at work, I agree with Alison that these are normal questions that are commonly a part of friendly interaction that you probably should answer. Being weird and evasive risks making people wonder if there is some dramatic reason for that like messy child custody issues

    1. Empress Ki*

      I answer questions because I don’t want to be seen as unfriendly, but I don’t ask personal questions to my coworkers. I consider this is not my business if my coworkers are in a relationship and have kids.
      If they want to disclose it, it will come naturally in conversations during breaks.

      1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

        I’m of the camp where I keep things in a pleasant, every day conversation about work and benign things (weather, traffic, etc) while getting to know people and then, as topics come up, ask people about it. This is why, for example, I know a former coworker has a wife and two adult kids, but I know nothing about them because he never mentioned their names, what they do, etc.

        I’ve never been diagnosed as neurodivergent in any way, but LW #2’s answers are one of those situations that I run into sometimes where I think, “I thought I had the social codes and norms cracked, but I guess not? How do I respond to this?” But I’m also old enough and have experienced enough that I probably would just enjoy this benign weirdness and tell stories about it to people I know when weird, wacky coworker stories come up.

        1. NotBatman*

          So I can’t speak for everyone, but: I do occasionally feel the need to dodge “normal” questions at work. (I don’t want to give my pronouns; I’m not lying when I say I’m fine with any.) The way I do it is through making a neutral comment and then immediately asking the asker a different question. So something like:

          Them: Do you have any kids?
          Me: My sister’s kids are great. How old are yours?

          Or:
          Them: Are you married?
          Me: It’s funny how many COVID-delayed weddings we’re seeing right now. Have you had the chance to go to any lately?

          It’s mostly polite, mostly pleasant, and also makes it obvious to most people that I’d prefer to talk about something else.

          1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

            I can see that working in the moment, but after the sixth time, someone’s going to notice you dodging the question and it’s going to seem odd. (I’m going down the rabbit hole in my head and if you give the same dodge every time, that’s going to seem strange, and if you give varying answers, it’s also going to seem strange.) I think people are bound to find it weird after awhile. Not that you HAVE to give answers, but being evasive persistently is going to come across as off. Is that fair? No. Is it probable? Yes.

          2. George Sands*

            Not Batman, some people will probably find it frustrating and confusing that you’re clearly not asking what’s being asked, but kind of acting like you are? Like a politician who has had very bad media training.

            It would make me feel like I was being “handled.” Then again, I generally don’t ask those personal questions because who knows what is going on in people’s lives. But if I overheard it, I’d be a bit thrown off.

          3. Blue Pen*

            I understand what your intent is here, and while I would certainly never want to put anyone in a position where they’re forced to talk about personal things they don’t want to talk about, I don’t think your example responses here are doing what you think they’re doing.

            Bringing up your sister’s kids in response to a question about if you have kids would strike me as odd. The same about COVID weddings to if you’re married. I could see someone potentially mishearing me or misunderstanding the question and that be the response, but if the question is asked multiple times (or similar questions) and your answer is still not tracking, I would be confused.

            That said, I wouldn’t push it and would chalk it up to “that person doesn’t want to talk about X.” But it would truthfully still give me pause and, depending on your delivery, come off as unnecessarily chilly when a collegial working relationship is trying to be formed.

          4. Elle*

            Maybe I’m an oddity, but this would spark my curiosity more than anything else. I’m generally very uninterested in coworkers’ personal lives* but this level of not-very-smooth evasion would get me wondering what someone was hiding.

            *Often I have had to hide portions of my own and rarely ask questions of others due to this

            1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

              Once they figure out what’s going on, I 100% can see coworkers purposely asking these kinds of questions just to see what sort of answer they’d get in the moment.

              “So, do you have a girlfriend/boyfriend?”
              “Isn’t it weird that in French, the term of endearment for a significant other translates to ‘petite cabbage?’ Do you call your sweetheart something food related?”

              “Do you have kids?”
              “Wasn’t that Cabbage Patch craze in the 80’s the wackiest? What’s your kids’ current hot toy?”

              “Are you married?”
              “Remember when Luke and Laura got married on General Hospital? Do you and your wife watch Grey’s Anatomy?”

              2. Mina Murray*

                I am hereby registering my disappointment that your third example didn’t continue the cabbage theme.

          5. Head Sheep Counter*

            I love that the answers to your answer highlight why folks offer dodges and why LW2 is replying the way they do. Its not ok to ask someone six times what the status of their love life is or how fecund they are.

            1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

              I assume that people would space them out over time, not six times in a row. Then that would obviously be obnoxious. But if you work there in the course of years and never give a straight answer about personal details, people are going to notice.

              1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

                Also, I picked the number “six” off the top of my head to indicate that if you do it once or twice, it’s probably fine, but after awhile, if you keep it up, it’s going to look weird.

            2. RagingADHD*

              I assume it’s referring to the reticent coworker giving the same deflections to six different people, not that one person is hounding them.

              1. Head Sheep Counter*

                Regardless if a work environment is hounding (and to my mind 6 could be hounding depending on duration) a colleague and this is reflective of their environment… no wonder LW2 is sarcastic.

                1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

                  I was thinking more a variety of people over time- months, years, etc. At some point, people are going to go, “It’s been 2 years and every time we ask Bob about personal details, he goes evasive.” I’m not talking about people hounding in short periods.

                2. RagingADHD*

                  I have no idea what sort of alien environment you are envisioning here, but I was talking about different people on different occasions. Do you actually work in a place where coworkers gather in a circle around a new employee and pepper them with personal questions?

          6. Bitte Meddler*

            If someone gave me those answers — or, more likely, if I’d overheard them because I tend to not ask coworkers stuff like this — I would think (1) you don’t have any children and have some negative feelings around that, and (2) you are in a relationship that is different from the kinds the majority of people are in.

      2. Baunilha*

        I think it really depends on 1) how the questions are asked and 2) how the person reacts to your response.
        So I can see dodging out of the question about relationships, but the children one was pretty harmless. Now, if the OP had answered with a simple ‘no’ and the other person kept asking follow up questions (“but why”, “don’t you like children”), that would be rude and inappropriate. But just casually asking to establish rapport doesn’t warrant OP’s response.

        1. Frankie*

          The children question is not harmless. Not only is it no one’s business, it is fraught with possible trauma. They will also use a coworker’s childless status to discriminate when it comes to extra shifts, staying overtime and time off.

          1. Kay*

            Well at this point with the LWs comments they have probably landed themselves at the bottom of the pile anyway, so… ???

          2. Wren*

            You can’t possibly know that the information will be used to discriminate. She might not have a job where that ever comes up or it might not even occur to people to use that information to discriminate against her. It sounds like you have some past history where you were taken advantage of but you can’t assume that will happen to everyone else.

            1. Cthulhu's Librarian*

              It happens everywhere, and routinely to childless people. Please don’t try to undermine other people’s lives experiences – maybe listen to what they are telling you and accept that things are an issue even if you never noticed them before.

              1. Hohumdrum*

                I’m a childless person and it’s never happened to me at any place I’ve worked, so to add my lived experience to the table I agree with Wren that assuming disclosing whether you have children or not will automatically lead to discrimination is unnecessary and strange.

                1. Milena*

                  I’m a childless person and it has happened to me at several place I’ve worked, so to add my lived experience to the table I agree with Cthulhu’s Librarian that assuming disclosing whether you have children or not will automatically lead to discrimination is a very real possibility.

                2. Hohumdrum*

                  @Milena
                  A possibility, yes, but not an automatic certainty that necessitates an iron clad policy of treating all personal questions with suspicion. Rather than suggest that being childless will always equal being discriminated against at every place every time, I think it’s wider advice to get the lay of the land and go from there. This stuff doesn’t just vary by office, but also by industry, which I think people on here forget.

                3. I am Emily's failing memory*

                  In my experience, it’s less than childless people are discriminated against/singled out for the overtime and crappy shifts, and more than the people with children are given preferential treatment/singled out to not be asked to work overtime or crappy shifts. Which works out to be 95% the same end result, but the big difference is what that means when you don’t tell people whether or not you have kids. With no information, you’re going to remain in the default category, and that’s “people who don’t get preferential treatment,” not, “people who do preferential treatment.”

                4. Not the class clown*

                  I’m a childless person, and this *has* happened to me at work (largely in the form of being expected to work late while colleagues with kids are able to leave on time), but I *still* think it’s strange to try to hide your parental status out of fear of discrimination. Particularly because in many workplaces, it would be difficult to keep it hidden long-term. Not to mention that woman are just as often discriminated against for *having* kids.

          3. Anon Attorney*

            This is a very alarmist approach that could be harmful to your success in the workplace. Would you advise a parent to hide their status to prevent being discriminated as a parent (which also happens a lot!)? People bring who they are to the workplace and if they are discriminated against they should go to HR, an attorney, or the applicable enforcement body in their locality.

            1. Orv*

              Everywhere I’ve worked, “I have to do [kid-related thing]” is an automatic pass to leave work early, no questions asked, so I’m not sure why they’d hide it.

              1. Good Lord Ratty*

                Being known as a mother is frequently something that prevents women from career advancement, though it most frequently comes up during hiring (which is why it’s supposed to be illegal to ask someone if they have children during an interview or on an application).

                I am childree myself, but your blanket statement is inaccurate. Mothers experience discrimination based on their family status, regardless of whether you believe it, and regardless of whether people without children also sometimes get the shaft in the workplace.

                1. Orv*

                  I suppose I’m a bit blind to that because all of my jobs have been at places that didn’t promote from within, so “career advancement” was never on the table. It’s a fair point.

              2. Rebelx*

                Women who are mothers routinely get discriminated against on the assumption that their child-caring responsibilities make it impossible for them to be dedicated enough to their job, or even on the basis of antiquated views that mothers don’t belong in the workplace, in ways such as not getting promotions/raises/opportunities, not to mention the effects on one’s career of taking any time away from work for parenting. I believe the commenters who say that they have worked many places where childfree workers aren’t given the same flexibility as parents and/or have had to pick up a bigger share of the work, and to be very clear, I don’t think that’s fair. Unfair thought it may be, I don’t think it rises to the level of “discrimination” in the degree to which mothers, specifically, are very much discriminated against in the workplace.

              3. Not the class clown*

                Same here – and as a childless person, being expected to stay late while coworkers with kids leave early is endlessly frustrating.

          4. Seashell*

            For those of us who worked through our pregnancies and/or took parental leave, the answer is obvious. Even without that, I’ve run into multiple co-workers outside of work with my kids, so I wouldn’t have been successful even if I had tried to keep it a secret.

            As for your discrimination concerns, I’d say that depends on the job. Not every job involves extra shifts or overtime, and time off is more of a concern at jobs were coverage is an issue.

          6. Snow Angels in the Zen Garden*

            My truthful answer to the “do you have children?” question is “Not living.” While just briefly answering the question can sometimes make me uncomfortable, and normally also does the people around me, other outcomes have included causing discomfort for pregnant coworkers, coworkers stop discussing their children with me at all (I don’t mind, and I do attempt to talk about my nephews if I saw them over the weekend), and at church, a few people who stopped allowing me to interact with their children.

            On the other hand, it can be helpful for coworkers to know why I don’t want to attend their work baby shower so they’ll stop asking me to go, or why I need to duck out early if I do go.

          7. Cinnamon Stick*

            Bingo. Miscarriage, death, giving a child up for adoption, estrangement…all things that people might not want to talk about. While it may seem harmless to ask, it’s not a neutral harmless question.

            There are better ways to get to know people.

              1. Lydia*

                I can appreciate that, really, but almost anything can be traumatic to anyone and avoiding all questions about anything because it might be traumatic is not really a feasible way to exist in the world, working or otherwise. For the last six months, asking me about my boss would have caused me to cry because she died earlier this year. That’s for me to manage, not for coworkers or friends to try to divine from the ether.

                1. Bitte Meddler*

                  I agree, Lydia.

                  My brother took his own life in a motel in 2022. I started a new job this time last year. Several co-workers have asked me if I have brothers or sisters / come from a big or small family (all relevant to the conversations at the time).

                  It took a good long while for me to settle on “Yes, an older brother,” versus all the other options. And to be able to say it without tearing up or having to excuse myself.

                  Does it mean that those questions open up a wound I’m trying to keep sealed at work? Yes.

                  Does that mean people should never talk about their siblings at work or ask others about their [potential] siblings? Absolutely not.

          8. DisgruntledPelican*

            That is true of literally everything. If this is your attitude at work, please find a job where you don’t ever speak to anyone.

          9. fhqwhgads*

            Asking it in a vacuum, sure, not a good idea. Asking it in the context of “my child is here right now and I’m trying to relate in the moment” is WAY less fraught.
            There is also no reason a coworker – not a boss or anyone with any authority over anything – making small talk in passing is going to store that information away for later and use it to stick it to their colleague. That’s some massive projection right there.

        2. LL*

          that’s interesting, because I think the relationship one is easy to answer “no” “not at the moment” etc, but the child one seems more loaded to me.

          1. AnecdotallySpeaking*

            Maybe because “I might have kids!” sounds like a weird flex (coming from a guy at least)

        3. relentlessly grilled when a young AFAB*

          Casually asking to establish rapport is normalized, but it shouldn’t be. Directly asking someone a personal question is rude, it puts the person on the spot to answer. If establishing rapport is truly the goal and not just trying to satisfy curiosity, then the person should talk about their own life situation and create a safe space and opening for the new person to volunteer their own information, if they so desire.

      3. Observer*

        If they want to disclose it, it will come naturally in conversations during breaks.

        Which it did, in the case of the question about kids. And the LW responded in a really strange way.

        That’s the real issue. Not asking others? That’s fine and in most workplaces would probably not even be noticed. Sidestepping questions of this sort? Could be seen as bit odd, but not that big of a deal. Being overtly weird? That’s a different kettle of fish. And, although the LW did not intend it that way, that’s certainly the way people are going to be seeing it.

        2. Misty*

          There is an old song by Gershwin with a line “Jenny got herself a husband, but he wasn’t hers”. Maybe the letter writer means something like that…

        3. JM60*

          By:

          “If they want to disclose it, it will come naturally in conversations during breaks”

          I think Empress Ki means that the person who does/doesn’t have kids will naturally bring up whether or not they have kids if they want to. I don’t think Empress Ki means that the other person should inquire about them having kids when the general topic of kids naturally comes up.

          The way Empress Ki dodges answering the question is going to come across as odd, but you don’t need to ask someone if they have kids when the general topic of kids comes up. Not asking that question isn’t a faux pas.

      4. Eleanor Tilney*

        It sounds like this is coming up naturally in conversation. EG kids in the office may well prompt people to ask others if they have kids.

        Also, assume good intent unless there’s a reason not to do so.

      5. LaLa*

        I’m so glad to hear this is NOT such an unpopular opinion.
        I HATE when people I’ve just met at work ask if I’m married or have kids.
        I always think, if you know me well enough to ask, you already know the answer.
        I KNOW most people think this is low-stakes social stuff, but I’ve always hated it. It seems gendered and invasive?
        Can’t we talk about anything else? Work? Books? Movies? Plans for the weekend?

    2. JSPA*

      At the very least: if it’s a legitimately bad or complex topic (as opposed to drawing an overly-strict line between work and the rest of life), a (slightly apologetic? hands-to-temples?) “it’s complicated” or, “That’s a hard topic for me at the moment” are what one wants. That’s respectful of these being totally normal questions that humans ask each other in dozens of circumstances–including work–while also opting out of answering.

      There are indeed dozens of circumstances where the question could be awkward, temporarily or longer term. But collectively those circumstances are rare enough that allowing a graceful opt-out (as opposed to a bizarre one) is presumably going to continue as the standard level of accommodation.

      1. JustaTech*

        Or even just a long pause before answering. I recently had a coworker ask me if I have brothers (in response to the behavior of some coworkers). I do have a brother, but it’s complicated, so I just gave a kind of long pause and said “yeah, it’s complicated” and she gracefully pivoted to her main point (that our coworkers were acting like children).

        Sure, some coworkers will be super nosey and obnoxious, and when you’re new it’s harder to know which ones those are, but most people will be willing to let things go.

    3. Ana Gram*

      I had a colleague who would clearly tell people that she didn’t discuss her personal life at work. It was odd but she did it in such a friendly and frank way and immediately followed up with a discussion of hobbies/tv shows/travel that it was really disarming. She was popular at work while still holding that boundary.

      But the evasive answers are just weird and are making something out of what the OP really wants to be nothing.

      1. hello*

        I have a coworker like this as well. We have quarterly all-staff meetings, where any new people are asked a couple of general intro questions. She cheerfully declined answering any of them! However, talking to her one on one, she’s happy to talk about her interests, things she did over the weekend, etc. I think it was just doing it in front of a group that she wasn’t happy about.

        1. Ana Gram*

          Yeah, I think you can get away with a quirk if you’re generally seen as a friendly coworker and reliable colleague. But it’s definitely something you have to work to counteract. Sounds like our colleagues made it work :)

          1. George Sands*

            Yes part of it is the difference between being a warm, friendly person who is self-aware about a quirk, and being rude to people who are asking fairly basic questions as they have done something wrong.

          2. MigraineMonth*

            It also helps to act as if it is a personal preference/quirk, in my experience. Don’t make the questioner feel bad. Don’t act as if asking if you’re partnered/married/have kids is a dreadful social faux-pas. Don’t act as if it’s bizarre for anyone to want to make small-talk with or know about the people they spend 40 hours a week with.

            If they continue to ask personal questions after you’ve demurred, or if they ask something actually work inappropriate, you can pull out the “Wow”, awkward silence and shocked face.

        2. Lizzay*

          I always thought it was weird when someone new comes in & they’re asked to say something about themselves & they veer off into what they do on their personal time. Like, I would say “I went to College U., and previously I was working as an X for Y company.” I wouldn’t add that in my spare time I like baking and knitting and fine dining.

          1. George Sands*

            That’s not “weird” at all. “Say something about yourself” can absolutely be interpreted as “I enjoy doing xxx.” Unless it’s a NSFW hobby or something, how is it weird? It is extremely normal.

          3. Dawn*

            If you ask me about myself you are absolutely going to hear about my garden, and whichever plant I’m particularly enamoured of at the time, regardless of the circumstances.

            Right now it’s my Jaltomata procumbens which just started flowering.

          4. Blue Pen*

            I’m sorry, but you finding that weird is weird. Unless the hobby is truly work-inappropriate, I don’t see how someone talking about how they like to knit and bake is a bad thing. It’s a way for people to connect with others.

            If I know someone new on the team likes to read, for example, it creates an “in” for me—and them!—to ask what they’re reading, who their favorite author is, did they hear that such & such is coming out with a new book this fall, etc.

            1. Orv*

              It’s funny because it’s so context dependent. If someone leads off a job interview by asking “tell me about yourself,” they’re not going to expect to hear about my hobby of restoring antique radios (unless I’m interviewing at either an antique store or a repair shop.)

            2. Quill*

              Yeah, “tell us about yourself” in an intro is an icebreaker, so that people remember New Jenny in accounting likes to watch soap operas and Jenny from HR is a knitter with three new grandkids.

              “Tell us about yourself” in an interview is “I went to School X and worked at company Y because I have always been interested in engineering the anti-meltability of chocolate teapots.”

          6. lizzay*

            Hm, unpopular opinion. I guess I was more thinking of when it’s a senior person being introduced, which I still maintain feels weird! Like, your cat breeding hobby has nothing to do with why you’re the new senior exec in our office.
            And anyway, as a junior employee I was never asked to talk about myself! It was usually more along the lines of “This is lizzay & she just joined. Introduce yourself to her later.” Maybe it’s my RBF.

      2. BatManDan*

        Talking about hobbies / tv shows/ travel IS talking about one’s personal life. They’re leaving out family, relationships, and romances, but they are definitely talking about their personal life.

      3. The Rise and Fall of Sanctuary Moon*

        Yes! I have a coworker who is extremely private, but she is also very helpful, kind, collegial, and supremely organized. Often at our team meetings we start with 2 to 5 minutes of anyone who did something interesting over the weekend, and she simply doesn’t say anything for that part of the meeting. In other conversations, she focuses on work and doesn’t volunteer information outside of that. Almost a decade later, and I know what state she lives in and that she owns a house, and that is just fine. She does amazing work, comes up with insightful ideas for workplace improvements, and time and again has helped her colleagues who need it. We all think the world of her and never, ever ask her about her personal life. It can be done, LW! Odd answers are not the way to accomplish it, though. Simply hold the line while being a great coworker.

    4. YetAnotherAnalyst*

      LW2 really needs to work on their deflection technique. If they work on responding pleasantly to the broader thread of the conversation rather than the specific question, they can have their privacy without creating the impression they’re in Witness Protection or whatever.
      “Are you in a relationship?” “Not looking currently! Hey, did you see that meeting invite…”
      “Do you have kids?” “They really are a handful, aren’t they? While I’ve got you, what do you think about…”
      Also, it really helps to develop two or three safe, interesting topics for conversation. People will often accept a change of topic during rapport-building conversations, because their goal was building social connection rather than actually interrogating anyone. So a non-committal noise and a collaborative topic change will work for most folks. “Mm. Hey, can I get your opinion on this knitting pattern? I’m eager to try out cables, but do you think it’s too much?”

      1. Eldritch Office Worker*

        Yes this exactly. If it’s really important to you to maintain this boundary, there are friendly and professional ways to do it.

      2. AvonLady Barksdale*

        So much this. Sometimes I feel that we, as a society, have lost the incredibly useful art of being breezy. Sure, sometimes it takes work to develop the skill to be breezy, but man, there are so many benefits to being able to brush off a question you don’t want to answer without making it the elephant in the room. Because that’s the thing– when you provide an answer that’s defensive or designed to make a point, you call attention to yourself. Isn’t the point to deflect attention?

        1. Lizzay*

          Haha, a family friend got married & moved to the DC area; when someone had a welcome to the area party for them, the new spouse was asked where they were working. They responded “the government”. So we all figured it was CIA/DIA/NSA. Nobody who lives in the DC area would just say “the government” & leave it at that. I think someone pointed out to one of the in-laws that he really needed a better answer.

          1. Insert Clever Name Here*

            Interesting, when I lived in DC for several years “a small IT consulting firm” was the answer when you were not allowed to give an answer. I had friends who worked for the Secret Service, FBI, and CIA who would answer “Secret Service/FBI/CIA” because they were in non-intelligence roles and were *supposed* to say where they worked. I also had friends who worked for “a small IT consulting firm” who to this day I have no idea which agency they worked for or where they really went when they didn’t attend the weekly happy hour.

        2. Blue Pen*

          Because that’s the thing– when you provide an answer that’s defensive or designed to make a point, you call attention to yourself. Isn’t the point to deflect attention?

          100%. When you think you’re deflecting, you’re actually drawing the spotlight onto yourself—and not in a good way.

          1. Diane Chambers*

            There was a Gilmore Girls where Rory was doing court-ordered community service. Emily excused herself from a DAR meeting to drive her there, and a friend said “Going shopping”? Emily said “something like that!” Always found that so weird. Make the person a thousand times more curious about something you want to hide and isn’t your information to reveal. Why on earth not just say “Yes, going shopping.”

      3. Dasein9 (he/him)*

        This technique is really helpful.

        I noticed at a former job that someone let himself become “the coffee guy” by mentioning how much he loves coffee when he was new to the team. That gave people a chance to get to know him by asking questions about coffee, discussing brewing methods, etc.

        It’s not about the coffee; it’s about establishing rapport that really does extend into how smoothly we work together.

        LW#2 might want to consider sharing one trait or detail that isn’t deeply personal and letting that be the way in for people who want to establish a working relationship. Loving cats. Keeping a troll doll on the desk, like Richard Mayhew in Neverwhere.

        Alison often points out that being pleasant to work with is part of most people’s jobs and this is one way to make oneself pleasant to be around while also preserving privacy.

        1. fish*

          Yes, exactly. I had a colleague who was “the bird guy”, and then everyone had an easy way to approach him. (And he got to talk about birds!)

        2. Joielle*

          Yep, this is the way. Pick out one or two innocuous things that you don’t mind talking to people about, and let that become your “thing.” For me, it’s pets and plants. You can get a lot of conversational mileage out of what the cats have been up to or how the tomato harvest is this year without actually saying much about your life!

          1. MigraineMonth*

            If you do go down this route, be warned that you may start accumulating [thing]-themed items.

            Seven years ago I tried my hand at sewing and altered a sweatshirt to look like the costume of a little-known superhero. I now have two purses, a water bottle, several Funko-pops, and more dedicated to this superhero and look like a full-blown fangirl. The thing is, I didn’t actually buy any of them; people just see that I have these things, so I must want more!

          2. Agony Aunties*

            Everyone at my workplace knows my cat (mostly because I work remote and he’s a nosy gremlin who can’t not show up when I’m on a work call). Definitely gets me out of sharing much else about my personal life because they all just want to know how the cat is doing.

        3. Catgirl*

          As per my username my coworkers know I have a cat. I don’t often talk about family, friends or hobbies, just because I’m private, but I will talk about my cat if I have to.

        4. fhqwhgads*

          Yep. I once accidentally became “the car person”, but hey, it was better than getting asked about other stuff I didn’t want to share, so I ran with it.

      4. Smithy*

        Honestly – when people ask what the point of small talk is – it’s this here. It’s that ability to build rapport with those you need to collaborate with, without sharing information you don’t want.

        I live in DC, and between the weather, Metro, and lunch/coffee spots – I’ve been able to maintain years long friendly conversation at work without discussing much else. Inevitably through those topics, it’s fairly straightforward to see if you do share any more niche (but still comfortable) interests – such as knitting, a sport, or tv show – or not.

        Big picture, I don’t see anyone necessarily getting fired for this, but depending on your job this can easily take deposits from your overall capital at work. The thing that would negatively impact you in being chosen for stretch assignments, representing your employer externally, or potentially promotion.

        1. Turquoisecow*

          I also I don’t think anyone would be fired over this but people are human and if the opportunity comes up for a promotion or a big project, people might not want to work with the person who shuts down all small talk with weird answers. They (understandably) prefer to work with people they get along with. Big Boss might not want to promote you into a leadership position or into something more visible to customers or outside clients or vendors if your answer to “how was your weekend?” is “I don’t have to tell you that.”

          Lots of us have to spend a good amount of time with our coworkers and would like to have a relationship that, while not exactly *friendship*, is at least friendly and pleasant. There’s a way to be friendly and pleasant without sharing personal details if that’s what you want, and if you do it right (quick non answer, change of subject, let the other person talk) people won’t even notice you’re not sharing them. That’s not what OP is doing, and I wouldn’t blame their coworkers from steering clear of them for being weird after the weird answers.

          1. Observer*

            Big Boss might not want to promote you into a leadership position or into something more visible to customers or outside clients or vendors if your answer to “how was your weekend?” is “I don’t have to tell you that.”

            For sure. And Big Boss would be right. No one needs to pander to nosiness on the part of clients, customers or other outside people. But if you want your business to stay afloat, you *need* to be able to get along with people. And one piece of that is not making simple chit-chat into a Weird Thing that leaves people wondering “what just happened here?” and possibly “What did I say to provoke that?”

            Another *huge* piece is making people feel like a *person you see* rather than just “customer #245”. So essentially saying “I will not respond to any question that is not about our business” is saying that you so indeed see them as “customer #245” Rather than as a person who happens to be your customer, although everyone presumably agrees that that (ie customer) is the primary relationship.

          2. Smithy*

            Yeah – I think the professional area where this risks the most harm is if the OP wants a position where advancement includes external facing meetings or events, conferences, etc. If your supervisors/big bosses aren’t seeing you being engaged in lower stakes areas – i.e. relationship building with your colleagues – they’re just going to be less likely to give you those assignments.

            Conferences, work travel – that can be a long time with your colleagues to only talk work. And not that the expectation needs to be sitting next to a colleague on a plane and chatting the entire time – but if you’re unable to do any of that. That does not read well.

      5. Baunilha*

        +100.
        I’m childfree by choice and avoid talking about it because a lot people seem to think I’m inviting to argue with me and change my mind. So when people ask me if I have kids, I answer with “No, but I have two nieces and a nephew” and proceed to talk about them.

        1. Pottery Yarn*

          This is a good option even if you do have kids but don’t want to talk about them. “I have a nephew!” or “I have a cat!” or even “Ha, I can’t even keep a plant alive!” You’re not explicitly saying you don’t, but you’re not saying you do either.

          1. Zelda*

            Any of those will read as a “no”. In fact, it’s quite likely that the listener won’t store the details of the statement as such, and will just remember that the speaker does not have kids, possibly with the confabulation that the speaker explcitly stated that there were no kids. Which is fine, until the speaker has to respond to an emergency for kids that others are 100% sure do not exist.

            1. Smithy*

              Yeah – I do think that there is a very pragmatic reason why not to do this in case the answer to any of these questions is “yes”.

              Unless you tell a supervisor that you have a partner and/or kids and that’s a secret – you do risk a situation where the supervisor might end up mentioning that information to other colleagues unaware that you’re not sharing. It just really pre-positions weirdness.

              And while I am 100% in favor of not saying you need a sick day or emergency absence – there are those situations where not sharing anything does not help you. Things like exhausting your sick day bank but you never shared that you also have a partner/child with health complications – or taking off a lot of time in advance of bereavement and giving no context around that.

              Hopefully there’s not a lot of really difficult personal stuff in your life that you do need to balance with work – but realistically that will happen eventually. And finding a way that you’re comfortable talking about some of this truly does only help you.

              1. Kuleta*

                Agreed.

                On another post, AAM reader “Elsa” made a good point that if one is really going to put a wall between their personal and work lives, then one has to really keep their personal life from encroaching on their work life.

            2. MigraineMonth*

              I think those answers would only work if the children in question weren’t around–deceased, adopted out, permanently estranged, jailed for thirty consecutive life sentences with no parole, joined a cult and moved to Mongolia, etc.

              All of which would be a lot to go into at a new workplace, so a technically true answer would probably be easiest.

        2. dePizan*

          Yeah, I’m childfree by choice and also aromantic asexual, and people get weird about both of those things. I’ve never outright stated I’m either of those things and just pivot to talking about my niblings, or what I’m doing with my sisters and their families for the holidays. My coworkers do know that I’m not married, but I deflect any further enquiries about why/were you ever/etc into talking about something else (and we’ve now worked long enough together that they know not to try anymore). So they have no idea.
          They’re mostly lovely people, I just have no interest in coming out to them or worse, defending the idea of asexuality or being childfree to them.

          1. Quill*

            Yeah, also aroace – being out at work is a thing that I haven’t bothered with for years, because there’s no tangible benefit for me. I just don’t talk about partners (easy when you don’t have one) and most people I’ve worked with who have kids will let you know pretty quickly just by mentioning that they have to go to parent teacher conferences, leave work by 4:30 to pick up the kid, etc.

            At which point it’s easy to turn them going “I have been talking about my kids for 10 minutes, I should let you talk – do you have any kids?” to “Nope, just houseplants” or “Nah but I’m looking forward to seeing all the halloween costumes this year.”

          2. Agony Aunties*

            I feel this. It’s why (if it does at all come up) I tend to refer to myself as queer at work, to avoid having to get into the specifics of asexuality and have adopted “oh not for me” with the same breezy tone I might use to pass up a break room treat if anyone asks me about kids.

          3. But what to call me?*

            I never bother explaining the details of my lack of interest in dating/romance/marriage or having kids, but I’ve found that a breezy ‘nah, it’s not for me’ or something like that, said with a smile and a casual shrug, goes over pretty well. It conveys the relevant information – don’t have them, don’t want to have them – while keeping the tone positive and casual. That way I don’t have to worry about trying to conceal not having those things without needing to get into a big explanation or trying to convince people I’m right about my feelings. Some coworkers have seemed a little surprised about it because we work with kids and I do like kids, but they still take their cues from my tone and body language about whether it’s a big problem they need to help solve or just a thing they casually know about a coworker.

          4. I Have RBF*

            I’m a CF ace married to another ace. I just talk about my spouse, and if they ask if we have kids, it’s just a breezy “Nope.” At 63, people have (finally) stopped asking me about having kids at home. I have one niece, two nephews, and three great-niece/nephews.

        3. Jack Russell Terrier*

          Right – it’s mostly about the conversational ball, not about the yes/no answer itself. Lobbing it back so it’s easy to catch builds that rapport, having a fastball sent straight to your chest is unexpected and perhaps alarming.

        4. NotJane*

          Yes! I’ve gotten pretty good at deflecting this question because I’m childfree (but not by choice) and it’s a long and sad story that I’m absolutely not going to get into with workmates or strangers. I also answer with “No, but I have a niece and a nephew” and talk about them or “Nope, just dogs!”, which usually moves the conversation to pets.

      6. Chirpy*

        Yeah. I get not wanting to answer, because I’ve absolutely been treated like the disposable one at work once people at work found out I’m single with no kids (and some people will absolutely dig and dig to figure out what’s “wrong” with you) but most people who are asking this are just unimaginative about their “get to know you” questions*. So OP needs to find another thing to deflect to. Do you have a fun/bland hobby you’re willing to talk about? Did you recently read a good book? Or ask the other person about themselves.

        *a far less loaded “get to know you” question is “do you have pets? ” – many people have had a pet, or wanted a pet, and most are willing to talk about them. I absolutely love when people start with this one.

        1. MigraineMonth*

          Some people don’t have or want pets, and if you’d asked me about mine two weeks ago I’d have cried at you and forced you to look at a picture of the cat I’d just lost.

          Then again, this may be getting into “not everyone can eat sandwiches” territory. I don’t think there is a universally good topic for small talk. (Talking about the weather recently has mostly been, “Isn’t it waaaay too warm for this time of year?”)

          1. Chirpy*

            I do get that. I have also burst into tears when asked if I had a cat, and my cat died years ago (can’t afford another until I get a better job, unfortunately.) But it’s still less socially problematic than “do you have kids”, at least in my experience. Nobody has ever judged me for not currently having a pet, but they sure do judge me for not having kids.

            (And sorry about your cat. I would have loved to see pictures.)

          2. Filosofickle*

            I agree there is no universally safe topic that is not purely banal. Personally I have found that in my world saying I don’t have kids is mostly met with neutral responses, but saying I don’t have pets is the one that gets me the side-eye and follow ups that imply there is something wrong with me! Shrug.

        2. BatManDan*

          In support of those that think everyday, common questions should be off-limits are inherently loaded and/or triggering (and I’m NOT defending that position – I think it’s ridiculous), pets aren’t the trigger-free question you think they are. I’m allergic to cats, to the degree that if you haven’t had a cat in your house for 5 years, I can tell you USED to have cats within 30 minutes of entering your home. First wife knew this, and got cats anyway. She’s now my ex. Cats are triggering to me (in more ways that one! haha). (I don’t expect other people to know it or to work around it; I’m responsible for my response to triggers, not anyone else.)

          1. Chirpy*

            That does suck. But I’m guessing most people would say your ex was terrible for not taking your allergies seriously, not berate you for not having cats, which is what happens to a lot of people (particularly women) who don’t have children. I’ve worked places that once it became clear I didn’t have kids, I became the only one who had to work late – and alone. I’ve had people switch from pleasant chitchat to calling me *the literal devil* just from saying “no, I don’t have any kids”. The problem is not only potentially triggering someone for whom not having kids is an issue, it’s also the potential for putting someone in a position to disclose information that can often be used against them, personally and professionally.

            Is “do you have pets” a perfect question? No. But overall, it’s less likely to be a problem. (I’ve had people take regular statements about the weather as a reason for anti-climate-change rants, too. There is no perfect question.)

    5. Falling Diphthong*

      Being weird and evasive risks making people wonder.
      If OP were an actual spy, they would never react the way they are. If you want people not to pry into what you consider too personal, you have a bland cover story. “Single, no kids, I like skiing and watching Bakeoff.”

      2. FricketyFrack*

        Hey, who you calling bland?? :D That cover story is my actual life. It’s a good one. Except when your mother tells you she’s “saving the episodes” so you wait to watch them so you can talk about them together, and then she spoils bread week for you.

          1. FricketyFrack*

            Ah it’s ok, I mostly watch because it’s fun to see the things people make and they’re all so nice to each other, not for the competition aspect. She didn’t tell me who star baker was, just who was eliminated, so we’ll still have something to talk about.

      3. Emily of New Moon*

        I once knew someone who said, “I don’t have kids. I’m too selfish to have kids.” That way, she not only answered the question, but also stopped the whole “but it’s selfish not to have kids!” thing before it began.

        I sometimes refer to myself as a proud childless cat lady, but I wouldn’t recommend doing so in the workplace as it is bringing politics into it.

        1. Kay*

          Kids… not like pets! You apparently aren’t allowed to crate them! And everyone gives you the side eye if you try to leash them! How can you get anything done!!?? Gotta give it to those cat herders, now they have some skills… I think I need another coffee just thinking about it, anyone else want one?

          Although admittedly, my response to the coworker my slip out something like, so was there mixup at the sperm bank, just a wild Vegas filled youth or are you just awaiting the results of the DNA test? (okay maybe not, but I would 100% be thinking it)

          1. Orv*

            This made me chuckle because there’s a picture of me on a leash as a kid. My mom was going through LAX with me, she was very pregnant with my sister, and she knew given half a chance I would take off down the concourse at a speed she couldn’t possibly match.

            1. maelen*

              I got leashed as a kid because I would wander off when shopped and get very, very upset when I figured out I was lost. I leashed my twins occasionally just to help keep track of them.

            2. WeinerDog*

              Lol, I too was a leash child. I used to silently ditch my parents all the time so they tied me to them.

            3. MigraineMonth*

              When my mom broke her leg, she put my 3-year-old sister on a leash because she couldn’t keep up with her. Unfortunately, when my mom held the leash in her hand and used her crutches, this just gave my extremely active sister the ability to yank one of the crutches out from under my mom.

        2. Dawn*

          I wouldn’t say this about kids – not in a work context, at the very least – but I sometimes tell people “I’m too mean” for various things.

          A friend was recently looking for chat moderators for one of her projects and I definitely pulled out that go-to.

          And it’s rather sad that we’ve reached the point as a society where “childless cat lady” is now a political statement.

          1. Orv*

            Everything’s political now; it’s one of the reasons small talk is so hard. With climate change being such a divisive issue even the weather isn’t safe anymore.

              1. I Have RBF*

                Seriously.

                But there is a portion of our society that is more comfortable with their web of lies, half-truths and conspiracies than dealing with reality, thus forcing the rest of us to have to coddle them lest we be seen as big meanies forcing them to face reality.

    6. Immaterial*

      to me the odd answers bring up more questions/ speculation than a straightforward answer plus topic change would. Unusual answers are more memorable and gossip worthy.

      1. Wilbur*

        Yeah, I’ve definitely talked to an old guy who’s said they might have kids and began to elaborate. Had to change that conversation before it veered into learning uncomfortable facts.
        Very easy to avoid this by saying you like to keep your work and family life separate before asking about work trips, complaining about potholes, whatever.

      2. Observer*

        Unusual answers are more memorable and gossip worthy.

        Yes. And because they are memorable, they have more potential to harm the LW in subtle but real ways.

    7. Anne Elliot*

      I think it’s important to note that despite how the question is titled in the column, the OP did not “refuse” to answer questions, they answered questions with responses that IMO go beyond being weird to being a jerk.

      If you don’t want to say whether you’re married or not, or have kids or not, just say so: “I’d prefer not to say” or “Oh, I don’t talk about my personal life at work, ever” or “Why do you ask?” plus a conversational pivot. But if when someone asks if you’re married/in a relationship, you answer “Sometimes,” at best it will read as an unfunny attempt at being funny, and possibly/probably a jerk-ish thing to say. If someone asks if you have kids, you respond “Maybe I do and maybe I don’t” or “who knows?” (YOU know, obviously), then you’re being a jerk, no question about it. It’s a snarky, snotty thing to say.

      And you get to be jerk if you want! Dealer’s choice. Answering offensively is a tried-and-true way to make people think twice before getting in your business. But then don’t ask if your coworkers are going to dislike it or think less of you because of it; of course they are. You know they are.

      1. Seashell*

        A woman would obviously know if she had kids. A man who slept with a woman and didn’t follow up with her over the next 9 months might not know, but I don’t think implying that as a possibility would reflect well on him in the workplace.

          1. Me, onboarding*

            This gives Paula Poundstone’s joke “I don’t have kids…well, none that I know about!” a whole new meaning.

        2. Joielle*

          That’s what came to my mind with that response! I would think the LW was either being a jerk, or implying something weird about his tendency to sleep around. Either way, not someone I would engage with going forward.

      2. Pastor Petty Labelle*

        the belief that it has nothing to do with work, therefore should not be asked is really odd. The whole point of finding out about someone (without prying, of course) is because we aren’t automatons who do nothing but work. We are human beings who have interests and lives outside of work.

      3. BigMac87*

        I agree, the LW does come off as a jerk rather than just private. Also, part of being a human being on earth does involve engaging with people. The idea that you don’t want to tell anyone ever at work anything remotely personal does come off as unnecessary hostile when small talk is a fairly common way for people to try and show a bit of kindness or politeness or empathy to one another.

      4. Lizzay*

        I disagree with the first – if someone responded ‘sometimes’ to the are you married question, I’d laugh pretty hard! But agree, the response to the kids question would make me just avoid that person from there on in.

    8. Fluffy Fish*

      Same – I’m a very firm work/life boundary person. I don’t do colleagues as friends and I do not participate in things like potlucks, lunch outings, or fun activities.

      But my coworkers still know things about my life, because that’s part of having a pleasant working relationship with people.

      In fact because I am otherwise nice and pleasant and personable my boundaries are well respected and I’m still always invited to things even though they know I will decline (and we usually joke abotu it.)

    9. Justme, The OG*

      I agree their answers were weird. They instead could have said that they don’t really talk about their personal life at work and left it at that.

    10. iglwif*

      OP2, it’s fine and totally valid to not want to get super into the messy personal details with (especially brand-new) colleagues, and as a cancer survivor with infertility issues I am very aware of how messy a seemingly innocuous question like “do you have kids?” can get.

      The thing is, though … people are making casual conversation! They’re not trying to plumb your deepest, most painful secrets. For instance: If someone with kids asks if you have kids, they’re looking for common ground. They’re expecting a yes or a no, or a this many or a not yet or a “nope, not planning on it,” and they’re likely prepared to hear and respond to any of those. They may even be prepared to hear something more difficult (but if they’ve struggled themselves, they might not ask about kids until they know you better, in case it’s a painful topic). What they are not prepared for is an answer that, to be honest, kind of sounds like you’re cosplaying the Riddler.

      Different people have different levels of comfort with different topics and that’s completely fine, obviously, but you do have to work with these people. Gracefully changing the subject is great. A breezy “nope! Tell me about yours!” is great. Even “that’s a tricky topic for me, sorry. While we’re here, can I ask you about…” gets the point across without being off-putting.

      1. Aggretsuko*

        This whole thing reminds me of a very awkward Q&A a fellow I know got forced into doing.

        Lady: “Do you have kids?”
        Guy: “No.”
        Lady: “Any stepkids? Want any kids?”
        Guy: “No.”
        Lady: “Any nieces or nephews?”
        Guy: “No.”
        Lady: “I give up.”

      1. 2 Cents*

        LOL I’m thinking of Rosa in the early Brooklyn 99 episodes — she had a good rapport with everyone, but no one knew anything about her, including where she lived. She wasn’t rude about it, just didn’t talk about “personal stuff.” OP, for your colleague who said “Kids, huh?” you could’ve agreed they are a handful without revealing if you have them yourself, but have, in fact, been around a small child once in your life. “Do you have kids?” “No, but I’ve been in charge of them before” leaves it vague enough so you could be their dad, uncle, sports coach, or momentarily the oldest kid on the playground when smaller children were present. The way you’re doing it now is not the way.

        1. Dawn*

          I mean, the other thing about Rosa is that (at least until later seasons) everyone in the office was legitimately terrified of her, and that’s probably not the vibe you want to cultivate.

      2. Orv*

        I think then they’d be only too happy to tell you their meticulously constructed cover story.

        I knew someone who worked for a three-letter federal agency in an extremely sensitive position. When they were ready to move on, they were given a falsified work history (that covered the same set of skills) with a front corporation for references, so they wouldn’t have to reveal details during their job hunt.

    13. rebelwithmouseyhair*

      I had a student once who simply said “that’s a fraught question, I’d rather not talk about it” when I asked if she had kids. I said “no problem” and moved on to something else. I don’t see why OP can’t say something similar.

    14. LizB*

      Yeah, my immediate thought was, if LW2 is a man, “I might have kids” could conjure up some pretty dramatic scenarios – he donated to a sperm bank years ago and could have a dozen offspring running around without his knowledge, he has a habit of having unprotected sex with one night stands and doesn’t care if he got them pregnant, all sorts of soap opera stuff.

    15. Spooky*

      OP2 – is being weird/rude to your coworkers when they make basic friendly overtures a good idea? No. Is the point you’re trying to make to them a good one? Also no. Nothing you’re doing here is sensible.

    16. Csethiro Ceredin*

      Yes, if OP’s goal is to make people think LESS about their personal life, these replies will do the opposite.

    17. Goldenrod*

      I really don’t enjoy talking about myself with people I don’t know well, but I think you can’t avoid giving some biographical information to co-workers. The thing that works for me is to give a short answer, then pivot to asking the person about themselves.

      This tends to work because most people love talking about themselves. So in the example of “Do you have children?” I would say something like, “No. How old are yours?” and then keep the conversation focused on them.

      I recommend a short answer followed by a pivot. But you have to divulge some details, otherwise it will create too much mystery and have the opposite of the effect you want.

    18. Get over yourself*

      I had a manager who shared virtually nothing about himself. We knew vaguely that he was married and had 2 kids. No idea ages, sex or names. He was a crappy manager. Then one day he called out. Turns out his wife had been battling cancer for years and she died. He didn’t even want them to share that his wife had passed away but management decided that was important information to share. It explained so much about how he had been at work. And had he even just shared a small amount about his life (he knew I was a cancer survivor too yet never gave any indication he had ever even been effected by cancer), even just some benign anecdotes of his kids here and there, or yeah “my kids do that” type of response when others told family stories, he would have been perceived better and some of his actions would have been understood. He ended up getting a demotion and then subsequently quit. Not sharing even the basics of his life hurt him with his reports and ultimately his boss.

      OP’s responses are weird and would lead me to steer away from them. You can share small details about your life without sharing specifics, it’s called small talk and it goes a long way to building repour.

      1. MigraineMonth*

        This brings up an important thing about relationships and how human empathy works. For good or for ill, we’re more sympathetic towards and likely to give slack and extra chances to people we have a human connection with.

    19. megaboo*

      I don’t always ask about kids because of fertility issues. I don’t want to bring up something that could hurt a person. We’ve seen a few folks who are struggling with birth announcements, office showers, etc. on the blog. Other than that, I feel like the rest is just small talk that’s normal.

    20. CosmicKiwi72*

      I’m queer and wasn’t out at work for years and while I’m sure I fumbled a couple of these questions I found ways to answer them without revealing a lot.

      Either jokes “my relationship status? Oh that’s complicated” worked pretty often.

      Or just honest answers like “hey, I do my best work when I can focus on work at work and home stuff at home so I try not to talk about my family/home life at work.”

      You’ll still be seen as a bit weird but not as weird as LW#2’s answers were.

  2. Nodramalama*

    LW1 your report needs therapy or some other kind of help to assist them in managing their trauma in the workplace. It’s not appropriate for them to put that responsibility onto you.

    Lw2 this is a very odd response to what is basic small talk. Also, all of your responses are going to prompt way more follow up questions than a very simple yes or no. Saying “who knows” if you have kids makes it sound like you’re Nick Cannon or something.

    1. Roeslein*

      Exactly, if OP2 is a man it makes them sound creepy (there’s a particular type of man who answers “none that I know of” or “I might” to the “do you have kids?” question) and if they’re a woman it… just doesn’t make sense?

      1. Frank Doyle*

        Oh that’s interesting, in the context of the first question about being married I took the answer to the question about kids in the same spirit — not so much “I might, I’m not sure,” but more “I might, wouldn’t you like to know!”

        As a woman without kids though, I have on occasion answered the question with “not that I know of!” because I find it kind of hilarious? I do deliver it it a way that (I hope) makes it seem like I’m just joking, and not trying to be mysterious or standoffish or awkward or anything. (As a person who’s been answering that question for a very long time, it kinds of brings the conversation to a halt to just say “no.” Thank goodness I have a dog.)

        1. Nodramalama*

          Well LW seems to want to bring the conversation to an abrupt end, so I think for those purposes a direct no would be perfect for that.

          1. Avii*

            It isn’t. About half the times I’ve answered one of these questions with a ‘no’, the response has been some variation of ‘well why not?’.

            2. WeirdChemist*

              That’s why Alison’s suggestion of immediately changing the subject (or turning the subject to the person who asked first) can help. If you give a “No” followed by a long awkward silence, yeah a lot of people might try to fill it with follow-up questions just to keep the convo rolling. If you say “No, so anyway how about those TSP reports?” or “No, how about you?” with a blandly congenial tone, then most people will move on. (And if they keep prying then at that point *they’re* the rude one not you, and you can start escalating in abruptness)

            3. Lenora Rose*

              At which point you can definitely say, “oh, let’s not talk about me.” (ideally in a breezy way rather than a stone cold one, at least until it’s time to absolutely shut the rudeness down). If they persist, they’re the rude ones, no question.

              But frankly, “I got rude prying question to a normal answer” is still not an excuse to make your replies weird and offputting instead (Like OP did, not like you do, as far as I know).

            4. CrabbyLibrarian*

              This is why I’ve switched to “No, my dog is enough for me” and this usually transitions nicely into talking about pets, a generally safe topic.

              1. Georgia Carolyn Mason*

                I have said “no, but I have some super cute nephews — did you know a 10-year-old can be a black belt?” or “no, but I plan to adopt a dog soon” and that usually backs people off. (These things are both true, and “no, I’m asexual and I also find small children exhausting after an hour” which is also true, would be a bit much for work.)

              1. metadata minion*

                Yeah, I think it’s very regional/cultural. I also never get people asking when I’ll have kids/why I don’t have kids, but I have plenty of friends who are sick of fending off the questions, especially from relatives.

                1. Sillysaurus*

                  This seems true. I’m in the PNW and it’s incredibly common not to have kids here. If anything, there’s a little bit of surprise if someone does have children. There are way more follow up questions if you don’t have a dog lol

            6. rebelwithmouseyhair*

              Which is very rude, so you can throw that back in their face with a very curt “you really don’t want to hear the story” which can imply that maybe you’ve been struggling with fertility issues and can’t talk about it without bursting into tears.

            7. Orv*

              Yeah, I find any declaration that you don’t want kids has to sound apologetic if you don’t want people to try to cajole you into it.

            8. Lydia*

              I don’t know who y’all are spending time around, but I can’t remember even once saying no and getting a follow up of well, why not. I can remember vividly the one time I was told I’d change my mind about having kids. I know people are running into rude people, but I don’t think it happens as often as people fear it does.

        2. Ellis Bell*

          Yeah, I think doing this once or twice in the right context is funny, and I get the urge to make a point of avoid the awkwardness when people are being nosy, but OP is consistently playing the ‘don’t say yes or no’ game – that is a joke that will rust, especially since they’re not joking. It was particularly weird in the context of a coworker basically talking about their own kid and not being particularly nosy.

            1. Allonge*

              In general I agree but it can be nosy.

              One of the reasons people here are recommending a short yes/no + subject change is because that is the soft signal for ‘I don’t want to talk more about this’. Pushing back against that and keeping on asking brings it into nosy territory.

              Asking once, especially in a reasonable context, is ok.

                1. Hastily Blessed Fritos*

                  People do push back – people above have experienced it – so it’s not an unreasonable concern. That said, “no” is still less likely to get pushback than “maybe”, and “No” can be followed by a pivot to talking about a safer topic.

            3. Sloanicota*

              I would say it’s a little nosy as a conversation starter with a new coworker. You could say, “how are you liking it here?”or “how was it over at Teapots Inc.?” but you went for “are you married?” It’s quite a common nosiness, but it’s nosy, and I don’t like to be asked abruptly like that (although I understand the woman with kids asking when it became more relevant to the conversation better). Still, although I chuckled at OP’s answers, I agree they’re not the right move in most situations. (I still think “why aren’t you married?” / “I don’t know. I suppose it doesn’t help that underneath my clothes my entire body is covered in scales” is funny, and think about it every time I’m asked this nasty question – thanks Bridget Jones!).

              1. ferrina*

                Eh, the examples that LW gave are common conversation starters. I agree, I hate the “are you in a relationship?” as a conversation starter, but it’s not generally considered nosy. And “do you have kids?” when the coworker is wondering if this is an opportunity to commiserate is a really normal way to chat.

                There are definitely people that get really nosy about relationships and kids, but the examples that LW gave aren’t it.

                1. Annie*

                  Right. Now you can’t even ask simple questions. How are we as a society going to come together without being able to talk to each other in general. I’m not suggesting getting into deep personal conversations, but this is basic information and a way to get to know someone.

                2. a clockwork lemon*

                  I genuinely can’t think of a context where “Do you have kids?” is more innocuous than when a living human child is physically present in the room doing kid things. It’s not just a small talk question, it’s an attempt at smoothing over a temporary disruption. The answer to the question is “No, but know how kids can be” or “Yes, I totally get it.”

              2. Tea Monk*

                hehehe. I’d figure out some way to get the conversation focused on the other person because nosy people often still like to talk about themselves and normies will give you an offramp into something more interesting.

                C; Do you have kids?
                Me: No. Do you have any kids?
                C: So my little 4 year old has best fingerpainting in the whole kindergarten…

              4. askmeanything*

                there are just as many people who would think it was nosy or awkward to be asked immediately about their past job as there are people who find it nosy/awkward to be asked about being married. Someone who just started a new job has necessarily just ended a past job OR just come out of some other life transition (maybe they were unemployed for several years, maybe they just had to take time off to care for a sick relative or child(ren), maybe they just got divorced and so had to find new/different employment.

                There’s a reason we give people (especially new people) the benefit of the doubt when we’re asked a question we don’t love — your “awkward, nosy question” is someone else’s “safest getting-to-know-you question” and someone else’s “awkward, nosy question” is your preferred “getting-to-know-you” question. But we can’t possibly know that about someone else until we take a risk and try out a question or two, then try our best to read their responses and redirect our next question to something they’re indicating they’d like to talk about more. Once someone actually shows us that they’re not going to follow those cues and keeps asking questions you’re clearly dodging, THEN they’ve become nosy. Not before.

                Right now I’ve been meeting a lot of new neighbors because I just moved. We bought a coop in NYC, which if you know anything about that, it means my neighbors have a vested interest in me being employed/financially solvent. I also got laid off RIGHT after we closed on the apartment, which I was actually happy about and didn’t have an immediately negative impact on my finances because I’d worked there forever and got solid severance, but also because my beloved and only grandma recently passed away and generously included her grandkids in her will, which extended my grace period for finding a job before it gets stressful by a couple of months. Suddenly, getting asked “what do you do” by my neighbors, the #1 standard “getting-to-know-you” question in NYC, has become fraught, but they have no way of knowing that! I answer honestly and tell them I’m in between jobs, which then makes them respond with sympathy, then I have to reassure them that I’m fine, all the while it also brings up all these complicated emotions of grief, gratefulness, guilt, etc about why I’m feeling ok about being laid off while I know many of my old coworkers are under extreme stress. But just because factually, asking me “what do you do” IS a complicated, fraught question for me right now, it doesn’t make it nosy when a new neighbor asks me. How the heck are we supposed to get to know anyone if no one is allowed to take a risk and try to make an overture of human connection without being labeled as nosy or rude?

                I agree it’s not ok if someone asks “why AREN’T you married,” but that’s not what was asked here.

                1. rebelwithmouseyhair*

                  A friend moved to NY just after retiring, and wasn’t comfortable admitting that he was now officially “old”, so he went with “I’m unemployed”. He found it hilarious because neighbours would kind of recoil as if he had some contagious disease!

        3. ThatOtherClare*

          Often the ‘Do you have kids?’ question can be a polite way of asking ‘Can I talk to you about my child/ren or will you be bored and unable to relate?’.

          I’ve always found people are willing to accept answers such as ‘I love being the cool Auntie to my nieces and nephews’, ‘Oh, I’ve been volunteering with XYZ children’s program for 10 years’ or ‘My Mother was a teacher. I think I’ve had enough experience with under-8’s to last several lifetimes!’.

          Make people think that you’re oversharing and often they won’t even realise that you didn’t answer the more personal question.

          1. Numbersmouse*

            I now always say, “No, but I do have two cats!” Which basically puts the questioner in front of a choice: do they change the subject or ask me about my cats? Either way, I win.

            2. Joana*

              And now I’m thinking about the part in The Princess Dairies where she’s signing an autograph for a little girl and is like “I don’t have a sister, but I do have a cat.”

            3. me*

              I’m similar, I started saying “the cats are the kids” and then more often then not there’s a sharing of pictures of pets which is a win all around

              1. Emily of New Moon*

                Then there’s always, “Yes, I do. Want to see a picture of my little one?” and showing them a picture of your cat. “Oh, you mean HUMAN children? Then no.”

            4. Lady Blerd*

              I often give this as an answer or I mention that my sister gave my mother enough grandchildren to get me off the hook and usually the conversation naturally changes to soemthing else without awkwardness. And the upside to have a ton of niblings is that I can contribute to convsersation about kids

            5. Jenesis*

              I love this response because I am not a “cool auntie” nor do I want to be, but honestly saying that I don’t particularly enjoy interacting with children and I find it boring to listen to other people talk about their children would come across as rude. Cats, on the other hand, I am always happy to listen to other people talk about (and I recently acquired a sort-of-foster of my own, so I now have something to contribute to the conversation)!

              1. Kit*

                I have become a “cool auntie” to my niblings… now that they’re teenagers and are at an age where we end up discussing things like accommodating neurodiversity in socialization, why Penelope was a mama bear in the Odyssey, and queer representation in literature. Literally, niece came away from spending several hours talking with me shocked that I turned out to be cool. I… haven’t changed, kiddo, but I do much better with people who are, y’know, passing cultural coming-of-age milestones than I do with toddlers.

                I’d still rather talk about cats, though, so that dominated my conversation with niece and I’m fiiiiiine with that. (Mine is a lovely tuxedo gentleman, he’s extremely dignified but the tummy is not a trap.)

            6. Double A*

              This is great for me, a person with kids AND cats. I will talk about either or both.

              If you tell me you have dogs I’m at a loss. I don’t want to hear about it.

          2. Lily Rowan*

            In a casual work setting one time, two people were talking about their kids and one turned to me and asked how old mine were. I don’t have any! Which is what I said, and basically we all laughed and moved on. Because my coworkers are normal, which I understand is not 100% universal.

        4. Seashell*

          I would find “not that I know of!” funny coming from a woman. With a man, I’d think either he’s a big jokester or potentially creepy.

          1. Annie*

            Creepy seems a stretch there, but who knows, I guess. Most people who have responded that way when I’ve asked they were just joking around.

            1. rebelwithmouseyhair*

              I think it comes across as creepy because they are implying that they’ve had unprotected sex with all sorts of women and you may be the one they hit on next.

        5. hello*

          If I ask if someone is married (which tbh I wouldn’t ask, spouses are generally something people bring up on their own), and they responded, “I might, wouldn’t you like to know!” I would be extremely confused. Yes, I want to know. That’s why I asked.

        6. LL*

          I’m also a woman and I like to say “not that I know of” to the kids question because it’s hilarious. But I don’t have kids and I’m just saying that in a jokey way, not trying to end the conversation.

        7. LNZ*

          Ok but i totally do the same, answering with stereotypically male answers is one of the bits I do to amuse myself

      2. Nonanon*

        One of my friends used to be a sperm donor (prior to finding out a family history of a genetic condition which made him ineligible); whenever we were in social situations and people asked about children, he would always answer with an excited “Maybe!” and give that fun fact.

        I ASSUME he just answered “no” to coworkers, but I could be wrong.

      4. Lizzay*

        I know nobody saw ‘Sisters’ with Tina Fey & Amy Poehler, but when asked if he had kids, John Cena responded “I’m sure I do.” {cue Tina Fey ‘daaaaamn’ face} Hilarious response! But also, not work appropriate!

    2. sheworkshardforthemoney*

      The trauma letter reminds me of another letter with the co-worker who needed someone to accompany her home and stay with her until her partner arrived. It’s outside of normal work norms and needs to be addressed. They’re making other people responsible for their mental health in a way that is beyond normal boundaries. Give them a ride home, but coming inside and staying for several hours is not the solution.

      1. Sloanicota*

        Yep. OP should kindly but clearly express that this is the employee’s problem to resolve and that their options, unilaterally, could be using the EAP, seeing a therapist, whatever it takes for them, because they will have to accept feedback as part of the role, and that’s not OP’s job to fix with them.

  3. Pink Sprite*

    OP #2 — This won’t get you fired, at least that would be highly unusual.
    But your strategy of strange answers to normal everyday questions between people getting to know each other is truly bizarre.
    Seriously, just cut out the word games and engage in a regular getting-to-know people conversation.
    Like Alison said, you can have a few topics in your back pocket for when you can gracefully and graciously change steer the conversation in another (regular, every day) way.

    1. JayNay*

      I kind of feel OP2 because I also hate the personal-life-questions. But the way OP is answering now is coming off as off-putting.
      The next time, OP could say „I’m not big into talking about talking about personal things at work – but how about work topic/ innocuous hobby/ the commute today.“
      Finding a topic that you can comfortably talk about is a better solution than stonewalling people you want to have a collegial relationship with.

      1. ThatOtherClare*

        ‘Eh, I’m not very exciting on the topic of family. But ask me about my windsurfing/garden/cooking/labradors if you want me to chew your ear off!’

        1. Zelda*

          “I’m not very exciting on the topic of [thing I don’t want to talk about]. But ask me about [thing I do want to talk about]” is GENIUS!

      2. Glomarization, Esq.*

        “I’m not big into talking about personal things at work” is still a weird and stonewalling and non-collegial answer to “do you have kids?” or “are you married?”

          1. NotBatman*

            I think a fairly direct “Let’s talk about teapottery instead?” in response to “Are you married?” makes it clear that it’s not a question LW2 is comfortable answering. It’s still outside the social norm, and it runs the risk of giving the listener the impression it’s a painful subject, but it’s fairly polite and most coworkers will honor that request by switching to a teapot question.

            1. MigraineMonth*

              Offering a different topic is so important. Don’t just say, “I don’t want to talk about [current subject]”; that’s like setting up concrete barriers across the road. Give them a conversational offramp as well: almost polite people will take it rather than try to ram the barrier.

              Of course, if the person is being extremely inappropriate/racist/etc, it’s fine to do a cut direct and leave them floundering.

        3. rebelwithmouseyhair*

          I would assume that they’ve just broken up with someone or miscarried, and I would avoid the subject with them. Why not do the kind thing?

        4. CosmicKiwi72*

          It is weird but less weird. And gets less weird if you say it in a boring tone, not an accusing tone, and immediately redirect the conversation to something you do want to talk about.

          Some people will 100% speculate what your non-answers mean. And that’s one of the things you have to weigh when deciding to keep your personal life 100% out of your work life.

        1. Eldritch Office Worker*

          No it’s not, particularly in a light and friendly tone. It’s actually fairly common to handle it that way. You may personally find it off-putting but you can’t honestly say it’s *just as* off-putting as what OP is currently doing.

          1. AD*

            If I heard a co-worker respond with “I’m not big about talking about personal things at work” to an innocuous question like “Do you have kids”, yes it would be off-putting. What are you talking about? There are ways to make friendly conversation and gently avoid oversharing that don’t evolve evasion that feels this odd or adversarial.

            1. Eldritch Office Worker*

              We’re talking about something that is largely about tone and conversation skills, so it may be difficult to discuss with nuance in this format – but none of this needs to be odd or adversarial.

              1. AD*

                I think word choice is maybe even more important than tone here, sorry. There are far better ways to deflect or to gently not engage with personal questions than a flat out “I’m not big about talking about personal things at work” when asked a direct question like “Are you married” or “Do you have kids”.

                Also — the context of who the conversation with is important! Saying that to a member of your team you work with every day — odd and adversarial. Maybe saying it, in a breezy tone, to someone in the same organization you never work with closely — pretty different context.

                1. Lenora Rose*

                  Why is not talking about your personal life odd and adversarial?

                  I say this as someone who absolutely does share SOME bits of my personal life at work; everyone knows I have a spouse and kids, and a few details about both. But there are coworkers where I know a whole bunch about their pet or grandkid or etc, and ones where I couldn’t tell you a thing. My opinions of them as coworkers are not correlated to how much they chose to share.

                2. AD*

                  What? Where did I say that?

                  I think OP2’s responses are odd and adversarial and so does almost everyone else here. Responding with “Sometimes” to a question like “Are you in a relationship or married?” from a colleague is deeply odd.

                3. AD*

                  For the record — in situations where I was asked my marital status from people in the workplace I did not know well, I’ve responded with a quick “No” and pivoted to another topic gracefully.

                  I do think “I’m not big about talking about personal things at work” is not a tactful or friendly response to a question I want to glide past — it announces that you are putting up a barrier, which you can do without verbalizing. You can skirt around topics you don’t want to get into at work without accentuating that you’re doing so — that’s the distinction.

                4. Rex Libris*

                  There is a difference between not talking about your “personal life” at work, and refusing to engage in common banalities when new coworkers are simply trying to get to know you at a basic level. “Do you have kids?” isn’t exactly classified information for most people.

                  Unless something was going on that isn’t clear in the letter, the OP’s responses would be seen as weird and off-putting to the point of hostility by many people. It isn’t to their benefit to think otherwise if they want to have remotely pleasant relationships with their coworkers.

              2. Serena*

                I don’t think that someone who says things like “I’m in a relationship sometimes” and “I might have kids” to their coworkers has the conversation skills necessary to make “I’m not big about talking about personal things at work” sound anything but off-putting or adverserial.

                2. Blue Pen*

                  I think this is a little ungenerous. If the OP is a private person, that’s totally fine, but they might not realize how they’re coming across and just need a course-correct. If they’re writing to Alison for advice, that tells me they are at capable of self-awareness and taking the steps to improve their social relations at work.

            2. Olive*

              I would assume that either they had some particular grief or complication in their life that they didn’t want to share or that they were extremely private or asocial. All of those would be acceptable reasons for a coworker to politely not answer, and I’d wait for other cues to determine if they were someone I should try to get to know better on a personal level or not.

            3. Ana Gram*

              I had a colleague who did just that. She was a friendly, bubbly person and was able to get away with it because she was warm and friendly otherwise. She just refused to discuss personal topics. It sounds off putting trying to explain it and I don’t think everyone could have made it work (I know I don’t have the personality to do it!) but she did and was well-liked by just about everyone. We just didn’t know anything about her personal life lol.

            4. Lenora Rose*

              I don’t know: I’d assume they were saying they aren’t big about talking about their personal life at work, and while it might be awkward in the moment, it also helps calibrate all future conversations so they don’t have to deflect again (and again and again…). I wouldn’t call it adversarial at all — unless your assumption is that all refusal to converse for any reason is adversarial. Which would itself be a weird sort of assumption.

              And they can do so in a tone which isn’t adversarial at all.

            5. rebelwithmouseyhair*

              Just imagine that it’s a woman who’s just had her seventh miscarriage. Let her be when she asks you to!

      4. L-squared*

        I don’t know, that to me is just basic information. Like I think its weird to work with someone, especially in person, and know NOTHING about their life outside of work. Asking that isn’t prying.

        I’m as single as can be, and I just started a new job. In no way did I find it intrusive to ask “are you married”

        1. AD*

          I think the distinction some people are missing here also is the relationship of who is asking! If someone on my team asked if I was married (as opposed to someone I did not work closely with at all) and I answered “Maybe” or “I don’t want to talk about personal things”, it would be a pretty unfriendly reply. And I say that as someone who’s always been deeply private at work. There are ways to remain private that don’t necessitate being coy or alienating.

        2. CosmicKiwi72*

          I agree that it would be weird to know nothing about my co-workers, especially ones I work with closely. And marital status and kids are common get to know you questions. But they both also have potentially uncomfortable answers around infertility, child loss, divorce, etc.

          Because of that I tend to let folks volunteer information rather than ask for it. And try to ask more general “get to know you” questions like “do you have any hobbies?”

      5. Stuart Foote*

        Avoiding these questions is extremely odd. People just want to get an idea of who they are working with and acting like friendly questions is asking them to reveal some dark secret is weird.

        1. Florence Reece*

          If you’re really asking because you want to get to know someone: congrats! You now know that they’re a private person. That’s good, relevant info. Mission accomplished.

          I think it’s great to be friendly with people. I don’t agree that saying “oh, I don’t like talking about my family/my personal life at work, thanks” in a warm tone and then pivoting to something else — which is the important part that some of these responses seem to ignore — is unfriendly, let alone ‘extremely odd.’

          I’m well-practiced in breezy redirection answers to these questions, but like…my man, sometimes asking these things *is* asking to reveal some dark secret. I’ve been asked, with the kindest intentions:
          -“Do you have any siblings?” Sort of! Both of my sisters died in infancy and I’ve barely spoken to my brother in twenty years because he SA’d me throughout my childhood. Can’t say that, obviously, total pleasant-conversation-killer. So depending on my mood I’ll either say yes (which inevitably leads to ‘where does he live’ ‘are you guys close’, etc — again, kind and pleasant questions that just happen to have really terrible answers for me, so I have to give pleasant non-answers) or I’ll say yes but that we don’t speak if I want to shut the conversation down. And that does shut the conversation down, every time, because the negative implication is still there. It is frequently awkward, and I have to navigate pivoting the conversation back to light pleasant topics after being reminded of the worst part of my life. Cheers!

          -various questions about my dad (because I mention my mom a lot, intentionally to avoid these questions) — do I visit him for the holidays, are we close, where’s he live? Every single one, incredibly close, he doesn’t! His urn is on my desk next to my bed, though. Thank you for the condolences, it was a long time ago, etc, now I have to pivot back to something less uncomfortable after being reminded of a loss. Cheers.

          Again, I’m good at navigating those sticky subjects and I don’t mind doing it. I recognize that people are just trying to be friendly and build rapport, and I think it’s important to respond in kind. But these aren’t neutral, easy questions for everyone, and there have been times where the expectation that I’ll hold a light, pleasant, socially-acceptable conversation about topics that are acutely painful for me is just…too much. Even if someone doesn’t have a “justified” reason for being private, they’re allowed to share as much as they want with others. You’re not entitled to answers about someone’s life no matter why you want them. That’s totally contrary to the rapport-building part!

          1. Serena*

            I mean, if I asked someone if they had kids and they said “I might,” my takeaway definitely would be “they must be a very private person.” It would be that they’re weird and unfriendly.

            2. Yorick*

              Agreed. Whether you’re married or have kids isn’t a secret that you need to keep from your coworkers. It’d be very offputting to have someone refuse to answer those basic questions. I wouldn’t necessarily ask them a bunch of questions about their kids or spouse if they didn’t offer information, though.

          2. Stuart Foote*

            There’s a big difference between asking if someone is married or has kids and asking about their relationship with their parents or siblings. Refusing to talk about that is unpleasant and antisocial.

          3. Yawnley*

            You seem to be operating on the assumption here that everyone deserves a life free from uncomfortable questions. But that’s not how life is! It’s okay if you get asked a question that makes you uncomfortable sometimes as long as it’s still regarded as a generally appropriate question!

            The way half of this board’s readers act as if people have *audacity* for extending basic niceties their way at work? I’ll never get over it.

            1. Blue Pen*

              Same, honestly. Are there topics in the workplace that are taboo? Of course. Are there seemingly innocuous questions I would prefer not to answer or go into detail over? You bet.

              But we don’t live in a hermetically-sealed chamber. Discomfort is going to come up at work and in every social setting; if someone is genuinely trying to get to know me in an un-prying way, I can recognize that for what it is: an innocent question from someone with no intent to offend or traumatize me who’s interested in forming some kind of relationship. That’s it—nothing more, nothing less. If I want to talk about it, I will. If I don’t, I’ll give a vague answer and pivot to another topic. The vast majority of people understand that dynamic.

        2. metadata minion*

          There are plenty of people for whom these normal questions are actually a sensitive subject, though. It’s fine to ask them, but if someone said “oh, I don’t talk about personal stuff at work” I’d assume that either they were very private or that it was a polite deflection because the answer to “are you married?” is something like “yes, but we’re in the middle of a very painful divorce” or “I’m in a poly relationship and don’t want to face discrimination for it at work”.

          1. Quill*

            Or “my husband was lost at sea” or some other suitably soap opera answer. There’s no question that won’t be painful / complex / not a thing they want to publish the details of at work for someone, the key is accepting when you aren’t going to get an answer.

      6. Anon Attorney*

        I don’t know I feel like it’s pretty alienating to respond to a very basic and normal, warm question intended to get to know you with “I’m not big into talking about personal things at work.” That makes it sound like you’re accusing the person of pushing social boundaries in a way that really isn’t true. I would just answer the question and redirect.

      7. Formerly Ella Vader*

        I’ve been answering the family/partner/kids questions with “I live alone”, trying to convey a tone of, “it’s okay, I don’t have anything to add, thanks for trying to include me but I’ll just smile and nod while you tell me about your life.”

        Whether I have kids deserves a longer answer for some people, but not for work acquaintances.

      8. fhqwhgads*

        Right, the problem with what OP2’s doing isn’t the not wanting to answer or discuss those topics. It’s the sounding like they don’t know how words work. If the non sequitur answers are meant to be played off as jokes, they need to be played off as jokes and followed by a subject change. If they’re stated as though they’re coherent replies…now it’s confusing. If they’re intended as a passive-aggressive “obviously I don’t want to discuss it”, it’s not clear enough that that’s the case.

    2. ONFM*

      I agree these specific examples won’t get OP2 fired, but if they get off on being a contrarian in every situation (which, honestly, seems to be what’s happening here) – that WILL get you fired, especially as a brand new employee.

  4. nnn*

    TBH, I’m going to keep “sometimes” in my repertoire for situations where I’m asked if I’m in a relationship and I don’t want to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth because Reasons.

    1. MK*

      If someone gave that answer, I would assume they are in some kind of messy on-off, or possibly non-monogamous, relationship. Sure, you aren’t giving a specific answer, but you are also making it very obvious that you aren’t giving an answer and don’t want to. If your goal is to deflect people’s attention from your personal life, it’s not the best idea.

      2. Peachie*

        Yep! Even saying “oh, I’m not a big sharer” or “oh, I’m usually pretty quiet about these things” is better than “sometimes” which might just make your colleagues think you’re having a series of flings. Fine if that’s the impression you want to give off, but do you?

        1. JayNay*

          Oh these are good phrases! I suggested similar up thread but „I’m not a big sharer“ is one I’ll keep in my pocket.

      3. Irish Teacher.*

        Yeah, my guess would be there is some big story here that they are trying to keep hidden, like maybe they are having an affair with somebody married or with the local (Catholic) bishop or maybe they are in an on-again-off-again relationship or they are polygamous and keeping that quiet (I don’t think the last a big deal, but a lot of people might) or they are in the process of getting divorced and it was a very messy divorce that they don’t want to talk about.

        1. Aunt Busybody*

          I guess my brain works a little differently. Polygamy or messy on/off relationship would not be my first thought with “sometimes.” I interpret it as “I’ve been in relationships before, probably am not in one now but am to being in one of the opportunity presents itself.” Like thousands of people who are between relationships but still looking for the right thing. I would probably even assume that maybe a relationship ended recently and my new coworker doesn’t want to open that topic/wound.
          Still all assumptions, I know, but I think it’s interesting how different minds jump to broadly different conclusions.

          2. ecnaseener*

            See, I would expect someone to just say “no” or “not right now” if the answer was “I’ve been in relationships before but am single now.” So if they made a point of saying “sometimes” instead of “no,” I’d be searching for an interpretation distinct from “no.” (Something something cooperative principle)

            2. Caramel & Cheddar*

              Yes, this. When people ask “Are you in a relationship or married?”, they’re not asking if you were ever in a relationship at any point in your life. That question is very clearly about the present and it’s weird to be evasive about it in a way that invites more questions instead of just saying “No” if the answer is indeed no.

            3. Blue Pen*

              Right, and I think most people realize that someone’s relationship status is not necessarily permanent until the end of time. If someone said, “no” or “not right now” as to whether they’re in a relationship, I wouldn’t think they would never date or enter into a relationship with someone again.

              Also, I wouldn’t even care? If someone wasn’t partnered with someone at the time of the question, but a month later was, I don’t see how that’s such a big deal to people here who seem insistent on not answering personal questions as if it marks them in the workplace for life.

          3. Minimal Pear*

            Yeah to me “Sometimes!” reads as a humorous way to say this and it honestly is pretty funny to me.

          4. Irish Teacher.*

            I would just never hear “are you in a relationship?” or “do you have a partner?” as meaning anything other “are you in a relationship now?” (especially since we live in a society that assumes everybody wants and has relationships), so “sometimes” sounds like a deliberate evasion or intentional misunderstanding of the question.

            “No” is generally taken to mean “not at the moment so I’m looking,” which is irritating really, but it does mean it would be unusual for somebody to use “sometimes” to mean that. Especially on its own. “Sometimes but not right now,” would be more normal there.

          1. Yorick*

            Yes, I’d actually assume they were almost oversharing by letting me know about their extremely complicated love life, which is the opposite of what LW wants.

            1. MigraineMonth*

              Yeah, like answering, “Do you have any hobbies?” with “Only ones I cannot discuss at work.” It’s the opposite of discretion.

      4. Another Kristin*

        Yeah, for someone who doesn’t want to share personal info with colleagues, OP#2 is certainly making themselves very interesting. Answering “sometimes” to a question about your relationship status is bound to pique your colleagues’ curiosity. If OP really want to head off personal questions, they should give one-word answers to questions about your personal life and don’t elaborate. People will get the message fast that they don’t want to talk about their relationship or children at the office. Being mysterious and cagey will make every office busybody desperate to pump them for information.

        1. Another Kristin*

          Anyway, cultural expectations play a huge role in what is considered a polite get-to-know-you question and what isn’t. I can tell you from personal experience that if you ever wind up in a room full of French Canadian grandmas you will receive an incredibly thorough grilling as to your marital status, number and age of children, family history of immigration, even religion (that was a bit shocking). A room full of Anglophone Canadian grandmas will angle for the same information but try to get at it obliquely, because just straight up asking a stranger if they’re Catholic feels impossible.

          1. Coffee*

            In Bill Cosby Show one of the interrogation grandmothers asked also vaccination status. As a kid I laughed at the question because I didn’t know someone could be not vaccinated. Nowadays joke hits differently

      5. Meep*

        Honestly? I just assume they are on dating sites and call it a day.

        I do agree that a lot of people would want to know more depending on how the response is given.

    2. Antsi*

      If you do, be prepared for people to make some assumptions and judgements – it’s such an unusual answer that it prompts more engagement and reflection from the receiver than an bland non-answer would. It would definitely catch my attention in a way that “not right now” or “nothing serious at present” would.

      1. Pizza Rat*

        People are going to make judgements and assumptions no matter what the answer is, but an answer pegged as hostile or deeply weird will get more of them and they’ll be more extreme.

    3. lanfy*

      That’s fine if you want to give the impression that you’re in some kind of ongoing dramatic relationship mess, or that you have a lot of short-lived relationships. Both of which, tbh, I’d probably be a bit judgy about.
      It’s not a neutral answer.

        1. EDIA*

          Sometimes relationship drama is inevitable, but if you’re involved in the relationship you have some measure of control over it. If there’s always relationship drama, if it follows you across “a lot of short-lived relationships,” you’re the common denominator.

          1. I might have a name*

            That’s so unkind. Do you see how this attitude is probably what makes people like the OP not want to answer their coworkers’ personal questions?

            1. EDIA*

              Truly, I do not see where you’re coming from when you interpret my opinion as unkind. You asked why someone would be judgmental of someone with ongoing relationship drama or a lot of short-lived relationships, so I answered: it points to that person being high drama themselves. Which, given that apparently the LW is not deliberately trying to give off this impression, I don’t get how you tie my comment back to the LW at all. LW said they didn’t want to speak of relationships at work because they don’t see what it has to do with work, not that because they feel/fear critical judgment from others. You are free to speculate that it’s a factor, but until LW speaks up, you only have speculation.

          2. metadata minion*

            Short-lived relationships doesn’t necessarily mean drama, though; those are two different things. Some people just prefer to have mutually-agreeable flings rather than looking for anything long-term. It’s fine if that’s not your thing — it’s not mine either, that much first-date-ness sounds exhausting — but you shouldn’t negatively judge someone else for it.

            1. EDIA*

              People who have many short lived relationships because that’s how they want to live their lives also don’t present themselves the way LW is presenting themselves to their coworkers, and if they are, they generally understand how it comes off (inviting intrigue, curiosity, talk) and are okay with projecting that image, which LW doesn’t and is asking for counsel on. Some commenters have brought up that the “Sometimes” answer could be funny depending on context, and I actually agree there, but come on. Humor is by nature subjective. LW didn’t mean it as a joke, their coworkers evidently didn’t take it as a joke, and LW is new to this job, so strange and cold is the only information coworkers have about LW.

    4. Bast*

      I agree mostly with what others are saying, but “sometimes” for me would be taken in different ways depending on the tone and body language. Said neutrally, I’d assume something like an on-again, off-again type of thing, or that perhaps the person is dating casually but they don’t want to get into it. If the tone was more playful or joking, my takeaway would be quite different — this is someone who plays the field. Another tone with more closed off body language would either have me thinking they’re in some sort of situation they don’t want to discuss for whatever reason OR that they just don’t want to talk about the subject at all– maybe they are going through a rough divorce, an abusive situation, or something else. There’s a sort of “closed off” body language that with a gentle nudge to something else can be taken a bit better and leave less room for “this person is just unfriendly.”

      I realize this may not be the impression someone is trying to give, but it would seem from the comments that I am not the only person who would get this type of impression.

    5. Seashell*

      I would save that one for your personal life. Co-workers are likely to think it’s a wacky answer.

  5. duinath*

    2 Honestly I think just flat out lying would even be better than this, if only because when you lie you put off weirding people out like this until they catch you. You’re putting all the weirdness and dishonesty front and center right away. Not the best move.

    (This is not me telling you to lie, so we’re clear.)

    You don’t have to tell people in depth details, most likely they don’t actually care. They’re just making small talk, they don’t know you. You can keep it surface level, but this doesn’t protect your privacy, as nothing they’re asking you is private, it doesn’t make you seem mysterious, it just makes you look bad.

      1. Not A Manager*

        “Do you have children?” – “It’s complicated.”

        I don’t think this is the conversation ender you think it is.

          1. Ali + Nino*

            And that is what you will be known for in the office – I think the opposite of LW’s intent.

            1. Eldritch Office Worker*

              Well OP is going to be known for their current tactic too. It’s hard to control what other people say about you.

              1. AD*

                It’s actually not hard to avoid the kind of weird and evasive response OP has given numerous times. Saying “no” when asked if you’re married or have kids is a pretty normal reply (as an LGBTQ person who’s worked in some less-than-friendly environments, I’ve had practice).

                I don’t think we need to defend the odd approach OP2 is using here. It’s not going to go well for them.

                1. Eldritch Office Worker*

                  I don’t know how you read this as a defense of OP but I’m not going to continue to engage with you being repeatedly defensive of things I haven’t said. OP is being incredibly aggressive.

        2. Audrey Puffins*

          If I had that response to that question, I’d immediately assume they’d had children who were now dead and would be tripping over myself to change the subject, so it could work, but people will draw their own conclusions which won’t always be “ah, LW is being evasive and giving nonsense answers to avoid having to give real ones”

          1. Irish Teacher.*

            I think I’d be thinking they had children but either didn’t have custody of them or their children were in care or maybe that they had a child they’d placed for adoption.

            But I assume the “it’s complicated” suggestion is more for marriage/relationship questions than ones about children.

          2. JSPA*

            Or estranged. Or you’re talking to a non-custodial parent who doesn’t have a means to contact. Or they’re trying for kids and not succeeding. Or the adoption was nearly complete in China and then what just happened, happened. Or they foster. Or the foster adoption didn’t go through, but it’s unclear what happens next. Or they really do consider their pets to be children, but have had bad reactions when they refer to their dog/cat/hamster as their fur baby. Or they are in a triad or larger polycule or Communal house, raising kids who do not belong to them (legally, and perhaps philosophically). Or the act of procreation was not voluntary. Or they’re in a place (literally or mentally) where they are shy about sharing too much because it’s a two mom family, two dad family, single parent family, and they fear judgement for that.

            In all of those cases backing away from the question is an appropriate response! But you don’t have to tell yourself a specific story about child death. Just remember it as not an OK topic with Jan, and move on.

        3. UKDancer*

          Yes. I’d be reminded of Boris Johnson where he’s not entirely clear how many children he has which makes him sound evasive and has led to further gossip and him being mocked for it.

          1. Chocolate Teapot*

            The running joke is that Boris Johnson isn’t sure himself how many children he has.

            Even though I prefer to not give out too much personal information at work, I think there is a minimum which could be shared. Neutral weekend plans is a good one.

            1. Orv*

              A related phenomenon is when a US politician seems unsure how many houses they own. Because almost all of them are rich, and own multiple houses (if you’re a senator or congressional representative it’s almost mandatory to own at least two, one in DC and one in your home state/district), but owning more than one house is seen as an out-of-touch upper-class thing in the US. So they rarely want to give a straight answer.

        4. DramaQ*

          “Do you have children?” – “It’s complicated.”

          I don’t think this is the conversation ender you think it is.

          It is if you are Nick Cannon. lol

      2. duinath*

        …No. That is the opposite of what I said. You won’t look mysterious, you won’t be protecting any privacy, this is not private information. A simple yes or no followed by a change of topic is not complicated, it’s not hard, don’t make it weirder than it has to be.

  6. H.Regalis*

    Side note: I really want to go around calling my male boss my man boss now. It sounds like how people do cavemen talk on TV or else like I’m the Hulk. “Him man boss. Him make do work. Cave Hulk smash!”

    1. CrabbyLibrarian*

      We call the male manager on our team “Baby Boy” after a customer called him that once (and we have his consent to do so). He thinks it’s hilarious.

      1. Myrin*

        That is hilarious but good lord, what was the original reason for a customer of all people to call him that?!

        2. Brioche for me*

          Dialect? There are varieties of English where an older woman might call a younger man “Baby Boy” (depending on the context it’s a *little* condescending, but not, like, weird).

        3. CrabbyLibrarian*

          The customer was an older woman for whom English was not her first language. We think it may have been a translation quirk with an honorific (some languages have honorifics that change with age and gender, so that’s our guess). The customer was extremely friendly and pleasant. It was actually a lovely interaction!

    2. Arctic Tern*

      I was always highly amused when, on the Great British Bakeoff, Nancy would refer to Paul Hollywood as the “male judge” during her season.

      1. Texan In Exile*

        I love that! It wasn’t until I saw an author refer to a character as a white male that I realized how much white and male are the default. Since then, I have tried to use that author’s technique in my writing, especially if I am qualifying other characters as female and/or not white.

      2. NotBatman*

        Yes! I’m constantly referring to “man doctor” and “man professor” because I hate the phrase “woman doctor” — it’s awkward, it’s condescending, it implies a mis-match between the two identities.

      1. Jackalope*

        I’m suddenly reminded of my middle school days, when I considered this response to be great comedy.

    3. Ray McCooney*

      “Are you having a good day today?”
      “Maybe I am and maybe I’m not.” (pulls out a piccolo and plays mysterious music)

      5. Orv*

        I have originally responded to “how’s your day going?” with “dunno, ask me after I’ve checked my email.” ;)

    5. Cat Tree*

      Reminds me of Johnny Tightlips, the mafia character from The Simpsons. “Hey, who says I got a mother?”

    6. I should really pick a name*

      “How are you doing?”
      “I don’t believe that’s any of your business”
      – Willow Pill, RuPaul’s Drag Race

      1. The OG Sleepless*

        When I was in vet school, a classmate of mine suddenly asked another classmate, “hey, I heard you have a job in Nearby City. Where do you work?” (Sort of an intrusive question, but it was so unusual for anyone to hold down a job in vet school, let alone one with a long commute, I guess curiosity got the better of her.) Response: an icy cold “I don’t think that’s any of your concern.” Questioner was mortified and hesitated to ever speak to her again, and to be honest it did trigger a bit of speculation about this mysterious job in the city.

        2. The OG Sleepless*

          I mean, it could have been a boring admin job for all we knew, but we sure thought strip club as soon as she said it. If she had just said, “eh, boring stuff but it helps with tuition,” I don’t think we would have ever thought of it again.

      2. PhyllisB*

        My brother’s response to a question he doesn’t want to answer is: ” You writing a book?” Of course the confused person says no. His response: “Why do you need to know then?” If they decide to be funny and say yes, his response: “Leave that chapter out.” He’s not an antisocial weirdo, but some things he just says nope, not answering that.

  8. EA*

    I’m exhausted just reading some of these. Taking “bring your whole self to work” way too far. You still have to act like you’re at work and have pleasant and reciprocal adult interactions.

    On number 3, I do think it’s worth directing head on because of the second language.

    1. Kenelm*

      LW3 said this employee has been in America for 30 years. Should be enough time to be able to handle feedback on linguistic nuances.

      1. Jordan*

        Have they had a previous female boss before? Are women in positions of authority in their background/ culture.
        You could always play it as
        “I know in X language you have male and female bosses”
        (or even the word in their language if you know it)
        “But in ( United States/United Kingdom/ Canada etc. we just say boss or manager by itself. “

          1. Allonge*

            Yes, there is no need to justify or explain – it’s a perfecly legitimate request. I appreciate the brainstorming here on why LW’s report may be using this terminology, but it really does not matter (unless he would insist that this is the One True Way, which we don’t have any indication he would).

            People get to have preferences in things that work differently in other languages or cultures.

        2. amoeba*

          I mean… in German, we also have different words for male and female bosses. I also work with a lot of French and Spanish people, same there. None of them would *ever* consider calling somebody their “lady boss”, even though we don’t even live in an English-speaking country (let alone for 30 years).

          Honestly, there might of course be cultural differences, but the “it’s different words in his native language” line sounds like a very red herring to me (or like a bad excuse on his part in case he actually brought this up and it’s not just the LW inferring).

          1. not like a regular teacher*

            I think the info about his native language could be relevant if this was his first or second year working in English, but after 30 years?? He should know better.

            1. Texan In Exile*

              One of my best bosses was a refugee from Iran. English is his second language, but the only malaprops I have ever heard from him are “Hey! I have been on the rodeo before!”

              (And, when I accused him of snatching the football from me like Lucy, he asked, “Who’s Lucy?”)

          2. LL*

            I was thinking this too. Many other languages have gendered nouns so there would be different words for a boss depending on their gender, BUT at the same time, anyone who’s had to learn English would learn that we do not have gendered nouns and wouldn’t do this.

        3. xylocopa*

          Guy’s been in the US for 30 years. “In America, we…” is pretty condescending and probably just escalates the weirdness he’s started with the “lady boss” stuff.

    2. Diomedea Exulans*

      Well I knew managers who referred to themselves as lady bosses or liked to be called that way. I wouldn’t particularly appreciate being called one though but I don’t find it offensive either. Probably LW’s employee had such bosses before?

      1. Quibl*

        I doubt it – it’s such a weird thing that I am aghast that you have known MULTIPLE people like this?! That’s bananapants! I’d be coaching them SO HARD if I was their manager, because that is just so inappropriate. (And that’s the real issue, it’s not about it being “offensive”, though some people like to characterise any concerns raised as people being offended – presumably because it lets them dismiss them without having to engage with the actual problem – it’s that it is inappropriate. A workplace is not the right place to be adding unnecessarily gendered.)

        1. 1-800-BrownCow*

          I’m with Quibl, I find this hard to believe as well. The only women I know who refer to themselves as “Lady Boss” or the ever-popular (why ?) cringeworthy “Boss Babe” are stay at home wives’ that get involved in the latest MLM scheme and hound you to join their team and become a ‘Boss Babe’ yourself [insert eyeroll]. I have never met a woman in a professional setting that wants to be called Lady Boss. But then again, I work in a male dominant field and don’t know many women in management rolls, except myself, and if any of my all-male direct reports called me his lady boss, I’d shut that down immediately. Yikes!

          1. Baldrick*

            Yeah, there might be places where this is okay (although I doubt it) but I can guarantee you it would be really unwelcome in any of the male-dominated places that I’ve worked, both tech and military.

            1. Cinnamon Stick*

              I’ve worked a lot of tech, some government, some non-profit, and Lady Boss never came up. It wouldn’t occur to me to use it. I’d think someone using it to describe me was being patronizing or dismissive. IMO, it should be shut down from the first time heard.

              TL:DR Eww.

        2. MassMatt*

          The term “lady boss” bothers me nearly as much as “work wife” and that is saying something.

        3. MarfisaTheLibrarian*

          The only way I would want to be referred to as “Lady [anything]” is if people swear fealty to me and bow when I walk in

    3. I should really pick a name*

      I think it would still be worth addressing it head-on if English was their first language,

      1. learnedthehardway*

        Agreed. The only saving grace about this is that the OP can let the person save a bit of face by saying that they realize the employee’s original language has different terms for male and female managers, but that it is coming off badly in English.

        Even so, after 30 years, the employee should absolutely have figured this out by now.

      2. MigraineMonth*

        There was an employee who referred to his boss as “manageress”, and that also needed to be nipped in the bud. You just don’t refer to workers by gender.

        Nurse, not “male nurse”. Engineer, not “female engineer”. Congressional representative, not congressman/congresswoman. Cafeteria worker, not lunch lord. Postal worker, not mailman. Boss, not “lady boss”.

    5. Wilbur*

      I do love how we’re getting reports on all these employees performances in recent letters. As if their performance is relevant at all to whatever little weirdsy their coworker/employee does. Just tell people you’d prefer something else.

    6. Anon Attorney*

      The commentariat leans a bit antisocial, which is fine for what you do in your own time, but at work you have to be willing to interact with other people in a warm, polite manner. Which includes not acting like you’re in the witness protection program. In fact, at some jobs, people actually form friendships!

  9. Dark Macadamia*

    LW2’s answers would make me significantly more curious (nosy) about them and not in a positive way, lol. I’d be really tempted to ask increasingly odd questions to see if I could get them to give a straight answer about anything.

    1. Avii*

      Now, y’see, I’m kinda on LW2’s side here. I’m a fairly private person who doesn’t care much for small talk at work, and while I haven’t gone about it quite as oddly as the writer did I have most certainly dodged a lot of personal questions and tried to politely make it clear that I didn’t want to engage in such conversations. But I did have one coworker who had previously worked as a sports reporter and who had a bad habit of treating every conversation as an interview, and trying to deflect from a topic would just result in him being more persistent and invasive with his questioning. The only way to get him off-track was to ask *him*, in response, “Why do you think you need to know that?”

      1. MK*

        The isuue with OP’s behaviour is that, while they say they give these odd answers because their private life is none of their coworkers’ business, they act in a way that is more likely to put attention on them. These answers don’t really give “leave me alone” vibes, more like “aren’t I clever?”.

        1. Irish Teacher.*

          Honestly, they would probably either make me think the person was hiding something major or more likely that they were a drama llama who was trying to make a mystery out of it to make themself sound interesting. Neither result is likely to be what the LW wants.

        2. Antilles*

          These answers don’t really give “leave me alone” vibes, more like “aren’t I clever?”.
          Or, alternatively, “there’s a juicy story here” vibes.
          You’re sometimes married, that’s an interesting framing. What does that even mean? Is your relationship some on/off disaster? Are you and your spouse on the rocks so you sometimes wish you weren’t together? Is someone cheating? Should I get a bowl of popcorn to enjoy the movie that is your life?

      2. I&I*

        In the case of ‘Do you have kids?’, at least, I read it less as prying and more as an attempt to gauge how understanding LW2 was likely to be about a problem the co-worker was having. The kid was doing something that might make people question their professionalism if they didn’t have a realistic understanding of what parenting is like.

        I’d guess any answer that amounted to, ‘I understand children are not adults and I’m not judging you,’ is all the co-worker was looking for.

      3. Drama Hedgehog*

        I think it’s absolutely fine for the OP to want to be private and not engage much in small talk – I’m that way myself. But this is not the way to go about it. The answers they describe are so out of the ordinary that they are just going to generate more questions, more engagement, and more speculation. They sound like the responses of a drama llama who is looking for the attention, not a private person who wants to keep some things to themselves.

        1. Neptune*

          Agreed. I don’t know if the LW is really socially awkward or new to the workplace or something (based on the sense of surprise that anyone would make non-work-related conversation and the concern about being fired for giving odd answers to personal questions) but there are totally ways to avoid sharing about your personal life at work and tons of people do it. This just isn’t it! It comes off as way more attention-seeking than just giving some kind of bare-minimum answer then changing the subject.

          1. Mad Scientist*

            New to the workforce certainly could explain it! I cringe to think of the way I answered questions like this when I was new to the workforce (and definitely a bit socially awkward). I remember being so terrified that I would be judged by my answers that I’d just freeze up. I lived with my then-boyfriend (now-husband) and thought this could be seen as scandalous because we weren’t married and I work in a relatively conservative industry, so I kept referring to him as my “roommate” (which I justified to myself because it was *technically* true…) But at some point a coworker asked an innocent small-talk question about my “roommates” that I couldn’t answer logically without outright lying, and I basically blurted out “I actually live with my boyfriend, I’m so sorry, I didn’t mean to be weird about it” lol… Thankfully, my coworker laughed it off and I learned a valuable lesson about how to have normal human interactions at work. Like I said, I cringe in retrospect!

          2. Kuleta*

            Or post-Covid lockdown. One advantage of WFH was not having to be in the same physical space with colleagues we couldn’t stand in the first place. Since then, we’ve talked here many times about colleagues who’ve become don’t-talk-to-me-unless-it’s-work-related.

      4. JMU*

        “I did have one coworker who (…) had a bad habit of treating every conversation as an interview”

        This is why I think Allison’s suggestion of turning the question around is wrong. That works for 90% of people (who are just making small talk, or looking for permission to talk about their own kids, hobbies etc.). But for the other 10% who are genuinely curious it backfires. Asking about their kids signals that you are fine with them asking about yours.

        Is there a entirely graceful way to close off inquiries about a certain socially-acceptable topic? Not really, but LW#2’s answers were very awkward. (I imagine she was stressed out and not really thinking things through.) In her shoes I would have said “sorry, but I do not really enjoy discussing X at work” with a smile and moved on.

      6. WeirdChemist*

        But that’s an issue with that specific person, not small talk in general. It’s not unreasonable to treat convos with this particular person this way, because you now know that this is how they handle conversations. It *is* weird if you go into *every* conversation with the assumption that the person is a former investigative reporter and won’t respect boundaries.

        With people you don’t know very well, start by responding with bland, but friendly answers. If they then show themselves as overly nosey weirdos, alter accordingly

        1. Avii*

          Oh, ‘bland but friendly’ certainly is my normal approach. But ‘why do you think you need to know that’ is what I’m always thinking when people start in on those kinds of subjects. That particular coworker was just the only one who got pushy enough for me to say it out loud. I’ve never asked such questions myself of my coworkers, because I don’t think it’s any of my business.

          1. Yawnley*

            I genuinely feel sorry for people who think this way. I’ve met some of my absolute best friends at various workplaces over the years. Y’all are missing out on potentially amazing relationships. And for what??

      7. Anon Attorney*

        There’s nothing wrong with you feeling that way, but you should keep in mind Alison’s advice. Part of being in a professional environment is being able to interact with other people, which may include some small talk.

    2. learnedthehardway*

      Some people would definitely do that. They shouldn’t, but give people a mystery and they’re going to want to figure it out, even if it is irrelevant to the work being done.

      It would be better for the OP to just say that they don’t like discussing their personal life at work.

  10. CrabbyLibrarian*

    Unfortunately, I’m coming across the situation that LW1 described more and more these days. I’m all for destigmatizing mental health, but I’ve had folks use the “your behavior/tone/words trigger me” as an attempt to redirect the conversation when they are receiving tough feedback.

    It ties into this concept I learned of recently called “weaponzing boundaries.” Setting boundaries is an effective way for a person to manage their triggers, but when boundaries are used to attempt to control the behavior of others, that’s not okay. I’ve had more than one conversation when an employee has brought up something being triggering and it’s immediately followed by a conversation about what I (the manager) should be doing to prevent them from feeling that way.

    The point of recognizing your triggers is so that YOU can deal with them. It is not for you to put responsibility on others.

    1. Daria grace*

      Good boundaries are about what the person setting them does (eg, if I am spoken to disrespectfully I will leave the meeting). They ideally aren’t a list of demands for other people (eg. You are not allowed to be critical of me), especially not unclear demands like is happening to the OP

      2. I should really pick a name*

        And the person setting the boundaries needs to accept that holding them may have consequences.

      3. Eldritch Office Worker*

        Yes I’m finding I have to explain this over and over with young people new to the workforce.

      4. Joana*

        There are perhaps versions of this where you’re putting an onus on someone else, but it’s reasonable. “Don’t make SA jokes or I’m going to stop talking with you” is reasonable. “Don’t give me mild, completely warranted criticism that’s part of your job or I’ll start crying” is manipulative.

          1. Joana*

            True, but there are times when “Please stop doing this”, whether you give them consequences or not, is the reasonable reaction to something and there’s times when it’s not. Offensive, potentially triggering jokes is one of them. Feedback on your performance, unless the person is actually being mean-spirited, is not.

        2. NotBatman*

          Yes! “I have trouble getting useful information from your feedback if you don’t tell me outright it’s critical” is a reasonable boundary. “Would you be willing to let me know in advance what a meeting is about so that I can be prepared?” is a reasonable boundary. “Don’t criticize my work” is not reasonable, and can’t be implemented in a useful way.

          1. MigraineMonth*

            I think that’s moving from the boundary (what you choose to do in a situation, such as excusing yourself if you think you’re on the verge of having a panic attack) to asking for accommodation, which is the next step for LW and the employee. As Alison pointed out, some accommodations are reasonable (letting someone know what a meeting is about beforehand) and some aren’t (never criticize my work).

      5. Orv*

        Wow, this comment thread has been incredibly useful. It clarified some stuff I’ve been thinking for a while.

    2. Indolent Libertine*

      I’m really curious how LW1’s employee imagines that anyone’s working life could possibly be devoid of any correction or criticism. This is like a caricature of “kids these days” and yes, it’s a textbook instance of weaponized therapy-speak.

      1. WS*

        I have a co-worker in her late 50s who does it, so definitely not age-group exclusive. She also likes to tell us about how great therapy is and that we should all go even if we don’t think we have problems, then “discreetly” tell people that another specific co-worker would be “much emotionally healthier” if they did.

        2. Zap R.*

          Oh, lord. I get the whole “everyone should go to therapy” thing to an extent but I am also a very mentally ill person who’s spent the majority of my life on waiting lists therapy. Not everyone should go to therapy.

          1. MigraineMonth*

            I was speaking with someone who was annoyed that her new therapist asked her about the goals she wanted to achieve; she thought therapy should be about deepening self-knowledge and not subscribing to capitalist philosophy.

            I said that was great for her, but the only reason I was employable was because of goal-based Cognitive Behavioral therapy. Self-knowledge is great, but as long as we’re in this a capitalist system I also need a job so I can have food and housing.

            1. metadata minion*

              It’s also kind of weird to interpret that question as only meaning work/money related goals! “To get to know myself better” or “to be less anxious” are both very normal therapy goals.

          2. AcademiaNut*

            I did a back of the envelope calculation about what would be needed for everyone to have weekly therapy appointment, on average (some would need less, some would need much more, pediatric therapy is more labour intensive, includes personal as well as family/relationship therapy). You’d need ~14% of the working population to be therapists, assuming each therapist took an average of 30 1 hour appointments a week, started professional practice at age 25, retired at age 65, and took an average of 3 years of leave during their career (parental, medical, sabbaticals, etc).

            So yes, everyone going to therapy has problems with scalability.

        3. I Have RBF*

          I would become rapidly annoyed at that coworker. I don’t want to spend money for someone to try to tell me who I should be.

      2. The Prettiest Curse*

        And also, in any job where you have a degree of autonomy, you will be asked to update your boss on your current work at some point. It’s easy to do this in writing if necessary (our team does this by email at the start of each week), but it’s entirely reasonable to ask this for the purposes of assessing progress and planning and assigning work tasks.

        1. Pastor Petty Labelle*

          What you said.

          There isn’t even a hint that OP is criticizing the employee’s choices on how to prioritize her work. She just needs to know so she knows what is still outstanding, what might need to be moved up the list and what might need to be shuffled off to someone else.

          OP can try to work with employee but employee has to realize that it is literally OP’s job to manager and that is not going to change.

      3. bamcheeks*

        They don’t say they so expect it to be free of criticism.

        I think this is the leap that you’ve got to be careful NOT to make unless it’s justified. Someone who is struggling with PTSD triggers is NOT “weaponising boundaries” or demanding that the triggering behaviour is simply eliminated from their life. Very often they are someone who is trying desperately to engage despite being triggered. This could be an employee who wants to progress, knows they need to engage with one-to-ones, is trying desperately hard to stay grounded and focussed, but still gets overwhelmed. They could be searching harder than LW for a solution but not finding one. Alison is right that LW can’t solve this for them. But they can probably make it worse by treating the employee as if they’re just trying to shirk criticism or get away with something.

        One thing I would do, however, is direct them to the EAP if you have one. They can’t usually offer full counselling (some can!) but they probably can help the employer figure out whether counselling or any other medical treatment is an option. Or maybe even figuring out whether it’s LW’s physical stance, accent, aftershave or whatever that makes the triggers hard to deal with and asking to move to a different manager.

        1. ABC123*

          But that doesn’t help the writer in the meantime. It’s great as a long term solution but doesn’t address the immediate issue

          And how would you set guidelines around asking to have managers switched? That seems like a Pandora’s box of

          1. bamcheeks*

            You could say this for literally any reasonable accommodation. That’s not a sufficient legal reason NOT to make a reasonable accommodation for someone!

            1. ABC123*

              Well it is all hypothetical because in the scenario the employee hasn’t made a formal request for accomodation.

              If they do, then it is a matter of whether the accomodation is reasonable, or not. What if there is only one manager in the business? Or if say the employee, a llama groomer, is legally required to be supervised by a Certified Expert Llama Groomer, so having them report to one of the other managers (all teapot experts) would put you in violation of regulations?

              1. bamcheeks*

                So I’d love someone who works with the ADA to chime in here and say whether or not that’s how it works. Here in the UK, the duty is on the employer to make reasonable adjustments if they know the employee has a disability or a health condition– the employee doesn’t have to ask for a specific adjustment through a formal process. If an employee tells you they have a health condition (and “I’m being triggered by X” would absolutely count), you have a duty to make reasonable adjustments, and if the employee was fired for failing to perform their job, the employer would absolutely be liable for not having gone through a process to identify and implement adjustments. The process for identifying reasonable adjustments is just as much on you as on the employee.

                Everything I can see about the ADA says it works the same way, eg. “An employer’s obligation to provide reasonable accommodation applies only to known physical or mental limitations. However, this does not mean that an applicant or employee must always inform you of a disability. If a disability is obvious, e.g., the applicant uses a wheelchair, the employer “knows” of the disability even if the applicant never mentions it.” I mean, that sounds to me like the duty works the same way as in the UK, and isn’t triggered by the employee formally requesting accommodations– I can’t see how the duty could only be triggered by the employee requesting accommodations if technically you can know about a disability that the employee hasn’t told you about.

                I’ve heard people in the UK talk about the ADA as very similar to our legislation, but that may be a misunderstanding. It would be quite significantly different from our legislation if this employee wouldn’t be protected by it until they’ve made a request for accommodations.

      4. Mrovka*

        “Ah well. I guess if it weren’t work, they wouldn’t have to pay us to do it.” – fantastic coworker bringing a gentle reality check to a work-related bitch session.

        The key – Work is, well, work. Not relaxation, not fun. Which is why they pay money for someone else to do it.

        1. Elle*

          This is a great response. I have folks who come to me with outraged complaints that are 100% par for the course for our role and I’m always unsure as how to respond.

    3. JSPA*

      I see a non zero chance that the letter writer is being played, Though of course they are a better judge of this than the internet, and they clearly feel the emotions / tears are legitimate.

      If somebody knows that they can’t effectively take direction and feedback, they honestly have three options:

      1. run their own business, potentially very successfully ( Some of our current multi millionaire / billionaires come to mind)

      2. be so proactive in their regular job (managing themselves, before the manager has a chance to weigh in, or even suggest how to do this)

      3. Treat the job as some sort of reality show, in which they’re playing the role of a conscientious employee for their own purposes.

      I got the last from a friend / frienemy with diagnosed ODD, which can be a beast of a condition to get a handle on, from what I gather? He said he could usually play his role for up to several weeks at a time, provided he had a few weeks of break in between. He therefore picked up short-term contacts with known difficult people, so if he cracked or blew up early, the outside assumption was that the problem was the manager.

      The rub is, this is advice we could give to the employee. Chances are that if this comes from the manager, it will be recieved as “intrusive parenting” or “an attempt to control” (or some other trigger). If there were some third person in the equation, who could (pseudo) commiserate with the problem employee, and suggest these as workarounds, that couuuuuld be an avenue (though i’m not holding my breath).

      Maybe the manager could bump up the task of “Three hours of consulting the internet on how to handle a job or boss that triggers your unresolved trauma,” and hope that they have anonymized the situation adequately, that the report will find this thread (or a useful reddit), and put it to use???

    4. Elle*

      I’ve supervised someone like this as well. She asked for no deadlines because deadlines trigger her memories of experiencing racism. It was hard to work and supervise her.

        1. Elle*

          She did not want deadlines or feedback. The reality of her job (and most jobs) is that there will be deadlines and feedback is a part of working. She was not new to working. She had been in the workforce over 20 years. I was candid with her and she did not get a glowing annual review due to her missed deadlines. She complained to HR but I documented everything. It wasn’t a high pressure job and she was given notice of any project deadlines weeks in advance. She has sought promotions but has not gotten them due to her work ethic.

            1. Elle*

              She’s come close to a PIP a few times. She does the basics of her job well but flounders anytime a special assignment comes up. And the crazy thing is that she’s always asking how she can do better and be promoted. We give her the opportunity and she gets upset when there’s a deadline or a meeting to go to. She wants a better title and more money but not the responsibility that comes with it.

              1. Bossy*

                How sad. It’s amazing to me that people will enthusiastically hold themselves back but let someone else do it and they get all pissed off. She won’t push herself to therapy but will complain when not handed a promotion. Ok.

                1. Elle*

                  It’s hard because she always bring up the trauma issue. But this is the job and if she doesn’t like it she should leave. She hasn’t left.

              2. Annie*

                That seems wild to me. If a person can’t even handle the basics of a job (reasonable feedback), much less specifics of that job (deadlines), then how in the heck do they think they can even hold a job? I get accommodations, when reasonable, but some things are just basic part of working.

      2. sheworkshardforthemoney*

        My response would be you will be given basic work because tax deadlines are fixed in stone and we can’t afford to pay financial penalties because you feel triggered by them.

        2. Hroethvitnir*

          If we’re speculating on actual plausible reasons, you could have experienced having much shorter and more harshly enforced deadlines than white people around you.

          That obviously wouldn’t justify wanting no deadlines?! If they had been meticulous about meeting them but anxious about the process, that’s one thing. Just. Not meeting deadlines and thinking they should be exempt? Um. No.

    5. Les*

      I’m enjoying the same experience and it’s getting harder and harder to not blurt out, “Who cares?” I want to be empathetic, but I too have uncomfortable things with which I have to deal and it has never once occurred to me to make them someone else’s problem. I fear one day I’ll just have had enough and say, “Great. Go be triggered somewhere else and come back when you’re ready to engage with me and the work.” In the meantime, there’s nothing else to do but say, “regardless, we’ve got to get this done/discuss this issue/solve this problem so how are we going to do it?

      1. Danni Evans*

        Yeah, it can definitely get to be too much. OTOH, even Gordon Ramsay (who’s famous for screaming at and insulting people on his shows) stopped using a common shortened version of one guy’s name because it was the nickname his abusive dad used, so it’s worth considering if there’s an easy adjustment that can be made to avoid a trigger.

        1. lyonite*

          But that’s the key–not using a nickname is an easy adjustment, never asking for an update on where you are with work tasks is not.

        2. Joana*

          To be fair, a lot of Gordon Ramsay’s meanness and screaming was played-up for American television. Apparently he’s a lot less like that on the British versions of shows he’s in. But that’s an example of that a lot of people are more reasonable than you think they are/expect them to be.

          1. Zap R.*

            I remember a season of Master Chef where he had a blind contestant and he was very cool about making accommodations and work-arounds for her (e.g. Teaching her how to scrape her pie crust with a knife so she could *listen* for doneness instead of relying on the colour)

            Really made me see him in a whole new light. And the blind contestant ended up winning that season!

            1. Danni Evans*

              I remember that season too! And seeing him with kids is totally different as well. Agreed that his TV persona is exaggerated… but even with that, he often shows great examples of making adjustments for individual people as long as they’re willing to work & learn… he’s pretty harsh on the folks who think they know everything, or the ones who make a million excuses and don’t take responsibility for their part in improving (like some of the examples in these posts!)

              1. EchoGirl*

                IIRC Ramsey also had an abusive parent. So he’s probably especially sympathetic to that particular situation.

    6. Frieda*

      Yeah, I had a capricious, unpredictable boss who liked to shout and who randomly targeted people for vitriol. I realized pretty quickly that my response to her (to freeze up and have a huge uptick in anxiety later) was because she’s a lot like my mom.

      Off to therapy with me! But I didn’t *tell* her any of that, and it would not have improved my situation had I done so.

      1. Eldritch Office Worker*

        Good choice. I had a coworker who was in her 50s and regularly told her boss that she was triggered because the boss reminded her so much of her mom and it made her unable to work. That…did not go well. They worked together for many years but it was never a good relationship.

      2. Person from the Resume*

        But also shout and random vitriol is not at all good workplace behavior.

        An acceptable boundary is that when she starts to shout, you leave the area and return to the discussion once she’s calmed down.

    7. iglwif*

      I really feel for LW1, and also for LW1’s employee, who needs to do her own emotional work to figure this out.

      I have the specific kind of childhood trauma that makes me react very strongly to raised voices (especially deeper voices) and has given me a lasting aversion to conflict. I’ve done a lot of therapy about these (and other) things, which hasn’t made the reaction go away, but has taught me to talk myself down from it much more effectively. AND ALSO, a few years ago I was on a video call with my then dotted line manager and two middle-aged male VPs, and when the latter started arguing with each other in loud, angry-sounding voices about the topic of the meeting, I had to mute myself and turn off my camera so I could have the resulting panic attack in private. (These guys were not yelling at me. I’m not convinced they even remembered I was on the call. It terrified me anyway.)

      I’ve had outsized internal reactions to perfectly valid workplace feedback in the past. I’ve cried in office washrooms a non-zero number of times. I’ve tried to advocate for myself and ended up tearing up embarrassingly. All of this sucks.

      And it is also all my own issue to solve. (Except the yelling on the video call, which sadly turned out to be more or less SOP. That was extremely unprofessional and I’m very glad I don’t work with those guys anymore.) I can ask for accommodations like “if possible, let me know what meetings are about in advance.” I can express reasonable preferences for receiving feedback (e.g., in writing vs in person), and I might get what I ask for or I might not. It is my manager’s job to be professional — to not yell or verbally abuse me or whatever. It is not her job to refrain from giving me reasonable and valid feedback (?!) because inside my head I sometimes react badly to it.

    8. Emily of New Moon*

      Ugh, I hate the trendy/social media use of “triggered” to mean “mildly offended or irritated.”

    9. Emily of New Moon*

      My previous comments notwithstanding, it is possible that she really is triggered in the medical/psychiatric sense. LW said that Coworker told them, “your style reminds me of trauma.” Could it be possible that “style” means fashion, and the way LW dresses reminds Coworker of a toxic person from their past? Would it be reasonable for LW to dress differently if that is the case?
      But if “style” means the way that LW walks, talks, looks, etc. then Coworker needs to find a new job where they won’t be constantly triggered by working with someone who reminds them of someone else.
      Then there’s the possibility that Coworker isn’t triggered at all, and is just being a douche.

      1. A new penguin*

        I’m not a lawyer, but I’m struggling to see how asking OP to change their fashion style would really be reasonable. Maybe if it was “Please stop wearing that specific purple hat” or something, but if OP typically wears, say, black slacks and pastel cardigans, it seems excessive to ask them to go out and buy a whole new work wardrobe that’s visibly different from what they’re comfortable with.

        1. Joana*

          Yep. We had a similar conversation on a letter about OP’s coworker having OCD and the work place having a bunch of rules about how to dress etc so it wouldn’t trigger the coworker’s OCD. There are times when working around someone’s problems is reasonable, but when it starts inconveniencing others, you need to take a step back and really consider it.

          1. I Have RBF*

            Yeah, if someone tries to tell me that my wearing pants when I have boobs is “triggering” or something, and that I should start wearing dresses so as not to trigger them, my initial reaction would be very vitriolic, because being expected to perform femininity is one of my pet peeves/”triggers”.

      2. MigraineMonth*

        If it really is just LW that is prompting the emotional reactions, the employee needs to either figure out what it is and ask for an accommodation if it’s reasonable (don’t stand over me might be reasonable; don’t speak because your voice reminds me of my abuser wouldn’t work) or find a different manager.

        Having repeated emotional meltdowns when asked about routine parts of the job is not a solution.

    10. Blue Pen*

      Yes, I agree. I’m 100% all for mental health awareness becoming more and more accepted and integrated into our larger culture, but I don’t think we’ve fully figured out what that looks like in practice within the workplace. Work is not your therapist’s office, and for every action, there is a reaction.

      Like you said, my triggers are my triggers; and outside of blatant disrespect from my manager or co-worker, it’s not on my colleagues to dance around those triggers to make me more comfortable. Life is life, and if one’s triggers are so intense that they cannot be contained to the best of the individual’s ability, then this is probably not the right job for that person.

  11. Viette*

    LW2 – in order to sort out what to do, it may be helpful to ask yourself: what outcome did you WANT to have happen when you answered the way you did?

    I don’t mean that say ‘what the heck were you thinking, omg’. I mean genuinely what relationship WERE you hoping would occur? You say “how can I fix this?” — but what do you think is wrong about what’s happened? You’re in a weird and uncomfortable spot having put off and alienated some of your coworkers, but to an outside observer it would seem like you did that on purpose. But you didn’t, so what were you trying to do?

    If you’d like to dig even deeper, maybe think about who in your life gave you the idea that that was a way a person might respond to a co-worker’s question, and what were they all about?

    When the effects of your actions are so out of line with the norm and also evidently so out of line with what you wanted to have happen, you’d do well to consider this.

    2. D*

      I would hazard a guess what OP2 wants is to be one of those mysterious types that you realize years into knowing them that you know nothing about. And those people exist and are even occasionally mentioned on this blog.

      But OP2 doesn’t seem to realize that those people exist not by refusing to answer questions, but by deflecting a conversation before anyone can even ask those questions, or cleverly not answer them without leaving their conversation partner realizing they didn’t answer.

      It requires a *lot* of conversational skill. For instance, the answer to something like, “Ah, kids, you know? You don’t have any kids, do you?” would be to respond with something like, “Oh, I don’t mind. As long as he doesn’t use crayons on my cubicle walls!” which tells the other person absolutely nothing but continues the conversation relatively naturally.

      (as you can tell, I’m not really an expert at this conversational deflection, either)

      1. Great Frogs of Literature*

        I’m not an expert either, but if I were trying to deflect in this situation, I’d probably be going with something like, “Oh, I love kids! [How old is your son/what grade is he in/increasingly specific questions that draw the coworker out about what is, for many people, a favorite subject.]” It won’t work with everyone, and you need to be willing to engage in the extremely kid-centric discussion that follows (and possibly many more in future), but if you can respond with something enthusiastic and immediately pivot to something your conversational partner is happy to talk about at length, by the end of it they may not even remember that they asked if you have kids.

      2. Orv*

        It’s tough. I’ve been accused of over-sharing in the past, so I try to swerve hard in the other direction just to be safe, but it’s not easy to do without coming off as standoffish.

    3. Myrin*

      ” to an outside observer it would seem like you did that on purpose. But you didn’t, so what were you trying to do?”

      Didn’t she? I’m not too clear on that, honestly. Her rationale for answering at least the “partnered?” question the way she did was, by her own words, “I don’t see what that has to do with work”. So while she might not have intentionally set out to actively alienate her coworker, it seems like her reasoning for giving that kind of answer was thinking “That’s none of your business” which is effectively the same thing.

    4. I&I*

      And a tip to add to this good advice. Since you say you ‘don’t see what [personal information] has to do with work,’ I assume you’re trying to maintain boundaries and privacy.

      As others have said, these weirdly rude answers are actually going to draw attention. If you want to be private, you need to be boring. Are you in a relationship? Yes/not right now. Do you have kids? No.* Have you finished the spreadsheets? Ah, there’s something you’d like to say about that.

      *The answer you gave there will almost certainly have been read as ‘no,’ because parents are generally proud of their kids and claiming them is kind of the whole point. If my kid thought I wouldn’t admit they existed I’d expect it to hurt their feelings.

      I also think you need to make a distinction in your own mind between ‘personal’ and ‘private’. What you do in the bedroom is private; whether you have a partner is merely personal. The questions you’re wisecracking are only about the most basic kind of information that you’d put on a census form – which is to say, it’s pretty much public. The postman who delivers your letters probably knows that much.

      Try thinking of co-workers in the same category as neighbours: they don’t have to know what happens behind your closed door, but knowing who you live with isn’t uncovering any secrets.

      1. Viette*

        This is a good point. It does sometimes help to consider what the point of a coworker asking about family is, and apply the conversation to that instead. At the most benign, why do they want to know about kids? They are looking for a shared experience or relational point so they can have an interpersonal connection in which to couch work interactions. Maybe they’re trying to get a feel for your values and priorities to see if yours align with theirs. This is a big part of society and while I know a lot of folks are like, I hate this and never want a coworker to place me in a social context or assess our comparative values, it at least gives some framework to why refusing to allow any of that to ever happen DOES lead to difficulty maintaining work relationships.

        1. I&I*

          I think if a co-worker is set on assessing your comparative values, they’re going to find a way to do it whether you tell them if you have kids or not.

        2. amoeba*

          Or, I mean, they just like to connect to people on a slightly personal level because it’s nice to have something to chat about during lunch/coffee/whatever? That’s just a pretty normal human instinct – spending 8 h a day in a room full of virtually complete strangers you have zero personal connection to will be uncomfortable for the vast majority of us.

          (And it definitely doesn’t need to be something private or super personal, it could very well be just their favourite Netflix shows or whatever! Kids and spouses are just something that most people are happy to talk about casually, which is why people bring it up.)

        3. Falling Diphthong*

          They are looking for a shared experience or relational point so they can have an interpersonal connection in which to couch work interactions.
          I think this is well put. They’re trying to figure out how to do chit chat with you, and how we ask about someone’s weekend depends on whether we know if they have a partner, kids, etc. Most of these questions are people seeking for “We both have kids; we can talk about that common experience” or “Alice spends her weekends hiking, so I can ask her if she took any interesting hikes this weekend.”

      2. Irish Teacher.*

        Yeah, I once had a couple of students who tried to delay getting any work done by asking me the most ridiculous personal questions. Most of the questions would have been fine on their own, if they weren’t in a list: “are you married?” “do you have kids?” “do you have a boyfriend?” “who do you live with?” “did you buy a new laptop?” (when teachers were given school laptops), “where did you get it?” “how much did it cost?” “where do you live?”

        I basically took to boring them into stopping. “Are you married?” “No.” “Do you have a boyfriend?” “No.” “Do you have kids?” “No.” “Do you have a favourite soccer team?” “No.” “Do you like such a TV show?” “No.” Eventually, one of them commented that I had a very boring life and I responded that it could never be boring with them in it.

        But had I started a “maybe I do and maybe I don’t,” it would likely have led to them trying to find my social media accounts or questioning other teachers about me or something because it would both have given the impression there was something worth finding out and also that they could upset me or get a reaction by asking, which was also part of what they wanted.

        Now, hopefully adults wouldn’t behave quite like that but while they might not do it openly, it would still start them wondering and perhaps quietly trying to find out what the secret is.

        1. Bast*

          I remember this trick in school! And the crazy thing was, it actually worked on some teachers. We used to employ it frequently when there was a test we didn’t want to take, and we’d keep the teacher talking so long that he’d look up, realize he had spent too much time chatting, and postpone the test until the next day.

  12. Mark*

    LW2 I wish you had expanded a bit for giving the responses you did, especially about children. You could have pivoted so easily, into an innocuous comment, “your child reminds me so much about me/ niece/ nephew/ neighbours kid and guess an age. Deflect while still not answering the question.

    What do you say when people ask where you live/ how long your commute is / if you drive or take the train? “Oh around” “in a living unit” “sporadically”.

    Best of luck but you are probably best of working for a company that has taken a vow of silence or equivalent.

    3. FuzzFrogs*

      As someone who works with small, curious children, there are so many ways to answer questions like this in a way that doesn’t reveal anything about you! An example of a conversation I recently had:

      Child: Where do you live?
      Me: About twenty minutes from here.
      C: Is it a house?
      M: It is.
      C: What color is it?
      M: It’s yellow. Did you like the stories I read? Which one was your favorite?

      OP2 may benefit from looking up a list of common acquaintance questions and deciding what answers they’re comfortable giving. (And then, asking a friend they trust for feedback.)

  13. Luna*

    LW Manager: it’s not your job to play psychiatrist or manage anyone’s moods. They may not be up to the job, and that’s ok.

    1. Empress Ki*

      Providing a reasonable accomoodation is part of managing, not playing psychiatrists. The problem here is that the employee’s request isn’t reasonable.

      1. Boof*

        But just as you said, in this scenario the employee is expecting their boss to figure out a plan for their emotional needs, not requesting a specific accomodation. So they are indeed demanding their boss play psychiatrist, which their boss should absolutely decline to do so. “if you have a request for accommodation, please let me know so I can review. Otherwise discussing your work and progress with me is an essential part of your job. Does it make sense for us to continue?”

  14. Observer*

    #2 – Alison is right. You *could* be fired for this, assuming you are in the US, because in 49 states you can get fired for pretty much anything outside of specific protected categories (eg you can’t be fired because someone doesn’t like your ethnicity, religion, etc.)

    But, there will certainly be repercussions to your behavior. For one thing, Alison is right that it’s easier to work with people who like you, at least on a surface level. And you are doing everything to keep that from happening. In fact, I think that Alison understates the case. She is right that you are coming off as rude and cold. But you are also coming off as making fun of your coworkers. Like what kind of answer is “Maybe” to the question of whether you have kids?

    I do think that in the long term, your job is at risk, and so is your career. Because your behavior is likely to create the kind of ill will that makes people less likely to cut you some slack when (not *if*) you have a less than stellar day. And unless you are absolutely stellar at what you do at least 90% of the time, it would not shock me if your work got managed and measured with much more of a negative lens than your coworkers.

    And the problem is that when you move on, people are likely to remember you for the wrong reasons. You will be the person who “acted like a jerk when people made small talk”; “made a big show of hiding their personal life”; “acted like we were all a bunch of slackers for daring to make small talk” etc.

    Now a lot of people are going to say that those (and similar negative) descriptions of your behavior are not accurate. And they would be correct. But that’s not going to be helpful to you if that’s the impression people get. And it is highly likely that people will get that kind of impression.

    You seem to take for granted that THE “correct” way to respond to any question whose answer is not related to work is to obfuscate. Why? And why would you go to this much effort? Sure, it’s not a LOT of effort, per se. But the back and forth over whether you have kids is a lot more than a simple “yes” or “no”, or even “yeah, kids.” with a pivot to whatever, if you don’t want to talk about it for some reason.

    I’m curious what prompted you to write in, and why you think you might be fired over this?

    1. Airy*

      I wonder if they’ve been fired before for social behaviour reasons they didn’t understand or anticipate. Saying “I think I came off kind of weird earlier when you asked me about (thing). Sometimes talking to new people makes me nervous and afterward I’m like, why did I say that? The real answer is (yes/no)” as applicable *might* help.

    2. Roland*

      This was originally posted on AITA and someone suggested that OP ask AAM as well, which was well-recieved. So I imagine OP was wondering about the personal angle more than the professional to begin with, but ofc just a guess.

      1. Observer*

        That makes some sense. But why did they post there? Usually people post on AITA because someone has said something or something has happened.

        1. Ellis Bell*

          I got the impression that OP was disconcerted by the “funny look” they were given when they failed to respond about kids, so they probably posted on AITA because they wanted to know if they were in the wrong for not answering, or if the coworker was for asking non work questions.

      2. EDIA*

        I looked up the AITA post. They also posted in WorkAdvice, with some way heavier stuff than the letter to AAM. I think their current Situation arose from an overcorrection of a previous job where they were way oversharing: details of gnarly physical health problems, suicidal ideation—the kind of personal, uncomfortable stuff you seek support from intimate friends and family. That wasn’t well received, so when a friend advised them not to share personal stuff at the new job, they took it to the other extreme, and now they’re here.

        1. MigraineMonth*

          Ahhh, yeah, that makes sense. LW, we have to find the middle path between oversharing and acting rude towards people who try to have pretty standard small talk with you.

          For most personal questions (as opposed to *private*, which would be not-for-work details about sex life, detailed medical/mental health info, legal problems, etc), a simple answer is usually not oversharing. Yes, I’m married. No, I don’t have kids. I’m planning to go hiking next weekend. I went to a barbeque last weekend.

          Keep it simple and dull. It’s better to be boring at work than to be known for a messy personal life.

    3. Ellis Bell*

      The really wild thing is that OP isn’t really obfuscating anything; if your answer is “maybe” you have kids, you don’t have kids. If you’re in a relationship, “sometimes”, then the answer very clearly implies you’re not in a relationship. OP is already effectively saying “no I don’t have kids or a relationship”, they’re just saying it in the rudest way possible. I know OP was trying to send a “maybe yes, maybe no” vibe to imply they’re unknowable, and try to get people to stop asking, but they’re not really achieving either goal and pissing people off. So they should just embrace the actual direct wording of “no”, whether it’s because they don’t have those things, or if they just don’t want to disclose. They can just choose that single word if they want to put the least amount of politeness in, but it’s always a winner to show return interest in the person asking: “Not me personally, but how about you?”

      1. Emily of New Moon*

        “Maybe” doesn’t necessarily mean “no” in this case. It could also mean, “I have kids but I’m not comfortable sharing this information with you because of reasons.” The reasons could be anything from death of a child to estrangement from a child to….anything, really. I do agree that “maybe” isn’t a good answer for the reasons that Allison and everyone else said.

      2. Irish Teacher.*

        Yeah, most people seem to be assuming they are single and childless. I’d have assumed the opposite about the relationship at least, because if you are single, it’s easy to say so and there’s really nothing to hide there. I would have assumed they are in a relationship and are avoiding the question because they don’t want to talk about it for some reason.

  15. Observer*

    #5 – Ran for office.

    Take it off your resume. The resume is a marketing document that is intended to highlight your work experience and possibly other experiences relevant to work. It is not intended to provide a list of every non-recreational activity you have ever taken part in, so you can and should leave out anything that’s not work related.

    The fact that it comes up in a Google search doesn’t matter. If you were on America’s Got Talent, or took part in competitive dance etc. that might come up on Google as well, but you still would not put it on your resume.

    If I saw this on a resume, I would be a bit concerned. Because I’d be wondering why you think it’s relevant. What skills do you think that experience gave you, that are relevant to the workplace? Are you going to be in “candidate mode” all the time? In other words, the issue is not which party line you were running on. Nor even that you were involved in politics at some point. But that putting it in a list of job activities makes me wonder how that actually translates into your work persona.

    1. carrot cake*

      Running for office involves “soft” skills, e.g. clearly-spoken and -written communication, level-headedness, a visionary mindset, etc. Framing relevancy of those skills as being in constant “candidate mode” is an odd take.

      That said, I agree with AG to leave it off.

      1. Testing*

        In the autumn of 2024, I’m not sure running for office does really require those skills you mention… :-D

        2. BatManDan*

          “The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
          To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
          To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.” Douglas Adams

          1. Orv*

            Having worked in an academic department where people were essentially railroaded into the job of chair, trying to make people lead who are actively avoiding it doesn’t work too well either. ;)

            1. linger*

              *nods in academia*
              Actually, the worst-case scenario for us was a former department chair who had political ambitions: he ran for mayor in his hometown, neglecting all department duties in the process.

      2. MK*

        A successful political career maybe involves these things. Simple running for office doesn’t even mean you have them.

        1. Caramel & Cheddar*

          This. I have a loved one who works in politics and if there’s one thing I know about people who run for office, it’s that the mere act of having run says absolutely nothing about their actual skill set or ability to do a job. That’s not intended as shade towards LW — I’m sure you’re great and highly skilled! — just that the bar for entry into running for office is often more about money and your network than it is about skills and what you’d actually bring to the table.

      4. Budget Badger*

        No, it doesn’t. Successfully running for office, being elected and being an effective elected official may require those. But plenty of people run for office without having any of those skills. Just listing the run on the resume tells the employer nothing about whether you actually have those skills or not.

        If OP wants to use their candidacy as evidence of skills, they’d want to be including the metrics and quantitative data to back up their assertion – what accomplishments do they have from that run to talk about? Did they win? Significantly increase their party’s share of the vote? Increase voter registration through a particular campaign? And so on. Whether it’s appropriate to do that or not depends on the job they are going for and the relevance of that work. But merely listing the run? Irrelevant, and potentially distracting to their candidacy.

      5. It’s A Butternut Squash*

        Anyone can run and run poorly. It doesn’t require any particular skills. Maybe some chutzpah?

    2. Seeking Second Childhood*

      How would you suggest someone address the time gap if she actually worked on the campaign as a full-time job for a period of time?

      1. LW 5*

        This is a great question! I was doing it in addition to my full time job, which I think speaks to multitasking well? But I don’t have a gap. But it is a good question for someone like me who did make it their fulltime job!

        I think my biggest question now that I’m removing it from my resume is, do I have it on linkedin with the relevant skills?

        1. Hlao-roo*

          I think keeping the campaign on your LinkedIn or not is up to you, in a “no wrong answers” sort of way.

          If you like your LinkedIn to be a comprehensive work history, and/or want potential interviewers to be able to confirm that the “Alex Smith” whose resume they’re looking at is the same “Alex Smith” who ran for [office] in 2020, and/or [insert any other reason in favor of keeping it on LI here], keep it on!

          If you want your LI to match your resume, and/or [insert any other reason against keeping it on LI here], take it off your LI profile.

    3. LW 5*

      I said it in the letter but could have given an example – I only listed activities about the run that were relevant to the field I work in. I was a one-man shop, so I did everything. If I were a graphic designer, for example, the only things listed would have been “built website, designed logo, designed campaign mailers, designed flyers,” etc.

      There are many aspects of running that are directly relevant to the field I work in. They aren’t all done by federal level candidates but are usually all done by state and local candidates because the money usually isn’t there to hire someone else.

      The relevance to the field should be clear because I listed out the skills used, not just the run. And the skills are directly related to the types of positions I was applying for.

      Perhaps that changes the answer and I should have made that clearer in the letter.

      I’m totally fine leaving it off! I feel I have those skills covered in other ways on my resume. But it wasn’t an out-of-the-blue irrelevant thing. I definitely tied it into what I bring to the table in my field.

      1. Hendry*

        For me, I’d leave it off but it would be more about possibly alienating anyone who might not like your politics, party, etc..

        I agree that a resume is a marketing document, but that doesn’t mean every item has to be strictly work related. There are plenty of non-work related things I would put on one, and as we’ve seen here in other letters it can be beneficial (Jeaopardy winner, First Place in National poetry contest, captain of your college baseball team).

        1. Peanut Hamper*

          Plus, they didn’t win the election. That doesn’t say a lot that’s favorable about how good they were at all of these skills.

          Again, resumes should be about accomplishments, not just “here’s a list of things I did”.

          1. LW 5*

            Well, no one from my party has won in this county in decades so I don’t think that has anything to do with my campaign skills :) I did get a higher percentage of votes than the party was expecting, which I *do* think speaks to those skills.

            Either way, I am fine leaving it fully off and not mentioning it for the relevant skills.

            1. Peanut Hamper*

              Yeah, that first line is probably not something that’s going to come up in a google search for you though. So potential employers would see this on your resume along with the skills you’ve listed, see that you didn’t win, and wonder what’s up. They probably wouldn’t realize that this was a case where no matter how good you are at these things, someone from your party is basically tilting at windmills in any election.

              You are wise to leave it off.

          2. MigraineMonth*

            I don’t think winning is the only possible metric, but I agree that just running for office, designing posters/logos and such don’t count as accomplishments. Remember that a resume is all about what you’ve accomplished distinguishes you from someone who had average performance at your job.

            If you had impressive fundraising numbers, organized a very successful voter registration drive or similar, that would be more resume-worthy than just winning (particularly since there are so many non-competitive races).

      2. The Gollux, Not a Mere Device*

        One thing about having been a one-man shop is that there’s nobody else who can say “LW built an effective website” or “LW’s flyers improved voter turnout.” Nobody is likely to tell an interviewer “I built a website, but it was crap.” Also, even if, for example, turnout improved relative to the previous election, that doesn’t mean your flyers made the difference. People might have been motivated to vote largely by the presidential race (that would be my first assumption), or by your opponent’s flyers and ads rather than yours, or even by “LW’s opponent is six kinds of weirdo, so I’m voting against him, I don’t need to know anything about LW.”

        1. LW 5*

          True. I could potentially get that kind of feedback from the local party, but that seems like a lot of work for something that doesn’t truly significantly impact my career.

          1. Kay*

            To an employer if you focus too much on your political campaign, and not enough on your actual work experience, that is going to stand out. Even keeping it on your resume tells me you don’t acknowledge the many potential issues with including it.

            Also, your party isn’t necessarily going to be able to provide you with any useful or relevant metrics. If I had someone who ran for office in 2020 tell me their campaign was able to turn out more voters than ever before I would do an internal eye roll and go “yeah, uh, that was true all across the board because of the sheer amount of involvement from everyone and their mother that year”.

            1. LW 5*

              Well, it was at the end of a 2 page resume with other volunteer work I did related to my field, so I doubt it came across as focusing too much on that and not enough on other work experience.

              My party could potentially provide me with the web traffic and social engagement of other candidates, as a comparison. And while voter turn out cannot be attributed to a single small area candidate (nor would I ever claim that), the voting results do indicate things like “other candidates of the party in the area running for other positions got 20% of the vote while LW5 got 30% of the vote” which would indicate stronger campaigning skills than other local candidates.

              But again, even if I were keeping it on my resume (I’m not), searching that out hardly seems worth the time and effort.

    4. Nonanon*

      Wasn’t there another LW from nondescript muttering noise ago who was interviewing a contestant on The Bachelor?
      Anyhow. Same proof of concept re hiring; there’s a chance your hiring committee already knows you were “the villain” on Survivor/voted for you in the last election or otherwise can, y’know, Google who you are and find out more. Unless candidate experience is relevant (applying for a position as someone’s campaign manager, for instance), leave it off.

      1. LW 5*

        That’s a good point – they will likely google and can ask me questions about it in the interview if they have them.

        So now my question is, do I have it on LinkedIn with the relevant skills or no?

        1. SimonTheGreyWarden*

          I think it is fine to leave it on LinkedIn. That way if someone is interested they might look into what skills you perceive it as influencing or requiring, but it isn’t taking up space on the resume itself.

    5. learnedthehardway*

      I agree – it was several years ago now, and if it doesn’t bring value to the OP’s candidacy today, it would be best left off.

      I would highlight soft skills / relationship management strengths within the write-ups/accomplishments of the roles the OP has held. While having those strengths is part of being in politics, so is being fairly aggressive and debate-oriented – and that’s not something to highlight.

      That’s not even getting into the possibility that someone may disagree with the political party that for which the OP stood as a candidate. Arguably, stating the party could be a benefit in some cases – eg. a think tank that is aligned with a particular ethos or a non-profit that focuses on some social issue a political party is known to support. However, in general, the OP needs to consider whether stating a political affiliation may knock them out of contention with people who have strong biases. Also, wrt for-profit businesses whose leadership is strongly aligned to a political party – while it might be an advantage to have been a candidate for that party, companies like this tend to be extreme in other ways as well (eg. limiting benefits based on religious views, etc.)

    6. Venus*

      I’d leave it off your resume only because an employer might wonder if you planned to run again and might leave your current job sooner than later.

      I think it’s fine to leave it on LI and mention it in the interview if it’s relevant. I don’t know why the difference matters to me, but leave it off the resume.

  16. Whitehorse*

    LW1: this doesn’t solve the bigger issue, but to expand on one of Alison’s points: could you ask for a weekly/biweekly/whatever emailed summary as a standing task for this person? If part of what makes it difficult for your employee is being directly questioned by an authority figure, having the conversation once and then having it be a routine work task might help them disconnect the required work from the emotional reactions.

    Another option for disconnecting the emotions from the action, if part of the employee’s trouble is sitting across a desk from The Authority: could you do a walking meeting, a coffee meeting in the break room/elsewhere, or otherwise change the dynamic?

    I agree with Alison that you should ask the employee what you can do to help, but having suggestions in your back pocket might help.

    1. Artemesia*

      An employee has to be able to tell the boss what they are doing now, what they plan to do tomorrow, where tasks are not getting done etc. Sure, use written reports sometimes, but the boss still needs to be able to supervise. Not being able to be supervised is and should be a job ender. This is as others have noted ‘weaponized’ therapy.

      1. bamcheeks*

        This is an unhelpful and bad faith reading of LW1’s letter. There’s no indication that the outcome LW’s employee wants is “I never have to do this and am just allowed to continue without updating my boss”. They could be searching just as hard as LW for a solution.

        They aren’t “weaponising” anything just by sharing with their manager that they are struggling with trauma triggers, but this is a great example of why people don’t risk disclosing mental health needs at work.

        1. Allonge*

          They could be searching just as hard as LW for a solution.

          In theory, yes, but they did not share any of this with LW, which makes it difficult for LW to do anything to help.

          If someone essentually sticks to ‘trauma – I cannot, cannot, cannot’, about something that is necessary to do the job (or in this case, any job), unfortunately it’s also on them to be proactive on the alternatives if they want to keep the job.

          1. bamcheeks*

            Right, but it doesn’t mean they’re weaponising something or manipulating someone if they *don’t know how to do that*. That’s an assumption of bad faith which is unfair and unwarranted.

              1. HonorBox*

                Agreed. And telling your boss that they they trigger unresolved trauma IS putting the boss in a difficult position – hence the letter. It may not be intentional manipulation or intentionally weaponizing something, but it puts the boss on the defensive. Whether the intent is there, it is like telling the boss that they are unwilling to meet, be held accountable for their work, and provide updates.

                1. bamcheeks*

                  Ok, I’m genuinely fascinated by this perspective. I understand that as a disclosure of a medical issue (one that demonstrates a huge amount of trust in the manager!) and a simple fact. Why does that puts the manager on the defensive? Would you perceive that as a criticism of you?

                2. Eldritch Office Worker*

                  @bamcheeks it puts them in the position of managing that person’s trauma. If it were simply “I’m disclosing this, I’m struggling with it, I’ll let you know if you can help/am open to collaborating for solutions but otherwise I understand this is my issue to manage” – you’re right, big show of trust and I’m here for it.

                  But in this case it’s making it so the employee is having regular emotional outbursts, apparently at a devolving rate, and contextualizing the situation in a way that makes it so the manager’s unspecified behavior is the reason for all of that while offering no solutions or constructive insight. Of course that puts OP on the defensive. It’s not criticism – they’re actively being told that they’re causing something but don’t know how or why. That’s a minefield to navigate while still having to be an effective manager for this person.

                3. bamcheeks*

                  @Eldritch Office Worker — emotional outbursts are *the effect of the medical condition*, though. That’s what being triggered is. Of course that’s not a sustainable situation, but it’s also not the employee making a choice to deal with their medical condition in an unproductive way. It literally is one (fairly common) symptom of the medical condition.

                  I don’t think this is “contextualising the situation in a way that makes the manager’s unspecified behaviour the reason”, and whilst it’s helpful if a disabled employee is able to proactively offer solutions, I don’t think it should be held against them if they can’t. It certainly can’t be under UK equality law: I don’t know if the ADA is different. Refusing to enter into discussions to identify reasonable adjustments/accommodations obviously is a problem, but it’s not clear if the employee has done that or if they haven’t been offered the opportunity yet.

                  To me, it’s no different than the letter a few weeks ago where the employee was allergic to the manager’s cats. The business need is that LW needs to know where their employee is on various tasks. The employee has a medical condition which means that the standard meeting doesn’t work for them. The fact that something about LW is triggering for the employee is no more LW’s fault than the employee being allergic to their manager’s cats is. I don’t really get why it’s a “minefield” or why it puts them in a position of having to “manage their trauma”– both of these seem like highly stigmatising reactions to me.

                4. Abigail*

                  @bamcheeks: I’m going to use your cat allergy analogy.

                  Let’s say somebody with a known cat allergy gets a job working reception at a vet office. They explain the allergy and say they cannot deal with any cats. They can only check in the dogs. They also need everybody who does deal with cats to lint-roll their clothes after cat interaction.

                  The conclusion here would be that a vet office cannot operate this way.

                  The same is true for this letter. If the employee cannot take feed back or status updates, they cannot do this job.

                  It doesn’t mean they can’t do ANY job. It doesn’t mean they are unworthy as a person. it doesn’t mean they deserve to be mocked or shamed. But it DOES mean the employer needs to move on to somebody who can do this job.

                5. bamcheeks*

                  @Abigail You’re introducing two new elements here — that the employee knew about the before they started working at the vet’s office, and that the only solution is one that doesn’t work for the business. Both of these things might be true, but neither of them is in the letter.

                  The known fact is that the employee is triggered by the manager. That doesn’t mean they can’t take feedback or give status updates in any form. There’s also no way of knowing whether this is a problem the employee has had for a long time, a new issue or something that’s suddenly got significantly worse, or something unique to their meetings with LW. Jumping straight to “the employee simply can’t do the job” is wild.

                6. Allonge*

                  @bamcheeks – regular emotional outbursts may be a symptom of a medical condition, but that does not make them acceptable in a work context. Certainly not as a response to a request for regular status updates. What job will not include talking to a manager about work status?

                  I don’t think it necessarily points to intentional malice, but that is not the question. Malice is not necessary for a work situation to be completely untenable. Employee does not need to be a bad person for firing to ensue. ‘Medical’ is not a magic word after which you don’t need to be part of a solution – that is actually the part that seems weaponised to me, the talisman of ‘I have a medical issue and you are triggering it’. Ok, what next?

                7. Eldritch Office Worker*

                  @bamcheeks @allonge yes, exactly what Allonge said. No reasonable accommodation would include “these outbursts are fine and can happen on a regular basis without intervention or mitigation”. That might mean the employee excuses themselves when the emotions start to build, or it might mean they report asynchronously, I don’t know what’s realistic for this job. But “symptom of a medical condition” is not automatically a pass for inappropriate work behavior. It means it has to be addressed in some way as opposed to jumping straight to firing the person, but it doesn’t mean it’s an excuse for it letting it get worse without intervention.

                8. bamcheeks*

                  @Allonge – right, and I said, “emotional outbursts are obviously not a sustainable situation”. Absolutely nowhere am I saying that LW should just sit back and let the situation continue as it is, or that they should just stop expecting to manage the employee. But there’s a massive gap between “this is all on LW to fix” and “this is all on the employee to fix, and if they don’t, fire them”, and people seem to be talking as if they are the main two options.

                  What’s next– well, as a manager in the UK (so not covered by the ADA, but by very similar equality legislation and practice), I would:

                  1. Let HR and my manager know that an employee has disclosed a medical condition to me, and check and confirm my next steps. (Although TBH I would have looped HR in before this.) Look up the organisational disability policy on the intranet.
                  2. Email the employee to acknowledge that a medical condition had been disclosed, and suggest start a process of identifying reasonable adjustments. Offer them an appointment with Occupational Health. Ask them to think about how they would like to start identifying reasonable adjustments — normally it would be a meeting with me, but in this situation that might not be appropriate, so it could be a meeting with my manager or HR instead. Or they could have the meeting with Occupational Health first and discuss that with Occupational Health. Let them know the EAP exists. Let them know they are entitled to bring a union rep with them to a meeting.

                  I don’t know how many of these options are open to LW — AFAIK the ADA requires employers to enter into a similar collaborative process to identify reasonable accommodations as the UK equality law, although it doesn’t seem like the US has Occupational Health the same way. I do think most of these suggestions that go straight to “this should be a job-ender” are probably wildly in violation of the ADA, however.

        2. Tea Monk*

          Nod. People ask ” why don’t you disclose?” and it’s because I don’t want to deal with the above nonsense. I’m not saying it’s all on the boss. The boss could recommend an EAP and help brainstorm with the employee about accommodations that allow the bosses concerns to be met.

          1. Observer*

            t’s because I don’t want to deal with the above nonsense.

            Except that it is not nonsense. It’s a reaction to impossible behavior at work that is not being addressed, and which the person is laying on their supervisor.

            The boss could recommend an EAP

            That’s the one piece of actionable advice here.

            elp brainstorm with the employee about accommodations that allow the bosses concerns to be met.

            The situation has gone well past that point, though. The behavior has been getting worse, and the employee is coming back with vague and totally unhelpful excuses that attempt to lay the responsibility on the LW. That’s not just “not completely” on the LW – it’s not on the LW at all!

            The problem hers is not that the employee has disclosed a mental health issue. It’s that they are acting in a way that is inappropriate and incompatible with their job, and they are *not* coming up with reasonable and potentially workable solutions.

        3. Artemesia*

          You don’t get to be that precious at work. Yes yelling is inappropriate or giving negative feedback publicly, but giving oral feedback about performance is simply part of being a manager and it is not reasonable to expect your work experience to be devoid of that. The employee needs to work on dealing with this trigger rather than expecting the boss to bend into a pretzel to manage them.

        4. Observer*

          They could be searching just as hard as LW for a solution.

          Highly unlikely.

          Someone in therapy / working on the issue would not be telling their boss “something about your style” triggers them, and leave it at that. At minimum, they would be explaining what they are trying to do.

          They aren’t “weaponising” anything just by sharing with their manager that they are struggling with trauma triggers,

          But that’s not what they are doing, though. They are not just “sharing their struggle. They are getting visibly upset at the mildest show of authority (ie the LW asking about schedule and work), have emotional outbursts at almost every meeting and are now telling the LW that it’s *The LW’s* behavior that’s the problem. And, it’s been getting worse.

          Whatever the reason is for this behavior it is simply untenable. Trying to excuse it by claiming that “something about the LW’s style” is triggering them is at best excuse making. But yes, more likely weaponized therapy speak.

          1. bamcheeks*

            Someone in therapy / working on the issue would not be telling their boss “something about your style” triggers them, and leave it at that. At minimum, they would be explaining what they are trying to do.

            What if they have only just realised that what they’re experiencing might be PTSD and are trying to get therapy or a diagnosis but haven’t figured out how yet? What if they shared that they were triggered when they were actually in the middle of an episode and they weren’t able to articulate it in any more detail at that point, and they’re still trying to write that email?

            1. Starbuck*

              Yes, what if? At some point it doesn’t matter what the excuse or reason is – bad behavior isn’t acceptable and can’t continue indefinitely with no plan for change or improvement. Sometimes someone can be doing their very best and try hard, but it’s just not working. And the answer might be too bad, this isn’t the job for them. Hopefully they can find a way before it gets to that point!

      2. Zarniwoop*

        “An employee has to be able to tell the boss what they are doing now, what they plan to do tomorrow, where tasks are not getting done etc.”
        They need to communicate that information, but if doing so in writing rather than a conversation works better, what’s the problem so long as it gets done?

      3. Orv*

        I struggle to collect my thoughts when speaking in person. My tactic is to write an outline of what I need to discuss, beforehand. Not a full written report, but a set of bullet points to reference.

    3. Observer*

      I agree with Alison that you should ask the employee what you can do to help, but having suggestions in your back pocket might help.

      I disagree here. It’s just too much to expect given that all the LW has is that their “style” is a problem and the the employee has problems with authority.

      At this point, it is completely on the employee to come up with something *and* to commit to making it work. They simply do not get to say or imply that they can’t deal with authority and it’s on their boss to make it feel like Boss actually does not have authority via some unknown transformation. And that’s what they are effectively doing right now.

  17. jinni*

    I can’t think of a context where it’s appropriate to ask about a romantic relationship or kids. I’ve lived a most conventional life and even I don’t want to answer these inquiries. I was told to wait for people to volunteer information. Aren’t there less invasive ways to get to know people?

    People have so many judgements and opinions about personal choices (that they rudely share). I only think LW2 needs a more artful approach. Although I love the answer: sometimes.

    1. Jenesis*

      The first context that comes to mind is if there’s a company party that allows plus-ones. People will want to know whether your guest should be referred to as your spouse, your datefriend, your sibling, or your roommate.

      Unfortunately (especially for women) it’s a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation. People will judge you for being cagey and people will judge you for having the “wrong” number of kids (whether too many or too few). You could probably get away with saying “That’s a private matter I’d rather not discuss at work” + abrupt subject change, just because sensitivity around the subject could indicate death of a partner/child, a bad breakup/estrangement, fertility struggles, and so on. But it will likely work less well for innocuous but no less work-irrelevant subjects, like favorite TV shows.

    2. Martin Blackwood*

      i think ‘but the other person is being rude asking’ isnt really helpful. because ‘rude’ as a concept has squishy edges. I dont recall anyone asking me what my relationship status is at work, but i can tell you multiple! probably like, four or five? people at work have asked me how much i pay for rent. Is it rude to ask about money? Sure. But people who own houses hear about rent crisises, thats a topic they can engage with me with. And it gives me an opportunity to bitch that my single small bedroom isnt worth what i pay for it, especially considering how many people live in this house. And then we’ve connected on a topic, small talk complete. Is it strictly appropriate to talk about it? no! will people consider these ‘forbidden’ topics, eg kids off limits if it comes up naturally in the conversation? sometimes, sometimes not!

      Definitely agree that OP2 needs a different approach. They’re very quickly going to be known for ‘answering questions about themselves weirdly’ which is going to get more traction than like, their boyfriend’s name.

      1. Allonge*

        To build on this and being a bit mercenary and transactional: sure, kids can come up organically in conversations and in general I am perfectly happy to hear about them in this way. (Frankly, I care very little about the specific relationship / family status of people around me on a daily level.)

        But, as this is work and it’s likely to come up: I don’t think it’s a good idea to let coworkers know about your (general you) kids the first time when you need to drop everything to pick a sick child up and coworkers need to replace you in something urgent. Like, I would do it, no questions asked, but the ‘huh, never knew there was a child’ would be a thought that is happening.

        Similarly: I don’t have a partner or kids but my parents live far away and they are getting to be the age where I may need to drop work stuff and go and help them. So their existence and the fact that I am an only child is not something I keep under wraps. I don’t bring it up in unrelated conversations, but it’s out there. Cause you never know.

        1. Seeking Second Childhood*

          And on the mercenary front… sometimes I am just hoping to find someone to give a box of toys my teenager just stuck in my car when I don’t have a charity shop on the way home.

        2. another anoner*

          You’ve framed this beautifully, but perhaps I’m biased as my family situation is similar to yours. It’s one’s prerogative if they want to be intensely private or lie about their personal life, but it’s also going to be difficult for others to support you (and be supported by you) if they don’t have a good feel for how your life is set up. When people know about this stuff ahead of time, it’s far easier for them to give you grace than to view you as making excuses.

          I suspect that this is a part of social reciprocity that really secretive people don’t understand on some level.

      2. Lady Danbury*

        I would find being asked how much I pay for rent to be faaaaaaar more intrusive than asking if I had a spouse or kids. I’ve never been asked that in almost 20 years of working, while I’ve been asked about spouse/kids countless times. It’s something that usually comes up in normal conversation, like someone mentioning something about their own kids, not as an interrogation. Of course you’re free to share as much or as little about your personal life as you want in a work context. But the way LW2 answers the questions is definitely going to be perceived negatively by their coworkers, to the extent of leaving a negative impression of their overall soft skills.

    3. Allonge*

      Well, it’s also really weird to introduce yourself as I am John Smith, the new alpaca designer, I have a wife but we are separated and 2.4 children and a budgerigar.

      Basic life stats are part of how we connect to other people. Asking some questions on this is very normal. Following up to the nth degree is not, to be clear, but generally my assumption is that “I live alone” or “I have three kids” is not a major secret.

      1. JustaTech*

        So I got two “meet the new person” emails today: both of them say the person’s name, role, and their professional background. One of them also mentioned the person’s spouse and children and “light” hobbies, while the other one was written with a ton of sports references, but did not mention anything about the new person’s personal life (including if they actually like sports or if that was all the person writing).

        I wouldn’t expect either of these people to introduce themselves in person this way (“Hi, I have 2 kids!” “Hi, I love the Marlins!”) but I also don’t feel like either is an overshare (we’ve also had those).

    4. Nodramalama*

      I think you’re overestimating how invasive the average person finds these questions. For a lot of people they’re just basic facts.

      1. Myrin*

        Exactly. They can be asked in an intrusive or weird way but they don’t have to be. (The literal first thing a coworker said to me in a past job was “Hi, I’m Saliha. You’re Myrin, right? Myrin, are you married?”. Which was so strange because those were here literal first words to me, but in the almost five years we worked together I came to learn that that’s just how she talks – asking random out-of-left-field questions with no buildup whatsoever was her modus operandi. I became one of her favourite coworkers even though I answered that very first question which a quite-obviously-not-expected “No, I’m not”.)

        Also, at least for the “kids” question, there was a clear context, especially if the coworker literally said “kids, ya know?” – I might totally backpedal if I said that and then realised oh no, does OP know? Does she have kids? Does she have anything to do with kids? Better ask!

    5. londonedit*

      They’re pretty normal questions, to be honest. Not in an interrogatory way, but just as small talk. It’s very normal for someone to say something about their kids, for example, and then say ‘Oh, do you have any children?’, or if I say something about my flat it’s normal for someone I don’t know well to say ‘Oh, do you live with a partner, or on your own?’ It’s just human conversation, it’s small talk, it’s just greasing the wheels of interaction. OK, fine, interrogating colleagues about their life choices isn’t ‘appropriate’, but simply asking colleagues about their everyday existence is fine.

      I get that some people really don’t want to give away personal information about themselves, but there are ways of doing that without resorting to weird or evasive answers that are just going to make people think you’re odd. You can just say ‘No, no kids here!’ and pivot the conversation on to something else. You can just say ‘Yes, good weekend thanks, you?’ Even if you didn’t have a good weekend, you can still say that. No one is going to insist on an in-depth truthful answer. People just want to say ‘Hi, good weekend?’ ‘Yes thanks, you?’ ‘Yes, good thanks’ and go about their day. You might think it’s pointless, and maybe it is, but it’s just about acknowledging one’s fellow humans and having a bit of interaction.

      1. AsstPlantProf*

        For a lot of people, not only is asking these types of questions not rude, but it’s actually polite, because it’s showing interest in the other person. I certainly don’t want to be nosy, and if a coworker or other person seemed uncomfortable I’d stop asking questions, but generally speaking I’d feel quite awkward just talking about myself. If I’ve been talking about, I don’t know, the big tree we had blow down in the storm last week and how much my spouse and kid enjoyed watching the arborists cut it up, I’d feel weird not asking something generic about them and their family. Otherwise the conversation starts to feel very one sided. I don’t think I’m out of the norm on that either.

        1. Paint N Drip*

          I agree that this kind of talk IS polite because connecting with people you spent a bunch of time around is a pleasant experience! And that is coming from a registered introvert

          Some people are happy to proactively share and that is great, but not everyone is skilled or comfortable doing that – the experience of NOT being asked about yourself can be very othering, so I’ll never look down on those who DO do the asking.

          1. londonedit*

            Yes, good point – for all the people who say they feel uncomfortable or they don’t know what to say when someone says ‘Good weekend?’ or ‘Do you have any kids?’ or whatever, there are other people (like me) who would feel really quite sad if no one ever asked me anything about my life. I have a friend who can talk for England, and most of it is about herself and her family and her stuff – she even does the classic thing where she says ‘You know Sally? Oh, you don’t? Well, anyway, Sally went to a pottery class last week…’ and then you get half an hour about Sally despite me never having heard of Sally before. Every time I come away from a social engagement with this friend, I feel like she hasn’t even asked one simple question about how I am or what I’m doing. And again, it doesn’t need to be in-depth or probing or hugely serious, but a ‘Have you decided where you’re going for your birthday yet?’ or a ‘How was your run last week?’ would be nice.

    6. Grith*

      This is an astonishingly “online” take. Basic surface-level knowledge about close coworker’s lives is incredibly normal to share and is a routine part of getting to know and getting comfortable spending time around other people.

      Of course no one has to share anything they don’t want to. But then you have to know that the socially unusual behaviour is you being evasive or offended about questions regarding a partner or kids. Not the person engaging in normal small talk questions

    7. metadata minion*

      This is something that varies by culture. Some people find asking personal questions rude and intrusive, and you should wait for the other person to disclose first. In other communities, talking about yourself is rude/oversharing and you should wait to be asked. In the latter case, asking questions about someone is (ideally; there are obviously nosy jerks in every culture) a sign of caring and interest, and never asking people about themselves can come off as a bit standoffish.

      1. Brioche for me*

        +1 to the cultural variation here. When I first moved to an “immediately ask personal questions like this” place, I was a bit overwhelmed by the HELLO STRANGER ARE YOU MARRIED small-talk and had to remind myself that it was like talking about the weather would be for me.

        In the context I’m in now, I wouldn’t ask about partners/kids unless the other person somehow brought it up in context (e.g., someone mentioned above buying a flat — like “by yourself, or with a partner?” seems a reasonable follow-up?), but mentioning your partner or kids at work seems 100% normal to me.

      2. WantonSeedStitch*

        I live in New England, where probing questions are generally seen as intrusive rather than caring, but even most Massholes don’t get all wigged out by being asked by a coworker if we’re married or if we have kids, unless the context is such as to make it creepy or pushy. “You’re so pretty! You look like a supermodel. I bet guys fall all over you. Are you married?” Not cool. “I can’t figure out what to get my husband for his birthday. He’s so hard to buy for. Are you married?” Perfectly cool.

        1. Bast*

          I also live in New England. I’ve worked in offices with varying degrees of professionalism and boundaries. The office I work in currently is definitely one of the more “professional” ones with boundaries being a little more firmly set than in other places. Everyone in this office is firmly “colleagues only” with no real friendships or relationships outside of the office (unlike other offices where people regularly held BBQs and parties and invited the office or met up for drinks after). Even in this significantly more buttoned up environment, spouses/children/etc still are brought up into conversation occasionally and it isn’t weird at all. I have pictures of my children on my desk. If someone asked me, “Oh how cute, are those your children, how old are they?” I’d probably answer in the affirmative and ask if they have children as well, since it was introduced. It would be extremely odd for someone to answer, “Sometimes” or something along those lines. A, “No, but I have 3 Goldendoodles” or something would change the topic and instantly give another avenue of discussion without being seen as evasive, strange, or defensive. It’s only weird when people make it weird. I can’t tell you nearly as much about my colleagues in this job as opposed to others, but basic info like married or single, children, pets, etc., usually is not seen as classified.

        2. Paint N Drip*

          Oof – native New Englander, but ND
          “You’re so pretty! You look like a supermodel. I bet guys fall all over you. Are you married?” is genuinely something I can see myself saying… no I don’t have many friends why do you ask

              1. Agony Aunties*

                I’m guessing that by ‘I bet guys fall all over you’ the person asking the question is assuming that the recipient is heterosexual (and therefore possibly (though not necessarily) receptive to this attention and/or interested in male attraction). That or – and this is a reach – there are gay guys and lesbians (and bisexuals, pansexuals, etc) so not all men may be falling over the recipient of the question, but women and enbies might as well.

            2. Paint N Drip*

              I mean.. I am a queer person? And boys DO fall all over pretty girls, no matter what the girls are into. I get your point, though – horndogs come in all genders :)

    8. teacher and hiker*

      I don’t find these comments weird at all. I even struggled with infertility, so sometimes asking if I had kids was a bummer but I never got offended by it, and had no problem just answering honestly.

      In my opinion, small chit-chat like this is part of the working world.

      1. Astrea*

        Yeah, I definitely went through a phase of infertility where the question of “Oh do you have kids?” hurt, but I wasn’t particularly offended or felt like I had to hide anything. It was only when they pushed through to “Oh so WHY don’t you have kids? Do you HATE them?” that I started to get a little frosty.

          1. Astrea*

            Something similar did used to work when I was younger; if someone asked if I wanted kids, I’d say “Huh, I dunno yet”, which is like saying I just hadn’t decided and that protected my privacy because it just gave them nothing to argue against, or pry into. But when I got older, the query became much more explicitly phrased as “do you already have them?” and mostly this was fine because usually they were just asking about my life, but occasionally you get the person who is very much assuming 1) I didn’t have any by deliberate choice and 2) that the ship has already sailed, by saying something along the lines of “I’ve never heard you mention children; so did you never want them, then?” That one is hard to answer with “not yet”, but it’s pretty fun to think about doing actually.

    9. Glomarization, Esq.*

      Small talk that involves basic biographical information about the people you’re speaking with is 100% normal and should be expected in a healthy workplace. These are people that you spend some 40 or more hours a week with. It is not unreasonable to be curious and ask the very, very benign questions “are you married?” and “do you have kids?” and to receive sociable answers that are actually responsive to the questions.

    10. Colette*

      I don’t love them as “getting to know you” questions – they’re defining the person in terms of other people, not themselves – but the OP’s responses are weird and off-putting; I’d probably avoid asking her anything else if I could.

    11. L-squared*

      As someone who just started a new job, its a VERY normal, and appropriate, thing to ask about. I’m single with no kids, and I’m not ashamed. I look at it no different as someone asking if I have pets. The fact that so many of you treat any question about your life as some kind of classified CIA document that only those with clearance should have access to is WILD

      1. The Original K.*

        There was a person on here who said they didn’t give the names, genders or ages of their kids for privacy reasons (if kids came up in conversation at work they’d say “my oldest,” for example, and would actively decline to answer questions about their ages or names), which I found really odd. This reminds me of that. I’m single with no kids, and this is basic biographical info. I frankly don’t care that much about my colleagues’ relationship or parenthood statuses, and I assume they feel the same about mine. It’s just … not that deep.

        1. YetAnotherAnalyst*

          For what it’s worth, it’s really, terrifyingly easy to find out a lot of information about kids with a very small amount of information and a little intelligent guessing. 99% of your coworkers are going to immediately forget any personal details about your kids because they’re just making conversation. 99% of the ones who do remember won’t do anything with the information besides asking you how Junior’s sportsball game went. But that last 0.01% has the potential to do great harm even if they don’t intend to.
          Keeping your kids’ details private is good parenting, and is a separate issue from stonewalling small talk at work.

    12. Media Monkey*

      i can’t imagine an environment where these would be seen as invasive or unusual (i also don’t work in an environment where it would be an issue to say that you were LGBTQ+). if you are introduced to people, what sort of conversation would you expect to have? in the UK/ London, in the first conversation you would likely have talked about where in london you live/ is it nice/ close to the tube/ how long is your commute/ how do you get to work first but family/ living situation would be a close second!

      1. londonedit*

        Yes! As British people we don’t like to share hugely in-depth information and we’re good at keeping our cards to our chests, but we’re also extremely good at small talk. That’s the whole point of the British ‘obsession’ with the weather – it’s mainly about having a handy conversation starter, and the weather here is so changeable that there’s always something you can find to say, whether it’s ‘Blimey, it’s got cold hasn’t it?’ or ‘Did you see it’s meant to warm up for the weekend?’ or ‘Did you hear that thunderstorm last night?’ or whatever. And it’s the same with the classic London ‘Whereabouts do you live? Oh, what’s the commute like? Are you near the station?’ stuff (see also: Bill Bryson once said you can set two British people talking about the best way to get from point A to point B and they’ll be there forever discussing the relative merits of taking the A40 followed by the M25, or the A406 and then the M4…) You don’t ever *really* have to reveal a huge amount of information, but a conversation is had and both parties walk away happy enough.

        1. The Rise and Fall of Sanctuary Moon*

          Not coincidentally, one of my primary strategies for getting accepted in British culture despite my suuuuper American accent is by leading with transportation facts. It is amazingly effective as a social lubricant.

    13. Falling Diphthong*

      Aren’t there less invasive ways to get to know people?
      Asking questions is the normal way to get to know people, and considered more thoughtful than just launching into a monologue about yourself.

      What would the less invasive way be? “I won’t ask you anything about yourself, nor will I volunteer anything about myself” is not how pleasant low friction working relationships are usually forged.

    14. Crinolina*

      Framing normal human interaction as ‘invasive’ is a rather extreme position to take. I’ve never worked anywhere in my life where it wasn’t perfectly normal to have casual conversation about these things. I’m a pretty private person but I work on a team of 12 people and I know the relationship status and parental status of all of them, just through ordinary everyday conversation, getting to know you questions etc.

      If someone finds that sort of very ordinary, normal interaction with colleagues particularly invasive and intrusive, they are probably not cut out to work with others.

    15. Pescadero*

      Humans look for common experiences – and there is significant evidence that shared experiences improve workplace relationships, and thus output.

      …and we’re largely talking about PUBLIC information here. Things the IRS knows, the census taker asks about, and is largely discernible through blindingly public resources.

      This isn’t naked photos of you – this is stuff that is published in the phone book.

      1. Orv*

        I always figure the “do you have kids” question is a way to see if they have something they can talk about with you. Parents love to commiserate about raising kids with other parents, and once they’re a parent the rest of their life falls by the wayside, so they don’t have anything to talk to childless people about.

    16. North Bay Teky*

      Less invasive ways? These are really superficial questions to begin with. I don’t know how we would reveal the most public information about ourselves to our coworkers without any questions to find common ground. That’s the point of these questions, to get the most basic facts about a new coworker. It goes both ways.

      There will be times when conversation at work will not be 100% on the work at hand. It seems you have an expectation that conversation at work stays 100% on the work. That’s not realistic.

    17. Frosty*

      I totally agree (and I see you’re getting responses saying you’re out of line with society).

      I certainly wish that people wouldn’t launch into “standard” questions about partnership and children. Its certainly the least interesting data I can think of – I don’t care if other people are married or have kids and I don’t know why others care.

      It’s personally sad to me to say “no” to questions that I’m not married and don’t have kids – it bums me out to say it. However, I’ll still answer it and hope that they keep the conversation moving (no follow ups to those questions please!).

      There are so many other things that we could be talking about and I hope people move to better “ice breakers”.

      I never ask those questions – I’m more likely to ask about someone’s neighbourhood or their hobbies or ask them something seasonal (“Are you into Halloween? I really like giving out candy – my neighbours decorate their house and I get to enjoy the runoff of their efforts because lots of neighbours stop by.” or “It’s been rainy lately but I kinda like that because it’s a good excuse to eat soup! Are you more of a cold or hot weather person?”

      Of course, these flow more naturally in person rather than typed on a page in a comment, but I just think it’s weird and boring to ask people about their home and family. I can WISH that people stop asking them, but still have a plan for when they do (answer quickly and follow up with something else that keeps the social contract going).

  18. Clementine*

    Is the employee a Spanish speaker? My experience is that they often use “Lady” as a direct translation of Señora in an attempt to be respectful. I think it’s fair to set up a conversation where you say – I appreciate you are trying to be respectful, but I’d prefer if you just say “my manager” rather than “my Lady boss.”

    1. Our Lady of the Cats*

      Yes, I thought the same thing. Spanish speakers, being polite, often just call me “Mrs.,” which I know is from the way they address women “Senora” in their language, and I like it so much that one of my friends and I (both English-speaking) always address each other as “Mrs.,” as in “Mrs, you won’t believe what happened today” and so forth!
      In many gendered languages people distinguish between male and female in the way they address people, esp. superiors. Professors in Germany, for example, are “Herr Doktor Professor” or “Frau Doktor Professor.” In English, we still have vestiges of this in word pairs like actor/actress (although increasingly, it’s just “actor”), waiter/waitress, prince/princess, and even in words like “seamstress” (again, it’s increasingly being replaced, like so many others, by neutral terms such as “stitcher”).

      1. Myrin*

        “In many gendered languages people distinguish between male and female in the way they address people”
        I mean, English has that, too, in “Mr/Mrs/Ms” – it’s just that a formal title such as “doctor” or “admiral” or “officer” outweighs that, which it doesn’t in other languages.
        You’re mixing up two different things, one being how someone is addressed – which the English language genders, too – and one being suffixes tacked onto regular nouns depending on the person’s gender (which English doesn’t do and which is something that non-native speakers learn from the get-go when they start learning English).

        It doesn’t sound like OP’s report actually calls her “lady boss” but rather refers to her as such to others, which I don’t think can readily be explained by his not being a native speaker when he has worked in a professional US environment for 30 years.

        1. Emmy Noether*

          English has vestiges of the suffix thing too (as in the above examples of actor/actress, waiter/waitress), it’s just slowly falling out of use.

          My favorite female coding suffix is the latin -trix, as in imperator/imperatrix. It just sounds really cool.

          1. Jenesis*

            As much as I love the -trix wording I am personally happy for the shift away from gendered to gender-neutral terms, as it avoids sexist implications when talking about a mixed-gender group and it’s more inclusive of non-binary people. E.g. “the waitstaff” or “the servers” instead of “the waiters” or “the waiters and waitresses”. There’s probably an inevitable bit of male-as-default when there isn’t an easy replacement for the old gendered words (like with “actor”) but I still think it’s better than the alternative.

            1. linger*

              What we found in looking at corpus data is: it’s complicated.
              (i) Gender-marking (-woman suffixes, female/woman+profession)
              is slowly declining in general, but against that background there are increases in use for professions women have only recently entered:

              The media love women candidates. We’re newsworthy.

              which may then decrease again as women make up a larger proportion of incumbents. So longer term, we expect a sort of rolling turnover of terms marking progress towards gender-equivalence of roles. And there are also (entirely legitimate) comparative uses of gender-marked terms in commentary pointing out, for example, how regrettably small the proportion of female judges still is.
              (ii) Epicene terms (-person suffixes, and similarly neutral terms e.g. firefighter, postie) may initially be used more often with female referents, but in practice, in many cases we can’t tell (e.g. a spokesman/spokesperson usually isn’t named). To the extent we can tell, at least the more established examples (chair/chairperson) do seem to be applied to both genders, and/or for arbitrary gender (not referring to any specific individual).

      2. Zelda*

        AIUI, the German terms aren’t modifiers, as in, Frau Doktor does not mean “female PhD holder” the way “lady boss” in English means “female boss.” Rather, German custom is to pile up *all* of the titles a person has earned, so Frau *and* Doktor *and* Professor. So it’s not quite “distinguishing between male and female professors;” one of the three titles has a gender attached but the other two don’t.

        1. Ro*

          I feel like a better German example would be how a lot of job titles are gendered e.g Lehrer (teacher-male) and Lehrerin (teacher-female) a lot of female job titles are the male (or “default” due to historic sexism) title with “in” on the end to denote the person is female.

        2. amoeba*

          Interestingly enough, the “official style guide” is to *not* call people Prof. Dr. – only the highest one is used in, for instance, letters, and not abbreviated. So even if you do see it a lot, writing an e-mail to “Sehr geehrter Herr Prof. Dr. XY” would, in face, be wrong – it should just be Herr Professor XY”.

          But yeah, you do usually use the normal address (Herr/Frau – where Frau is originally “Mrs” but is now used for all women, and the equivalent of “Miss” – “Fräulein” has been retired) plus the title. Most of us do, however, know that you *do not* use “Mrs. Dr. amoeba” – but yes, this has happened a handful of times in my life. But obviously by people whose English was just… not very good. Like, you definitely wouldn’t do that if you lived in the US for 30 years and spoke English every day!

          And “lady boss” would definitely be considered sexist/derogatory by any German I know.

          1. Emmy Noether*

            To build on that – stacking titles is also considered a really formal/stuffy form of address in German. Don’t know many people who address their direct boss that way.

            And I agree that we wouldn’t tack on lady- or woman- to words that aren’t gender defined already. That reads just as weird as in English.

      3. Hearsay*

        Thank you for bringing up this point. Señora can mean boss as well. I get called this a lot by my Central and South American friends when I’m leading them on something.

    2. Ellis Bell*

      I would treat it as any other language correction; especially if someone is trying to be polite and coming off more disrespectful than they intend: “Oh, it’s just boss for both genders in English; it can actually be seen as rude to change the title by gender”. Imagine if you were making this faux pas in a second language; you’d want to know.

      2. amoeba*

        After 30 years of living and working in an English-speaking country, I’d honestly find it pretty weird if somebody corrected my English like that! I’d much rather go with “oh, please just call me boss” and not treat them like somebody who’s just, like, starting out learning the language on Duolingo or whatever.

        1. Ellis Bell*

          I’m quite possibly biased by my own experience – my work friend who has been in the UK for decades sometimes does things like this and she is very outspoken about wanting to be corrected and to be told the whole rationale.

    3. Maxime*

      I felt the same way about the related story where a person calls her manager “manageress” but with a French origin or nationality, because in France most professional names were feminized, but not those designating an authority (e.g. for a long time “présidente was only the president’wife not a female president) nor those designating an occupation considered intellectual (e.g. no “écrivaine” –female writer which was used for a long time before the French academy refuted it) but never such a worry for “caissiére”(female cashier) or “boulangére( female baker) « It sounded sexist, like “in France, when it comes to authority or intellectual jobs, only men can do them because women can’t , you use the “masculin form” so for manual job, you can use feminin form) many people in France are in favor of feminization
      In that case, it might be enough to explain that, depending on the country and linguistic history, usage changes.

      1. amoeba*

        Oh yes, it is definitely sexist in French and German to only use the male form (generic masculinum, if somebody would like to know more…) It’s pretty weird for us to look at English where it’s the other way round! The first time I saw a female actor called “actor” instead of “actress”, it looked like blatant sexism to me – because it would be in German, haha. There’s a whole big debate about “gendering” (adding female/neutral forms when talking about groups of people, jobs, etc. instead of just using the male form as default).

        That said – “manageress” comes across *very* differently than “lady boss”.

    4. Clisby*

      I had a contractor (spoke English well, but clearly was a native Spanish speaker) like that – he always greeted me with “Hey, Lady!” He absolutely was not being disrespectful or condescending; he was extremely polite. I thought it was a little odd at first, but then figured he probably was just using the literal translation of “Hola, Senora.” I would not have dreamed of telling him to call me something different.

  19. Despachito*

    LW2 – these answers are weird but I feel for you, because I find the questions pretty intrusive.

    I am a member of a club (so not working environment but somehow closer relationships) for several years and I have never asked any of my fellow clubbers about children or spouses. Some of them may be gay for what I know. And no one has asked me these questions either.

    Some people choose to volunteer that information (I do), some do not, and if they don’t I assume this is what they want and I respect it.

    I would answer the question if asked and answer it unequivocally but it would feel weird. I would never ask it out of the blue, because as I said I find it intrusive. There are people going through a nasty divorce, people who live with a partner of either sex, people who can’t have kids or lost them in a traumatic way, and may not want to talk about it. And it is absolutely NOT RELEVANT to the activity of the club so I have absolutely no need to know it other than curiosity.

    Yes, it is often used as small talk but then the person would volunteer the information. If they don’t I assume this is not something they would want to talk about, and respect it.

    1. Jordan*

      Yeah, there’s a lot of negativity about “just answer the question” but for some people their living situation and relationships don’t fall into the expected parameters and the sort of relationship questions are at best a Sigh, annoyance and at worst a door they Don’t want to open or deal with in workspace mode.
      So I think the answers are funny, but would accompany with exaggerated facial expressions

      (But I agree with the “maybe I have kids from a male colleague gives the impression of irresponsible playboy)

      So give it with a eyebrow wiggle.
      Still, relationships are don’t ask me, I will bring it up if I want to share.

      # happy asexuality awareness week
      Now mind your own business

      1. amoeba*

        But the answer literally just needs to be “yes” or “no”. And then change the topic. I mean, I’d say 99.9-100% of people can more or less truthfully chose one of those, and there’s zero need to disclose anything more.

        (I would also never ask the question out of the blue and would find it weird if my colleagues just asked me without any context, but I’ve definitely had it come up naturally in conversation!)

        1. Ana Maus*

          and there may be reasons for not wanting to reveal either. I think the LW’s responses are not going to accomplish what they want, but I can understand not wanting to talk about it.

      2. ASD always*

        # happy reminder that asexual is not synonymous with aromantic or sex-repulsed and therefore does not preclude a spouse or child

        2. Irish Teacher.*

          And as somebody who is aromantic asexual, I think it’s pretty easy in that case, because my answer is simply that I’m not married and don’t have kids. As you say, not true for all asexual people, but even when it is, that leaves an easy answer.

        3. Jenesis*

          I’m a cis woman, married, and asexual.

          Probably 99.9% of people will assume I’m straight when I tell them I have a husband, but I’m honestly fine with that? My sexual orientation is none of their business.

      3. Nancy*

        They are simple yes/no questions. Since asexual people do marry and have kids, not sure why a discussion would be needed.

        1. Jordan*

          I only mentioned it because of the timing this particular week, not to preclude spouses or kids. Aware and encouraging of all variations.

      4. Observer*

        Yeah, there’s a lot of negativity about “just answer the question”

        Except that that is not what most people are saying.

        They are saying that these questions are not meant to be prying, and they ask about things that are very normal and typical for most people. But, also, if you *do* have a reason why you don’t want to answer, there are much better ways to deal with it that sidestep the whole situation.

        Like, instead of the whole nonsense about “maybe I have kids”, which is honestly *not* an answer I would expect of someone who finds the subject painful for some reason, they could have come up with something else. Like “Yeah, kids. They’re a handful, aren’t they” change of subject. Or even “I think pets are easier” with a smile and change of subject. Or the other myriad of ways others have suggested.

    2. Arrietty*

      Some people find it rude if colleagues and acquaintances don’t show any interest in them as a person outside the work context – ask any autistic person who has had to learn how to ask small talk questions.

      1. Despachito*

        But isn’t the interest shown just by natural conversations where you follow each other’s cues and talk about what the person in front of you show they are willing to talk about?

        So if someone says “I went swimming with my wife and kids during the weekend”, I would probably ask “oh, how old are your kids”? because it would organically ensue from the conversation.

        1. Observer*

          Well, yes. But in at least the second case, it was one of the most natural outcomes of the existing situation!

          For many people in a case that they were trying to reign in rambunctious kids at work, saying something like this is a way of signaling “I know that kids are causing some disturbance. I *am* trying to keep it in check.” Followed by the normal contextual question.

          1. JM60*

            I think the Despachito’s point relates to someone having a chance to opt-in to having their own kids being the topic of conversation.

            The conversation in the letter (reign in rambunctious kids at work) is an easy segue to talking about either your own or someone else’s kids, but asking someone if they have kids is making the topic opt-out. I think it’s fine, so long as you accept them opting out (even if they opt-out in an unusual way).

      2. Cinnamon Stick*

        When the OP wrote that they didn’t see what the question had to do with work, I wondered if they were autistic. I’ve had autistic friends tell me that they don’t comprehend why small talk is something they should participate in. One told me they thought it was outright stupid.

        1. Despachito*

          I’ve always seen the true purpose of small talk as “hi fellow human, I recognize you as such, we be of one blood, rest assured I will not harm you, and I expect the same assurance from you”.

    3. Allonge*

      For me the issue here is not so much whether the questions are intrusive. They may or may not be. It’s that these questions will absolutely happen and it’s good (essential, really) to have some kind of neutral answer on hand for everyday use.

      I totally understand that there will be situations where the answer is genuinely complicated. Or where it hurts. It’s great that you have a club where there is a shared agreement not to ask such questions. I don’t ask them myself (not without significant provocation / actual need to know anyway). But it’s something that will happen to all of us nevertheless.

      What OP is doing is creating way more harm to them than a simple yes/no would.

    4. hello*

      Some of these questions are asking about basic facts on your day-to-day life. I’m sorry you don’t want to get to know people in a club that you’ve been a member of for several years. These questions don’t necessitate every last detail about your personal life.

      1. Florence Reece*

        What a bizarre read on Despachito’s stance. They say pretty clearly that they share about their life, and they engage with what others share, they just don’t push for details that aren’t shared openly because they find that intrusive. Your response is to assume you know their intent and feelings? Obviously you don’t approach conversations the same way they do and it’s one thing to voice your opinion about that, but “I’m sorry you don’t want to get to know people” (who they clearly do get to know, just not using the methods you would) is condescending and super presumptuous.

        1. Despachito*

          Thank you.

          I do indeed see a huge difference between “I am absolutely not interested in you” and “I show my interest by following your cues in conversation and only ask questions if I can reasonably assume it will not be obnoxious to you.”

          This said, I agree that these questions OP is talking about, albeit I and a lot of others find them intrusive if not organically ensuing from a conversation, are pretty low-key, and if OP’s main goal is to get that person off their back the best solution would be to give a simple “yes” or “no”, because a weird response attracts far more attention than a short neutral one, and OP will come across as weird, which is something you usually do not want at a workplace.

          1. JM60*

            I see your comments in this tree as substantially relating to making these topics opt-in rather than opt-out, not that you necessarily are uninterested in ever discussing your personal life with others.

            1. Despachito*

              I think this is spot on.

              I absolutely don’t mind to discuss my personal life with others, but as you said – I do it on my terms and I like other people can do the same.

    5. Phony Genius*

      I partially agree. Some people feel these questions are intrusive, so I don’t ask them. I am rarely asked myself, so I think many others share this opinion.

  20. Greyhound*

    LW1: I’m seeing some scepticism in some of the comments about the use of ‘triggered’ or what is seen as overly emotional responses – not suggesting that’s coming from you. To be clear, this person needs to be responsible for their own issues and needs to manage them in whatever way she can. And Alison’s advice is good. But for anyone who has had severe trauma, being triggered is a very real thing, and can result in emotional responses that can be hard to manage in the moment. I’ve been in this situation myself, and had to politely leave the room until I could settle myself down. I suggest that if LW1 does in someway genuinely trigger this person (maybe she looks or smells like a past abuser – who knows), then the employee would be better off leaving. It’s impossible for the manager and painful for the employee.

    Of course they could just be a good old fashioned pain in the backside, but I don’t think it’s safe to just assume that.

    I’m not armchair diagnosing – who knows what is going on with this person – just thinking about possibilities.

    1. Nodramalama*

      For me personally, I don’t think the person is being disingenuous about being triggered. But being triggered by something that is required to do a job is not LWs problem to solve. It’s for the person to figure out how to deal with the triggers.

    2. bamcheeks*

      Yes, there’s several comments assuming LW’s employee expects to be given a permanent pass on feedback, and accusing them of “weaponising” boundaries. There’s no unification they’ve asked for anything or the sort! It’s depressing that the reaction to someone sharing a mental health problem is that they must be trying to manipulate people and get away with something, when that’s not *anywhere* in the letter.

      1. Myrin*

        I mean, there are two comments using the “weaponising” talk (and one is only explaining about the concept which they recently learned about) and I’m honestly not seeing anyone at all doubting the veracity of the employee’s being triggered, so I wouldn’t really say this is “the reaction” but I do agree that there’s nothing in the letter indicating manipulation or trying to get away with something.

        However, it does kind of read like the employee expects to be given a permanent pass, simply because they don’t seem to be bringing forth any possible solutions at all and are in fact “escalating” in the sense that they’re now telling OP her mere existence is a trigger. Which, I’m not saying that isn’t true, not at all! But, well, what is OP supposed to do about that?

        You said in another comment that the employee might be looking just as hard for a solution to this which is very possible but if they are, they really need to communicate that in some way! Because otherwise, what else but “expects to be given a permanent pass” are you supposed to take from their behaviour? So far, they’ve only ever said what amounts to “I can’t” which is effectively the same as “don’t talk to me or approach me or look at me at all, ever”, even if they are feverishly searching for a solution in their own head.

        1. bamcheeks*

          Two talking about weaponising, and at least two more that assume that the outcome LW’s employee wants is that they simply never have to update LW about their work or receive criticism!

          simply because they don’t seem to be bringing forth any possible solutions at all and are in fact “escalating” in the sense that they’re now telling OP her mere existence is a trigger

          Respectfully, “your mere existence is a trigger” is a hyperbolic read of what is written, and I also think it’s really dangerous to describe a disclosure of a mental health problem as “escalating”, even in quote marks. The employee has the right to disclose a mental health problem and to enter into a discussion with their employer about reasonable accommodations.

          LW quotes the employee as saying “something about your style”, which is not specific enough for LW to fix alone, but it IS a reasonable place to start exploring solutions. Oversight of the employee’s work is non-negotiable. But does that mean the employee could send them a written update? Is it something about LW’s physical presence that triggers them, and if so, would a phone call or a Teams call be easier? Do they need to allow more time for meetings? What would the employee like LW to do if they start to become triggered– end the meeting, wait, leave the room and come back after ten minutes? If it really is something about LW’s voice or something that can’t be ameliorated by changing meeting mode, is this the kind of role where the employee could be managed by someone else?

          I think the key thing to recognise here is that it’s not on LW to fix this for them, but it is also not the responsibility of the employee to fix it by themselves. It is great when a disabled employee knows exactly what they need and can ask for it proactively, of course, but it’s also quite normal for an employee to be dealing with a new problem and need support in the process of figuring out what they need, or for them not to know what can be flexed and can’t, or to be too scared to ask for accommodations because they’ve had a bad experience before. None of those things should be held against them or lead to the assumption that they are being uncooperative. The correct next step after a disclosure of a disability or health condition is to start a conversation about reasonable accommodations, and it’s just as much LW’s responsibility to do that as it is the employee’s, if not more.

          It’s certainly possible that LW has tried to have this conversation, and the employee isn’t receptive and is trying to avoid the problem. But it’s definitely not explicit that they’ve tried that, so it shouldn’t be treated as if it’s only or even the most likely possibility.

          1. Pescadero*

            “I think the key thing to recognise here is that it’s not on LW to fix this for them, but it is also not the responsibility of the employee to fix it by themselves.”

            Actually, under the ADA – it kind of is.

            The accommodations have to be reasonable, and the employee has to drive the process.

            It is the responsibility of the employee to inform the employer that an accommodation is needed, and what that accommodation is.

            1. bamcheeks*

              really?! OK, that’s a more significant divergence from UK practice than I had realised. Employers here are advised to let the employee drive the solutions if they can, since they are the experts on their own condition. But it is stressed that suggestions can come from either the employer or the employee (or occupational health) and an employer who left it up to the employee to come up with solutions and called it a day if they didn’t would be opening themselves up to a disability discrimination case.

              1. Pescadero*

                It CAN come from the employer – but there is no need for the employer to suggest anything, just work collaboratively and provide reasonable accommodation.

                It’s perfectly legal for the employer to just say “tell me what you need, and we’ll decide if it’s reasonable”

                1. bamcheeks*

                  So if you had an employee who acquired a disability and had no idea what they could or should ask for, there’d be no responsibility on the company to suggest common accommodations like, “we can order you a different chair”, or “here are some of the accessibility features in Microsoft”? That seems like a very big and obvious flaw in the legislation if so!

                2. blue rose*

                  @bamcheeks What’s your reasoning here? Pescadero is talking about the “interactive process” that Alison is always going on about when pertinent, wherein the employer and employee work together to come up with accommodations. Presumably, the employee, being the firsthand experience, would know more about their own situation than even can be explained to the employer. The employee’s input would be crucial to finding a workable solution, or before that, even deciding if additional accommodations are even necessary (not a decision that belongs in the hands of the employer, whatever the answer is).

                  Is it a concern about potential discrimination? I figure that whether the legal obligation to start the accommodation process is on the employer or the employee, the employer finds out in both cases, so if they’re the kind of employer to illegally discriminate on that basis, they’re going to do it either way. idk, it’s not clear to me what angle you’re approaching this from, is what I’m saying.

                3. bamcheeks*

                  There doesn’t seem to have been any interactive process here at all, is what I’m saying. The timeline LW describes is:

                  – employee is clearly having problems with a key aspect of their job (receiving feedback)
                  – I have informally tried several different ways of approaching this with the employee (“no matter how I handle the conversation”), but there has been no improvement
                  – the employee has disclosed that the problem is caused by a medical issue (“now I’m being told…”)
                  – Do I have to do anything else, or can I say it’s their problem to figure it out at this point?

                  Like, I don’t know how the ADA works. But for me as a manager in the UK, the disclosure of a medical issue would be the START of the interactive process or figuring out reasonable adjustments. What went before would be documented and relevant, sure, but that’s just me trying to be a good manager. Once a medical issue has been disclosed and we know the employee is protected under the Equality Act, we’re know we have a responsbility to provide reasonable adjustments and I’m working MUCH more closely with HR to make sure we are meeting all our legal obligations. We are offering the employee a meeting with occupational health, who are the experts on disability at work and reasonable adjustments. We are asking the employee to discuss their needs with their doctor or therapist and see if they have any good ideas. We are trying to identify whether the issue is feedback in general, or specifically with this manager. We also recognise that this is a really difficult and stressful time for the employee, and whilst we need them to engage with the process, we’ll try and manage it in the least stressful way possible. Part of that is trying to make sure the employee is well-supported by occupational health, their union, their own medical team if possible, the EAP or some other kind of representative in formal meetings. (Some of this is legally mandated, some of it is just best practice, but since I work for large organisations with formal HR, if we weren’t following best practice and got sued, we would need to have a very good reason why we weren’t.)

                  If the employee refuses to engage with that process, well, sure, then we are very limited in what we can do. But LW’s employee hasn’t been *offered* a process yet. LW appears to have written the letter pretty quickly after disclosure of a medical issue “(“Now I’ve been told…”), and they don’t mention taking advice from anyone in HR, or asking the employee what they need even informally, never mind formally. Like, I am sure they have tried really hard and are sympathetic to the employee. But they are not an expert on the employee’s condition, possible accommodations, or their responsibilities under the ADA, so the fact they hadn’t sought any outside advice would be pretty shocking.

                  We are not just going, “Tell us what you need, and if you can’t come up with anything, you’re out.”

                  I genuinely don’t know whether the ADA in text and in practice is significantly different from the UK equivalent, or whether what I’m seeing here is a lay understanding of how it works and a LOT of ableism. A lot of people seem to be assuming that the “interactive process” is “the manager has tried several different things to make this work, and it hasn’t, so that’s that”, and the bar would be a lot higher here.

                  There is also an assumption that the disabled employee is an expert as being disabled, has lived with their condition for a significant amount of time, knows exactly what they need, and can advocate for it, and that if they’re not doing that, they’re uncooperative. Whilst that is obviously true for many disabled people, people become disabled all the time. New conditions arise. Situations deteriorate. “Things got progressive worse, I had no idea what was going on, then I figured out that maybe it was XXX, and that was the beginning of things getting better but it still took a while to figure out what worked” is an incredibly normal story. Not all organisations can afford to go through a long process of figuring stuff out, of course, but at this stage, LW hasn’t even started a short process.

          2. Myrin*

            I said the “existence” aspect in reaction to this part: “I am a trigger for their trauma but they can only say that there is “something about my style”” which I interpreted to mean the way OP looks or her voice or the “presence” she exudes while she’s just there, which would indeed mean the way she exists. But you’re right that that doesn’t have to be the case.

        2. Eldritch Office Worker*

          ” So far, they’ve only ever said what amounts to “I can’t” which is effectively the same as “don’t talk to me or approach me or look at me at all, ever”, even if they are feverishly searching for a solution in their own head”

          Yes. The communication about mental health doesn’t end with disclosure – impact and management are the parts that require a real conversation. That conversation might start with “I don’t know what to do about it”, but that’s different than allowing things to continue as they are without some kind of strategy for either how to avoid a trigger or what to do when a trigger occurs.

          1. Hyena*

            I’m curious why the employee would need to say “I don’t know what to do about it” when I feel that is implied by them not having a solution.

            I’m also unsure why the assumption of them not having a solution is “they don’t WANT a solution except to Be Difficult” rather than the above good-faith interpretation of “they don’t know what to do about this emotionally and logistically difficult problem and are expecting their superiors/work, who may have more experience broadly and are indeed the people in charge of them, to take the lead on it.”

            I absolutely know that some people are just difficult and trying to weaponize therapyspeak as an attempted shutdown, and it’s possible that LW’s employee is one of them, but that interpretation is unkind and unhelpful. We’re meant to be collaborative. Even if the advice/comments end up not being applicable for this person, they may help a future reader, rather than making someone feel badly about their inexperience dealing with a difficult problem.

            1. Eldritch Office Worker*

              Nothing should ever be assumed to be implied in these situations, by either party.

            2. Myrin*

              “I’m curious why the employee would need to say “I don’t know what to do about it” when I feel that is implied by them not having a solution.”

              To show that they’re willing to actively work on the issue. If they’re just silently standing there while frantically trying to think of a solution in their head, that looks exactly the same as if they’re just silently standing there because they’re perfectly fine with how things are.

              (This is just meant as an answer to your question, btw. I totally agree that we have no reason to believe that this person is using therapyspeak to get away with something and absent any further information, it’s pretty uncharitable to claim that they probably are. I personally get the feeling that they’re just really helpless and don’t know how to verbalise what’s going on.)

    3. iglwif*

      Yeah, as a person with some very genuine triggers that a lot of people find kind of ridiculous, I am 100% willing to believe that LW1’s employee’s triggers are genuine.

      And at the same time it is the employee’s responsibility to figure out how to manage them in a way that allows her to have a job, whether it’s this job or some other one.

  21. Eric*

    I think it is worth keeping in mind that for some people, answering these questions could be problematic. For example, they could be LGBT and not feel comfortable disclosing that. While that doesn’t seem to be the case with OP, it’s worth thinking about as people think about how they might react to a coworker in such a situation.

    1. Nodramalama*

      There’s no reason why the answer to are you married or do you have kids has to reveal anything about whether someone is LGBT+.

      1. Avii*

        In an ideal world, sure, but you’d be surprised at how f—ing *weird* some people get when they find out that you don’t have kids or are single.

        1. Nodramalama*

          Yes, people can. But as a single, childless queer person, my answer of “no” I am not married has nothing to do with the fact that I’m queer. I’m not married because I’m not married.

          1. Avii*

            You’re right, it doesn’t. But people love to assume things and jump to conclusions. I once had a gay coworker who, on his first day, concluded that I was also gay because it came up in conversation that I was single and that I didn’t like seafood. I do happen to be bi, but the fact that I don’t like the taste of fish has nothing to do with that.

            1. Nodramalama*

              That really has nothing to do with the idea that people can ask basic facts about themselves without revealing more than they want. Asking someone how their weekend is does not require someone to say, I played with my gay softball league.

              1. Avii*

                The question wasn’t about asking how someone’s weekend went, though? It was about relationship status, and as I said, people absolutely get weird and nosy about that if you don’t give them the ‘right’ answer, whatever they expect that to be. Hardly anyone is going to quibble if you answer a question about what you did over the weekend with a ‘eh, nothing much’, but being single and childless past your mid-twenties invites all sorts of weird speculation from people who can’t mind their own business.

            2. lisa vanderpump*

              People are going to jump to more conclusions if you give weird “maybe I do, maybe I don’t” responses.

              2. DJ Abbott*

                Absolutely. I would think you were hiding something. The answer “sometimes” to the relationship question would make me think you’re a flaky person who plays games in relationships. I would think you are either playing games with your relationships, or playing games with me, your coworker. Either is a bad impression.
                If you don’t want to talk about your personal life, you could just say you’d rather not talk about it at this point. I would respect that, although in some places there are people who wouldn’t. So to a certain extent it’s situational.

              3. MK*

                @DJ Abbott, I agree, but it’s worth pointing out that a refusal to discuss even superficial aspects of your personal life, even if the other person completely respects it as a choice, tends to act pretty chillingly in a new relationship.

              4. Dust Bunny*

                This.

                I’m mind-numbingly cishet, I just don’t have a husband or kids because sometimes that’s how life shakes out. Just saying “no” invites a lot less prying than being cagey.

                Also, at some point the questioning does tip from normal into invasive, and at that point you’re free to ask them why they’re pressing this so hard? I had a very young, very marriage-desperate coworker many years ago who could not let my singleness go, but she was definitely an outlier. I finally just asked here what her deal was because there wasn’t any more to the story* and pestering me about it was getting weird. (I think it was some kind of clueless anxiety thing that was definitely more about her than about me.)

                *Even if there is more to your story, you don’t owe that to anyone else.

              5. Avii*

                Yeah, LW2’s openly evasive answers are likely to exacerbate things. But in my case, I gave a pretty straightforward response of ‘Nah, haven’t met anyone that I’ve really clicked with’ when my new coworker asked me if I was in a relationship, and they still went and conflated that with an earlier discussion about a seafood restaurant possibly moving into the building and leapt boldly into their own conclusions.

            3. hiraeth*

              That’s such a ridiculous leap that I think that guy would probably have been weird even if he didn’t know you were single. You can’t stop people making weird assumptions about you. That’s not something you can fully control. But if you actively want people to make *the very weirdest assumptions possible*, do what this LW did, because it is honestly bizarre.

              1. Spicy Tuna*

                Hubby and I have no kids (on purpose). We have a friend who assumes we are swingers because we are intentionally child free. That’s his issue, not ours!

            4. Nancy*

              Most people can handle the idea that someone is single with no kids without assuming they are LGBT. That person is just odd.

            6. Orv*

              I had an autistic friend who insisted I must be autistic because I mentioned something about trains and my ears looked slightly pointy to them. Some people just make wild assumptions.

        2. Lady Lessa*

          Just my personal experience. I’ve never noticed anything weird when folks find out that I’m a never married woman, who doesn’t have any children.

          I wonder if part of it is that I am working largely with men as a chemist.

          1. Nightengale*

            It’s less now than when I was younger, but being an unmarried/not dating woman definitely made people tell me “I would find someone” (I wasn’t looking) and being a pediatrician without children made people assume I would want/have children some day

            1. allathian*

              I suspect that people (or let’s be honest, women and people of any gender who get classed as female by others) in jobs that are often seen as nurturing or where they work primarily with children or parents and infants, like pediatricians, pediatric nurses, teachers (especially younger grades), and midwives are more often than not assumed to someday want kids of their own. Obviously a false assumption.

              It’s not necessary to have kids of your own to work effectively with other people’s kids. At least you don’t make the mistake of assuming that other people’s experiences of parenting are similar to yours if you don’t have any.

              My son’s speech development was slightly delayed as a toddler, and he went to speech therapy for 2 years before starting school. His speech therapist’s name is quite uncommon, and I heard from my sister that he was married to one of her friends from high school and that they’re childfree by choice. Both of them work with kids, my sister’s friend is a kindergarten teacher.

              1. Nightengale*

                These days when people ask if I have kids I say, 800 of them!

                But during my pediatric training there were a lot of senior pediatricians who often said to the trainees “WHEN you have kids you will understand” whatever. The implication was that we would all become parents and thus better more understanding pediatricians. This was aimed at both male and female trainees, except those few who already had kids.

                I’m not a parent. I am a disabled person with disabilities similar to those of many of my patients. So I have a useful personal understanding of their experiences while not having a useful personal understanding of the parent experience. We can’t all have everything!

            2. Dust Bunny*

              Same, but I’ve always worked in women-predominant areas. But it is much less now that I’m in a job where those women are mostly a little older and largely better-educated/have a wider variety of professional obligations and interests.

              1. Nightengale*

                yes I can’t tell if it has gotten better because times have changed or because I am now (48) perceived as not likely to “find someone” or have children whereas when younger I was seen as persuadable into conventionality.

        3. Snark*

          That’s a separate issue to deal with conversationally, and not related to whether OP2 is being weird and off-putting in their replies. Let’s not overthink it.

        5. HannahS*

          People are also deeply weird about women who have children, and it can also have career consequences (getting Mommy-tracked.) I don’t ask people their marital or parental status, and also none of that changes that “I might have children” is a strange answer. At BEST, I’d take it as a bad joke about sowing wild oats, which is not workplace-appropriate anyway.

          1. Old Crone*

            People can also be deeply weird about women with no children -romantically involved or not. Those people were in a position to damage me professionally or at the very least make my work environment unpleasant. Though in my decades of work, I find people don’t ask as much anymore. Maybe because I’m older now?

            (Other people’s experience can be different.)

            1. Allonge*

              People can be deeply weird, period.

              The thing here is, LW’s responses create that weirdness before others get a chance to be weird or not about the factual answers. People who are committed to their weirdness will not be prevented from doing so by this approach.

              I am all for weirdness in certain places and cases! But this is not good-weird.

            2. HannahS*

              Absolutely! I was responding to the idea that people are weird about people without partners or children; people can be deeply weird about others regardless of marital or parental status.

      2. Irish Teacher.*

        I can see it leading to awkwardness, like if the LW is a woman married to a woman and in a very homophobic company, then if she answers “yes,” to “are you married?” there’s a good chance there will be a question like “what’s your husband’s name?” or “where does your husband work?” and then she is left with the dilemma of whether to say, “he works in such a place” or explain it’s a she or try to avoid using pronouns, “oh, Apple,” which might get awkward long term.

        But yeah, I think lying and calling them the opposite gender or lying that she isn’t married or keeping it vague are all better options than “maybe I am and maybe I’m not,” which could well lead to people guessing anyway. In a homophobic environment where people tend not to be out, vagueness about whether or not one is married sort of indicates the possibility of a same-sex marriage.

        1. DJ Abbott*

          Agree with your last paragraph.
          This also got me thinking about my workplace. I don’t know the relationship status of most of my coworkers. It’s not something we ask about although if people want to share, we’re happy to listen.
          It can be difficult to navigate coworkers who are pushy with personal questions. I had trouble with this when I was younger.
          Avoiding the question would be a good thing to try, or saying they don’t like talking about their personal life. If coworkers persist after that, lying is better than coming off as rude or unfriendly. But a person should not be put in that position in the first place.

          1. sheworkshardforthemoney*

            People can ask about kids or marital status. BUT, it’s the follow up questions that can be intrusive. My sister lost her only child. Her response to the question is “Yes, but they passed away at age 5.” Most people will leave it at that but sometimes there are people who want many details. Her response is to remove herself from the situation if she can.

            1. Bast*

              I find that so incredibly odd and disturbing that people would ask for more details after some divulges the death of a child. I can’t imagine prying into that.

              1. Reindeer Hut Hostess*

                Agreed. I cannot imagine prying for details on something so incredibly painful. That said, a brief conversation with a very distant cousin who had lost a child was one of the most awkward moments of my life. I simply could not think of a single word to say in the moment. Absolutely nothing felt right to say. Today, I would say “I’m so sorry” and let the moment move forward to something else.

              2. Dust Bunny*

                WORD. Who does that?

                I know who does that: My dad, because “I was curious”. He can f-ing die of curiosity, then.

                1. DJ Abbott*

                  I would be curious too. But I would never ask! So rude and hurtful!
                  Unfortunately there are many people who don’t think, and do things like this. We’ve all met them.

        2. LWH*

          Purely anecdote but I haven’t really met any married queer people who bother trying to hide it at work, at the point you’ve gotten married to someone you’ve been through the gauntlet.

          That being said, having been a closeted queer person earlier in my life…I really don’t think we need all the hand wringing in this thread about “but, but what if they’re LGBT???” LGBT people have already figured out how to navigate this ten million times by the time we even enter the workplace. We can survive some completely normal office chitchat. We’re not a great example case for why someone should never ask a coworker anything ever trying to get to know them like anyone does when they’re around a person all the time. It’s not sinister.

          1. Sneaky Squirrel*

            Agreed, I don’t think that the answer to solving issues of discrimination is to avoid any possibilities of casual conversation with others in case they reveal that they don’t fit the mold.

            1. Elitist Semicolon*

              Avoiding discussion isn’t always about “solving issues of discrimination” – sometimes it’s about personal safety. And to LWH’s point, people who come out later in life haven’t necessarily “figured out how to navigate this ten million times by the time we even enter the workplace.” Self-discovery happens on its own timeline, and besides, there are plenty of folks who sprang forth from the womb waving a pride flag who are still cautious in a new workplace.

          2. Smithy*

            Yes this – having coworkers who are on the mild front busy bodies/ask more questions than you want or at worst, homophobic, misogynistic, or patriarchal are all separate issues. And answering questions about your relationship or parental status in that manner will only compound those issues. But those are standalone issues where “perfect” answers won’t remove those issues.

            While I’m not queer, I am single, no kids, and middle aged. And the people who are going to be weird about singleness – will just be weird. Additionally, while I do date/have relationships – I’d answer the question “are you in a relationship or married” as no. Is it the radical honesty about my life? Maybe not, but it’s usually true enough and is helpful with my colleagues who are normal enough.

            Putting aside work places with larger problematic issues at play – the most immediate reality more people face in the workplace can be around coworkers who want to be friends/personally or close or just like to gossip. Whether better intentioned or worse, being able to navigate this dynamic is just useful at work. Loads of people do go to work and don’t want to make friends, but are able to socialize professionally. Figuring this out is truly just useful.

          3. JM60*

            We’re not a great example case for why someone should never ask a coworker anything ever trying to get to know them like anyone does when they’re around a person all the time.

            There is a middle ground of, “It’s okay to ask, but don’t penalize someone if they opt out of answering.”

            For whatever it’s worth, I too have been a closeted queer person earlier in my life, and I think people not wanting to be out at work is a valid consideration to bring up on this general conversation.

        3. Seashell*

          I am a woman married to a man, and I can’t remember anyone at work ever asking if I’m married or, if I mention my husband, asking any notable follow-up questions about him. If any of this has happened, it’s been so few and far between that I’ve managed to forget it.

      3. Elitist Semicolon*

        It does if the coworker’s next question is, “oh, what does your husband do?” and now you have to choose between correcting them, which may not be comfortable/safe for many reasons, or flat-out lying.

        Maybe I’m an oddball here, but “are you married?” and “do you have kids?” are not questions I’d ever ask someone I don’t know because sometimes the honest answer is something they may not want to discuss (not just LGBTQ+ identity, but also a recent divorce, death in the family, whatever). I generally wait until folks bring their family up on their own and stick to hobbies until then, what they did over the weekend, or something else that doesn’t directly ask about family.

    2. MK*

      I don’t think asking if a coworker is partnered or has children is forcing anyone to come out. The issue you mentioned is part of why people shouldn’t be pushy and let it go if the coworker seems guarded about their personal life, but then again not being pushy should be your default regardless.

    3. Brain the Brian*

      I’m a gay man (thus far unmarried) in a workplace that’s not exactly LGBT-friendly. Answering a question about whether I’m in a relationship or married the way the LW2 says they did would be a great way to invite *more* unwanted prying.

      “Nope, no one at the moment” is a much more pleasant option.

      1. amoeba*

        Hah, yeah, I’d definitely either assume a weird joke or… some kind of complex, possibly poly, situation? An on-off-relationship that for some reason they felt they needed to share with me? I mean, if anything, I’d think they were possibly oversharing/hinting at something more private…

        1. Falling Diphthong*

          I think you’ve hit on something with this response being so weird that it lands as TMI. While it doesn’t contain information, it goes out of the way to suggest that there is a big elaborate complicated secret here.

          Like:
          “Do you know if it’s supposed to rain this afternoon?”
          a) “Ha! My job does not involve the rain! I don’t have to reveal that to you!”
          b) “I don’t know.”
          c) “This weather app gives it a 70% chance.”

      2. WeirdChenist*

        Yep. I’m a queer woman living in a place where thr majority of my coworkers are a part of a culture that highly values marriage, kids, strait-ness, and religious faith. I am none of those things. A bland, pleasant “Nope!” Or “Not right now!” keeps things congenial without getting personal. Immediately jumping to evasive or defensive answers makes things weirdly adversarial in a way that will invite more attention and prying.

        If your life circumstances are such that answering some basic small talk is going to be awkward (ie queer and not wanting to be out, going through a divorce, experiencing fertility problems), it can be helpful to pre-plan some bland answers in advance so you’re not panicking mid-moment

        Alison’s suggestion of immediately changing the subject is a good one, because a lot of people start up small talk convos about things *they* want to talk about rather than what they think *you* want to talk about.

        You don’t have to be bffs with your coworkers! But a surface-level pleasantness will get you a lot farther than hissing like a feral cat if a coworker dare asks how your weekend was

      3. hiraeth*

        Yes! If you actually want to fly under the radar, you need to aim for bland and boring. Cryptic and mysterious will have the precise opposite effect.

    4. Neptune*

      Honestly, I think that most LGBT people who are in that situation are very aware that weird coy answers like “maybe I do, maybe I don’t!” simply draw attention to their relationships. In my experience, performative vagueness like this is largely the domain of people who want to Make A Point about something, not people who are genuinely trying to protect themselves.

    5. Hastily Blessed Fritos*

      I’m married with a kid, and mentioning that is not going to reveal I’m gay.

      I do wish “do you have kids” was less common as office small talk because of the pain it can bring up for people dealing with pregnancy loss or infertility, but all I can do is not ask that myself, it’s too ingrained to change.

      1. Czhorat*

        Maybe, but kids are a HUGE part of your life if you do have them AND a big shared experience/conversation topic.

        I get how it could be very painful for some, but for man it’s too major to NOT be able to share.

        1. MC*

          It is extremely easy to not ask people about their family-building plans and talk about something other than your kids. Especially if someone tells you they’re uncomfortable with it. I have two kids after going through infertility and while they’re a huge part of my life, they are not the only major thing, and I’d never ask someone if they’re planning on having kids.

          1. Czhorat*

            Oh, I agree “are you planing on having kids” can be *very* intrusive. In the context of the letter “do you have any”? is perfectly normal. if the LW had said “no” then it would be weird of the co-worker to push. In this case, it’s weird of the LW to give such an oddly evasive answer.

        2. Michelle Smith*

          Sharing about your own children is perfectly okay for me. Asking me if I have children is a bit painful, but a reasonable question. Asking me any follow up questions about why or if I’m planning on having them in the future is where it becomes very personal and very painful.

          1. Czhorat*

            Oh, I agree here. I think “do you have kids?” – especially if it comes up in context as it did in this letter – is mostly OK, but there *is* a line somewhere close by.

            I’ve tried to learn that my experiences are not universal, while also sharing reasonably. There’s a balance to it.

      2. Dust Bunny*

        Single, no kids. Never met anyone with who I’d have wanted to share them, so I guess technically this is by choice but it doesn’t really feel like it (I can’t afford to have them on my own).

        I don’t mind being asked, I only mind if someone hounds me about it. Like, I’m in my later 40s–the odds of me getting married at all at this point are vanishingly small and even if I did I’m pretty obviously not going to have any biological kids. I don’t care if you ask, just don’t throw a pity party or start suggesting workarounds.

    6. L-squared*

      Some of you really want to make any and all excuses for this behavior.

      Just a basic “no I’m not married” or “nope, no kids” has nothing to do with disclosing your sexual orientation.

    7. ecnaseener*

      If someone is truly uncomfortable answering these types of questions, the best way to handle it is to warmly say “I’m actually pretty private about that sort of thing” and change the subject. People will still wonder why you’re so unusually private, but at least you’ll be owning it as a personal choice of yours rather than implying they were out of line for asking.

    8. mm*

      As a queer person myself, I am perfectly capable of navigating perfectly banal personal questions without revealing anything more than I want to. I can’t speak for all queer people of course. But being closeted at work or in our personal lives gives us a lot of practice in avoiding putting ourselves at risk at worst or uncomfortable situations at best. You can say “oh I’m taking some time to focus on my career or my health” or “I’ve gone on some dates but nothing has come from it.” In my experience, people don’t really pry beyond that. But even if they do, you can deflect. Or you can even lie. There’s no Small Talk Police that will come arrest you for lying about something like this. If someone keeps prying, you can always say “you know my life isn’t that interesting” and keep deflecting.

    9. Elle*

      Is this why straight people often completely sidestep my girlfriend/home life in conversations? They’re trying so hard to be allies that they’re coming off low key homophobic? I just assumed they weren’t interested in hearing about or are actively disturbed by my life.

  22. Stopgap*

    LW2, aside from professional consequences, acting cagey will make people curious about what secrets you’re hiding. If you want to minimize prying, you’d be better off giving boring, straightforward answers.

  23. Rebekah*

    #2 sounds a lot like my brother except that he’s perfectly self aware that he’s being weird and it’s part of his entire weird, quirky persona. I’m not entirely sure what he’s like at work, and maybe he keeps things a little straighter there, but I can definitely picture a scenario like this, and the more you dig the more elaborate and strange the answers get. I think he gets away with it because he’s a warm person and he generally hams it up so people know he’s being weird on purpose, but I don’t doubt some people find it a turn off or just confusing.

    And yes, being related to him can be annoying sometimes because you never know if he’s telling the truth about anything or get a straight answer to simple questions. Like, would it kill you to RSVP to the family Christmas party I’m hosting with a simple yes or no? Also why did you randomly tell me your gf is pregnant (she wasn’t) when I didn’t even ask? These days if I need to know anything I just ask his gf. She knows him well enough to totally understand why her BF’s sister might randomly text “Are you pregnant?” lol.

    Yes I love him and he’s genuinely entertaining and funny a lot of the time but dude, seriously sometimes.

    1. Irish Teacher.*

      My sister is so secretive that we literally found out she got engaged a week ago when her now fiancé changed his facebook status to “engaged.” And yeah, I could see her responding with something like this. My mum once texted her “any news?” and she responded with, “who do you think I am? Anne Doyle?” (Anne Doyle being a well-known newsreader on Ireland’s state TV channel.)

      I honestly don’t know how she gets away with it because she certainly isn’t warm about it. She’ll look at you like “who do you think you are, asking me questions?” But somehow she does. I suspect that she gets away with it at work because she is genuinely talented at what she does and her year group at college were the first to have the option of doing an extra year to gain a higher qualification than had been available in the southern half of Ireland previously, so she started her career as one of…I think 25 of the most qualified people in her field in much of the country.

      The most awkward part is when I get questions, especially like now about her engagement: “is she excited about the wedding?” “which of them proposed?” “have they much planned yet?” and I’m just like “uh, dunno. She doesn’t release information.”

    2. Falling Diphthong*

      I feel like “quirky” has taken on different connotations depending on whether it’s an outsider’s description or a way the person describes themself.

      1. Dust Bunny*

        Yeah, i’ve had other people call me quirky. I don’t think I’m that quirky. I’m definitely not intentionally quirky and I don’t want people to think I’m quirky on purpose, looking for attention.

    3. Anonynon*

      My boyfriend is like this, and I truly do not have the patience for this type of thing these days. IDK if that’s a problem with me, or a problem with him, but I can tell you I am considering breaking up with him because of it. I understand if you want to be impish and mysterious with strangers or acquaintances, but constantly dodging questions from your live-in girlfriend of multiple years is not cute, and it’s exhausting.

      For your brother to tell you his gf is pregnant when you didn’t ask and she isn’t is so annoying and purposely irritating that I would probably just tell him to f-off for the foreseeable future. Sounds like he needs a hobby that is not coming up with “clever” answers.

  25. Yeah...Nah*

    #2

    I can see why you feel the need for this, as let me guess, back in the days when I answered sincerely, people saw it as an opportunity to force convert me to heterosexuality, to the point of “inviting” a man I don’t know to corner me in the tea room, because we are obligated to marry a man? I was young then, and really didn’t know how to handle it except I quit and escaped that town when my coworkers won’t stop trying to ship me with every random male in town.

    I get your frustration, I also don’t think your answer is going to help much. I’m still trying to be more assume on faith, but yes further “ohhhh but you must need a man” still happens. Ultimately, if your work environment don’t have the HR to be willing to address this, I can see why you are on the edge about it. I don’t know what the solution is. Yours probably isn’t it, though.

  26. Artemesia*

    The first triggered example really feels a lot like how people use psychobabble to cover for their incompetence or unwillingness to do the work. I have seen this sort of thing from time to time. Yes, you can pretend it is genuine, maybe it is, but people don’t get to choose not to be managed. This employee is trying to use the language of disability to get out of doing the work. It is reasonable to act with ‘concern’ but be insistent that being an employee means being managed, being accountable for your time, your work, the quality of your work and that will not change.

    Alison’s language is good on this. Take is ‘seriously’ but hold the line.

    1. Sparkles McFadden*

      I think LW1 absolutely has to treat this like it’s a genuine problem, and document the hell out of everything. Work with the person to find a solution, if the company has an EAP program, give the person a referral to it etc. but make sure that the person knows that giving a manager updates is part of the job and they can’t just opt out of that. I hope the LW is prepared to fire this person because that’s probably how this is going to go. (You can easily guess how I know this.)

      I am wondering how the LW ended up with this employee. If the employee is new, the situation can be resolved quickly. If, however, the manager is new, and this sort of behavior has been tolerated by the former manager, or if the employee has been shuffled around from manager to manager because no one wants to fire the person, it is a really difficult situation to resolve.

  27. Kella*

    The key to being effectively evasive in answering personal questions is to not make it obvious that you’re being evasive. “Sometimes” and “I might have kids” make it super freaking obvious that you’re being evasive! This will either make people think you’re being rude, as Alison said, or will actually invite *more* questions because it’s obvious you’re trying to hide something and yet almost seem to be inviting further inquiry.

    1. Boof*

      Yep, deflect if you don’t want to answer, rather than outright block, and give people a clue what you do want to chat about. Unless the goal is just to not chat at all, I guess, but that will likely have some professional consequences, so LW can decide how much they just Do Not Want to.
      Ie, some variant of “are you single” can be “oh I’m good, and how about [insert topic you’d prefer to chat about]” or if they really just want to escape I guess something like “oh doing ok, sorry need to focus!” (again, sort of sounds like you answered a question even if you didn’t answer the question + politest reason not to talk more in a work context probably)

    2. Paint N Drip*

      Another commenter mentioned that it seems like OP wishes to be the secretly aloof person we all have in our lives (when you think about it, you really don’t know them at all) but being that person actually takes incredible social skills and tact. Being nth degree weirdly evasive accomplishes the exact opposite lol

  28. Irish Teacher.*

    LW2, the way to fix this is just to stop doing it and give more usual answers.

    If you don’t have a spouse or kids, just saying that will end the discussion a lot more quickly than being coy. If you do and don’t want to talk about them for whatever reason, that IS more difficult, but even just lying and saying you don’t or replying quickly and moving on: “oh yes, but they are much older. How old IS your child now? will work better than essentially inviting people to speculate.

    Like others, I doubt you’d be fired for this but it WILL have people speculating on what you might be hiding and make them more likely to look you up online/ gossip about what might be going on and also makes you look a bit odd, which could go against you for things like promotion.

    But I think you can ix it by simply stopping. One or two weird answers could be passed off as poor jokes or just you being distracted.

    1. Sparkles McFadden*

      I found this question interesting because I realized that I never got asked questions like these at work, and I never posed them to anyone else. We all just politely waited until details came up organically. I actually think the example of “Ah, kids…do you have kids?” is pretty innocuous. If you respond “No” and the person says something like “Maybe it’ll happen for you one day” then *that’s* obnoxious and boundary crossing, but the initial comment is just idle conversation.

      That said, I think just giving a simple yes or no with no follow up is the way to answer these sorts of questions and signal that you don’t want to have personal conversations. I don’t love getting personal questions either, but most people who ask such things are just trying to be friendly. Answering such questions in a strange way would invite more scrutiny, not less.

  29. Nebula*

    LW2 reminds me of a friend of mine who finds any questions at work about their life outside of work invasive. I am not someone who is particularly interested in making friends at work and my friend knows this, so they were ranting to me once about how awful it was that their colleagues were asking them questions about what they did at the weekend and stuff, and I was just like ‘I actually like to know a bit about the people I spend all that time with, it’s nice to be able to connect’ and they were really surprised. They had assumed that we would be on the same page there, but where they viewed these questions with suspicion (‘Why do you want to know what I did at the weekend?’), and also had some weird snobbery about the very idea of making friends at work (‘That’s not what work is for, why can’t you just make friends somewhere else’), I just figure that generally people are asking these questions with good intent, and if I don’t want to go into detail, I just give a bit of a non-answer. If someone then tries to pry (hasn’t ever really happened to me, thankfully), then that’s invasive, but the question in the first place generally isn’t.

    1. Ellis Bell*

      I think people get very confused about the difference between ‘friendly’ and ‘friends’. There can be good reasons not to make actual friends at work and decide to keep a separation between worlds (just as there are great reasons to lean into friendships in the workplace), but I can’t see the argument for being actually unfriendly.

    2. Colette*

      Yeah, I don’t understand people who find general smalltalk questions (such as “how was your weekend?”) invasive. It’s not a request to share everything, it’s a request to share something. You can respond with something like “pretty quiet, it was nice”, “had a chance to get outside and enjoy the weather”, “so busy, I need a weekend to recover from my weekend” – they give away nothing private or personal, but help build connections. And if you want to share more (“finally got the new floor installed!”, “got the garden in, looking forward to veggies this summer”), you can do that – but a generally pleasant but non-specific answer is fine.

      1. Eldritch Office Worker*

        Right. I don’t like small talk – I really, REALLY don’t like small talk – but I can pull off light and effusive answers and redirect conversations as needed. I work in a very “connect on a personal level” environment that I find slightly grating at times, but we don’t always get to be 100% comfortable 100% of the time.

      2. Dust Bunny*

        I actually like small talk because it’s interaction with minimal investment–I can be a little bit friendly without having to struggle to come up with something creative. (I don’t like an extended interval of small talk, but that’s not what small talk should be for, anyway.)

      3. anonymous anteater*

        the most boring answer is often easiest to bond over! ‘not much, finally went grocery shopping and slept in’ is so relatable.

    3. HonorBox*

      People don’t need to be friends with their coworkers. But it really does help to know a little bit about someone with whom you’re spending 40+ hours each week. There are complicating factors to be sure, but it is far easier to know something about someone just down the hall or who you pass on the way to the break room. “That’s Jane from accounting. She’s a kayaker who has a green thumb” is far better, in my opinion than, “That’s Jane. She’s an accountant. And that’s all I know.”

      1. londonedit*

        This is where I come down. I’ve been in my current job for quite a long time now, and my boss and I know each other well enough – but we don’t know *loads* about each other. Just enough so that we can have conversations where if I say ‘I’m going to Oxford at the weekend’, they’ll say ‘Oh, staying with your brother?’, or if they mention the fact that their partner has a job interview, I’ve already got some context about the fact that they were made redundant in July and they’ve been looking for something ever since. Just bits and pieces about each other’s lives so that it feels a bit more like we know each other, because that’s what you want when you need to work closely alongside a fellow human being. Of course I *could* do my job and know absolutely nothing whatsoever about my boss, but that would be a very cold sort of relationship and I don’t think it would foster good collaboration. No need to go into vast personal details, but I think it’s nice to know a little bit about the people you spend five days a week talking to.

      2. anonymous anteater*

        Agreed. I am trying to come up with jobs where it wouldn’t make your work smoother to have a bit of a rapport with colleagues. Of course there are jobs where it matters a lot and jobs where it’s not critical, but I can’t think of an occupation where it wouldn’t be helpful occasionally to have some social capital.

      3. metadata minion*

        Yep. And if you have any “weird” (but not actively stigmatized) hobby, that can be useful since then people will remember it and be less likely to ask you about anything else. Being The One With The Pet Tarantulas or The One Who Does Competitive Jigsaw Puzzles is a convenient pigeonhole to set up if you don’t really want to talk about also being The One Going Through the Painful Divorce, or The Trans One.

    4. Orv*

      There’s this idea going around the Internet that small talk questions like “what do you do?” and “what’re you planning this weekend?” are really just ways to sort people into socioeconomic classes in order to determine how much respect to give them. Which is just insane, but it seems to have become a common idea in Socialist circles.

  30. Helvetica*

    LW#3 – a colleague used to refer to me as “the teapot policy lady” when he introduced me to other people, which also annoyed me to no end, and we are all non-native English speakers. I would just say “oh, it’s “teapot policy expert”, thanks” and he did stop doing that. I think there is a lot you can convey in your tone that you do not need to justify in a long matter why you don’t like the use of “lady”.

  31. Rez123*

    My question for LW2 is what do you want to fix? Did you realise your answers were odd? Has someone said something? You jumped immediately to getting fired so what happened between the kids question and this letter.

  32. MyStars*

    LW1, if your company offers EAP resources, you might remind your employee that they are available. If I am being triggered by another person’s demeanor, it’s probably related to something historical, and it gives me material for sessions with my therapist. (Which can and has happened — I often have trouble with authoritative women who remind me of my grandmother.)

  34. Hendry*

    For #2, it might be easier if you simply invent a boyfriend like Jan on the Brady Bunch. “His name is George. George….Printer! Yes, George Printer

    1. Irish Teacher.*

      Or just say you don’t have a boyfriend. If the LW is comfortable with lying and doesn’t want to talk about their partner and/or kids, the easiest way is to just say they don’t exist. Inventing a new partner would probably be hard to keep up.

      1. Hendry*

        FYI that was a joke. You may be from Ireland so you might not be familiar w/the Brady Bunch which was a popular TV show in the 60s/70s in the US. There was a well known episode where one of the characters makes up a boyfriend

    2. blueberry muffin*

      If you’re in the United States, say he lives in Canada. If you’re not in the United States, pick another country. ;)

  35. Trout 'Waver*

    In response to LW#5, I lead teams that are diverse, with immigrants, LGBT team members, and women. If you ran for office as a partisan who was a member of a political party that was openly against those people, I don’t think you’d be a good fit for my team.

      1. LW 5*

        Part of me understands that that means I might not get a job from a hiring committee that opposes my views… part of me kind of likes that people like that would self select out of having me work for them?

        But I get that without research and knowing the area I am in it could raise more bad feelings than good. So leaving it off definitely seems like the best plan.

  36. Hearsay*

    Just my point of view, and as a Hispanic married to a South American immigrant: in Spanish they say Jefa which is lady boss. I’m not saying we should accept the phrasing (of course not!), but I wouldn’t just assume malicious or condescending intent on the phrase simply because he’s been here so long. A lot of people I know work in an English speaking environment but their lives are completely revolved around their culture outside of that.
    I definitely would correct Lady Boss to Boss, but I wouldn’t do it as if “of course you should know this,” because they really might not know. As someone who translate for a lot of these individuals they are very literal at times with how they translate things, sometimes to their demise.

    1. Peanut Hamper*

      In gendered languages, the masculine is often the default, so if it’s a language that augments the feminine (e.g., by adding “lady” or some such) rather than using a construction such as the e/a or o/a that Spanish does, it’s possible that it’s just a carryover from his home language and culture. I agree, it may be entirely involuntary and he doesn’t realize he’s doing it. (Or he knows he’s doing it but views it as a sign of respect, because in his culture, it actually is.)

      Since the employee doesn’t seem to be problematic in other ways, yep, the best way is to just be really factual with what you want.

    2. TyphoidMary*

      yeah I think they could pleasantly say “It’s just ‘boss’ in English!” like it’s a grammar correction.

    3. Boof*

      Yeah I don’t think it’s wildly out of line for “lady” to be used as an honorific – it’s a very outdated one but I could easily see someone not fully appreciating that / thinking it was showing respect. I wouldn’t assume that clearly everyone in the land has gotten the memo, when it’s easy enough to just say “oh just boss thanks!” and only dig deeper if they don’t easily accept the change.

  37. L-squared*

    #2. Yes, you were wrong. It is entirely your choice if you want to be a super private person who answers questions in the most vague way possible. And it is everyone else’s choice if they decide you aren’t worth being anything more that cordial to. Why you feel the need to be this private with people you are spending 8 hours a day with is beyond me. But, when you start being the one person not invited to lunches, or being left out of other events, don’t go acting like you are being bullied in the workplace. Just know, you are bringing it on yourself.

  38. Hendry*

    For me, I’d leave it off but it would be more about possibly alienating anyone who might not like your politics, party, etc..

    I agree that a resume is a marketing document, but that doesn’t mean every item has to be strictly work related. There are plenty of non-work related things I would put on one, and as we’ve seen here in other letters it can be beneficial (Jeaopardy winner, First Place in National poetry contest, captain of your college baseball team).

  39. CognitiveDissonance*

    I am fascinated by the comments section today. I don’t remember ever being directly asked if I am married or have kids at work in over 30+ years of work life at over 20 companies mostly in the Northeast US. I have volunteered I live alone periodically when it’s come up organically, but I only know the marital/family status of coworkers if they volunteer information or have a life event while we’re working together.

    My current workplace is a bit more free with personal information than most and I only found out about family of most coworkers when it came up because someone had to deal with an emergency. The one exception is the coworker I’d consider a friend, but even there I learned a lot of it through “my daughter’s car died, have to go help her” or similar.

    Which brings me to my second point. How do those people who say they never socialize at work make friends? All of my “in person” friends are coworkers I immediately clicked with (and therefore were more open with than random other coworkers) or people I met through them. I spent most of my time at work, especially when I was younger. I would have no friends if I didn’t organically “find my people” that way. Sure, there are some who ended up being “work friends” who didn’t last long term after we stopped working together, but some have been for life and everyone has people who drift out of their life for whatever reason.

    I am honestly flummoxed by the comments on this one.

    1. I should really pick a name*

      I’m not a “never socialize at work” person, but I haven’t met any of my actual friends through work connections.
      Most of my friends are either people from university, or people I’ve met through activities (sports, choirs, etc…).

    2. doreen*

      I’ve only made a couple of actual friends at work in 40+ years of working. There are about three or four friends from work that I actually still communicate with but most of my actual friends I’ve met because they were neighbors , through some activity we did together, we had kids in school or an activity together , some from high school and grade school

    3. Eldritch Office Worker*

      “How do those people who say they never socialize at work make friends?”

      How To Make Friends As An Adult is a whole topic of discussion that doesn’t have easy solutions, but I don’t typically socialize at work and I’ve done okay. Common interests, friends of friends, former coworkers I vibed with and kept up with after we stopped working together, etc. I’ll grab occassional drinks with coworkers or maybe go to an event once in awhile but I am pretty strict about keeping my work life and my personal life separate.

    4. Media Monkey*

      i think the AAM commentariat leans towards the introvert/ don’t want to talk to my coworkers/ don’t socialise outside the office. which is very weird to me – most people i know in the UK would have significant friendships at work and would always talk about their weekends (which is likely to include mentions of family). i don’t know what the difference is – i’ve got a couple of weeks off work in a few week’s time and i’m arranging to meet friends, almost all of whom are people i know through work. However i did move 500 miles away from home for work, so perhaps that’s why?

      1. Ellis Bell*

        I think that’s definitely a big motivator to make friends at work, but it depends on all kinds of of factors: life stages/workplace culture/personality meshes. For example I’m also in the UK, and while I’ve worked in places where I had extremely warm outside of work friendships, I’ve also worked places were that wasn’t a thing people really did at all.

      2. Pita Chips*

        Some workplace cultures really try to force their employees to bond and socialize. I think that’s where the resistance you see comes from more than anything else. Activities where people are forced to share personal things are uncomfortable for many, so a lot of people will retreat into themselves in response.

        I’ve always done better in workplaces where relationships could grow organically and I have some great friends I’ve made through work.

        For some people it’s important for their work/life balance to keep the two as separate as possible.

    5. ecnaseener*

      Ha, I’m the opposite of you on both counts! In my first staff meeting at my new job, everyone went around and introduced themselves and shared things like whether they had a spouse or kids or pets. (To be fair, I didn’t have to explicitly say “I am single with no kids,” I just talked about other things, but the question was very much asked.)

      And I’ve never made real friends at work, although I try to cultivate friendly relationships. I’m just not in “forming real bonds” mode and “work” mode at the same time, it’s not how I’m wired. It was the same with school, I virtually never made friends through classes, it was always through extracurriculars. (How do I make new friends – I don’t, these days, because I don’t have many group hobbies, but that’s how I would try to do it, with hobbies!)

    6. allathian*

      It helps to be in an environment where you aren’t expected to work more than 40 hours a week unless it’s exceptionally busy, and even then you accrue comp time.

      I’m an introvert and can only manage to maintain about a dozen friendships, with a handful of true “ride or die” friends. I’ve only made one lasting friendship past my 20s, and that was 15 years ago when I was 37. I met her in the mommy group I was in when I was pregnant and my son was a baby.

    8. CommanderBanana*

      I feel like this stuff comes up organically. The LW is being a dipstick. You can deflect questions you don’t want to answer diplomatically and warmly – I do it all the time.

      My two closest friends are work friends from over a decade ago, and we spend a lot of time together. We are all around the same age and were in similar positions at the job where we met, so we became friends pretty naturally and because we enjoy a lot of the same activities, still see each other multiple times a month. And I’m still close with a former coworker who is much older and now retired, but I’ve visited / kept in touch with her regularly.

      I’d have work friends where the friendships didn’t last after one of us left the workplace, and we’re maybe an-IG-comment-every-now-and-again friends, but I still think of them fondly.

      I don’t expect to make out-of-work friends at my current job, because most of my department is 1. a lot younger than I am and 2. report to me, so it wouldn’t be appropriate.

      You can be an introverted, private, discreet person who doesn’t want to make friends at work and still be warm and friendly.

    9. Jenesis*

      “How do those people who say they never socialize at work make friends?”

      Not including my husband, I have maybe two close friends (defined as “people I would go out of my way to share personal life events with”) and a wider circle of a couple dozen friends/friendly acquaintances. All of those people were met through shared hobby groups (either set up by the school I was attending or that I made a point of googling myself) or were introduced to me by those hobby-friends as people they thought I’d find cool. It does mean that all of my friends tend to fall within a fairly narrow demographic when it comes to socioeconomic status and personal interests, but as an introvert without a huge social battery, I’m fine with that.

  40. HonorBox*

    1 – Oof. I had a coworker who would break into tears when the boss simply asked about the status of projects and progress on aspects. This coworker did share with me that there were some childhood authority-related issues, and I strongly suspect that there was another big factor that played into this as well. We got to the point where my boss told me he was completely at a loss for how to approach this coworker (who since found another job).

    I would agree that you can’t be the one to fix this. But I think I’d suggest a couple of things. First, ask this person for their idea(s) about how you can provide feedback and get status reports on projects. What would work for them? Is it a different cadence for your meetings? Is it providing an agenda before the meeting so they can be more prepared? Second, make sure they’re aware of resources available to them. You can’t force them to seek therapy, but you can remind everyone of their access to an EAP if you have that available. And third, and I understand that this is going to sound harsh, but you can let them know very calmly and neutrally that having regular conversations, providing status updates, and answering questions from their boss are specific aspects of their job that they’ll need to figure out how to do. Tell them you’re willing to work with them, but you can’t not do your own job, and you need them to do their job in order to keep the projects moving.

    1. HonorBox*

      I should add this. LW you could tell this person something like, “I apologize that you feel triggered when we’re having our regular conversations. I don’t intend for my actions to do that. But we do have to figure out a way for me to get the information I need from you because that allows us to do our part of the business.”

  41. ecnaseener*

    For #2, re “Could I get fired for this?” – most likely not just for these two instances, but for an overall pattern of stonewalling coworkers, I don’t think it’s terribly unlikely. Particularly when you’re brand-new and probably in a probationary period of some kind, you don’t want to make your manager worry that hiring you was a mistake.

    Part of the job is working well with other people (btw that’s the answer to “what does this have to do with work”), so if your coworkers come to feel like they can’t talk to you without risking the types of responses you gave here, your manager might doubt your ability to succeed in the job. (It’s less problematic if your tone was clearly joking, and not making fun of the asker. If your tone carried any implication of “you’re weird for asking,” it’s pretty problematic.)

    So if I were you, I’d focus on building pleasant relationships with everyone but especially with the two coworkers in this letter. If you want to decline to answer questions about your life, do so warmly, with an attitude of “I’m unusually private, sorry!” not “why would you ask me a non-work question?” and follow it with an immediate subject change rather than lingering in the awkwardness. Maybe you shouldn’t have to do that, but you’ve started off on the wrong foot here so I think it’s wise to play it safe for at least a few months.

    1. Eliza H*

      This. You can’t get fired for it, but it will damage your working relationships, and honestly, you’re handling it in a way that distances yourself from people, so that’s not entirely surprising. The statement, “I try not to talk about my personal life at work,” should become your friend, as should the media relations tactic of answering the question you want them to ask instead of the question they did ask.

      (Person wrangling kids) “Do you have kids?”

      You: “Oh, I’ve seen how crazy it can get with kids. How do you manage with those two little ones?”

      If you give a neutral response and immediately continue with a follow-up question to whatever they just shared about themselves, people will almost always follow the flow of conversation and be happy to talk about themselves.

    2. CommanderBanana*

      I don’t have, don’t want, and usually don’t like kids, and I still manage to show a warm and friendly interest in what my coworkers’ kids are up to, and when I’m asked if I have kids, I just laugh and say no but that I did nanny or that no, but I have a spoiled dog. There are a million ways to answer this question without coming across as a jerk.

      Honestly, the LW reminds me of that woman who had a whole conversation with her CEO while pretending that her cats were her children and just ended up sounding like a dingbat.

  42. Heather*

    OMG number two. Dude. Did you decide that your goal is to be as bizarre as possible? If someone says “Eesh it’s so cold outside today!” do you respond with “Why would you say that? It’s always cold in January.” “Did you have a good weekend?” “Maybe I did, maybe I didn’t.”

    Your responses are so far outside the norm of human conversation that people are going to conclude that you are truly unhinged. Not because you don’t want to talk about your family! Many people are private at work. But because your responses are, to a pathological degree, bizarre.

  43. Danielle K*

    #5) I ran for city council in 2019.

    My profession is nonprofit fundraising.

    My resume was all nonprofit experience, so I didn’t include the run.

    Running for political office is on my LinkedIn profile as is the training I received from Emerge MA, but I only mentioned it in a cover letter if the cause of the nonprofit I was applying to made it relevant – for example, if it was a nonprofit that was dedicated to getting women elected, my run for city council was relevant experience.

    Good luck!

    It’s a tough job market right now.

    Leave your run for office off your resume if it isn’t relevant to what you’re applying for.

    1. LW 5*

      I said this above as well:

      I said it in the letter but could have given an example – I only listed activities about the run that were relevant to the field I work in. I was a one-man shop, so I did everything. If I were a graphic designer, for example, the only things listed would have been “built website, designed logo, designed campaign mailers, designed flyers,” etc.

      There are many aspects of running that are directly relevant to the field I work in.

      Perhaps that changes the answer and I should have made that clearer in the letter.

      But I feel like I have it covered enough in other areas of my resume now and it has been long enough that I can leave it off for sure. I was leaning that way anyway and appreciate the confirmation from AAM that I should

    2. LW 5*

      So you have the training on your LinkedIn but not the whole run? I also did training.

      I’m definitely removing it from my resume but I’m wondering if I should leave in on LinkedIn with the relevant skillsets used listed…

  44. tw1968*

    LW4: This is NOT a YOU problem. From what you’ve shared, you were doing extremely well until the company had money troubles. They are looking to coast off of your performance while they change the expectations/move the goalposts of your role. Now they’re collecting info on everything you do wrong (NOT helping you improve, which they would do if they wanted to keep you) until they have enough to fire you. That saves them money.

    Ex: What if you were a top sales producer and they said “Hm, we don’t have the money to pay those big commissions LW4 earned, so let’s increase the commission thresholds, lower commissions, do a reorg and then we can put in some bad reviews for staff and fire them.

    You’re fleeing a sinking ship at this point and IF anything comes out about current performance, well, you were a star, money got tight, they’re changing expectations for EVERYONE so they can reduce headcount to survive.

  45. hello*

    People like LW2 act like this and then are shocked when they’re passed up for promotions, being asked to lead new projects, etc etc

    LW2, you are not the only person who wants to keep things private at work. I suggest looking up ways others have shared just small pieces about their private life or how to steer conversations into more general topics, but you can’t keep doing what you’re doing. You’ll quickly earn a reputation, whether you think you deserve it or not.

    1. Nola*

      Yeah, there was a question/comment in the Friday open thread where a person had spent 20 years avoiding personal interactions with their coworkers. They were now retiring and were upset that their soon to be former coworkers were only remarking on how much they’d miss them in their function at the job.

      What did they expect? They had spent two decades enforcing a strict boundary and were now upset people were respecting that boundary.

  46. MillennialHR*

    LW #2 – I have a coworker in my office that I know very little about, because she doesn’t share much, but we have niceties about our dogs, very bland conversation about the weekend, etc. It doesn’t mean that we don’t know anything about each other, and we have a really warm working relationship, but it’s enough to see her as a person. I tend to share a little more with colleagues I’m close with, but I have no problem with a friendly, warm relationship without sharing much. You can keep your personal life private without answering “maybe” to every question from your coworkers and it helps develop good working relationships!

    1. Tech Industry Refugee*

      This exactly. I have coworkers where I know they have a dog and like working on cars and that is about it. It’s not awkward like LW2 is making it.

    2. londonedit*

      Yep, exactly. There’s someone at work who I have a meeting with once a month, so we don’t interact very often – but we still do top-level small talk and I know she has a dog, she knows I’ve just started going to the gym, etc. So we can start our meetings with ‘Hi, how’s Rufus?’ or ‘Back at the gym this morning?’ or whatever, and no one has to reveal much, but it’s nice to kick off with a bit of non-work chat just so it’s not a horribly dry work-based meeting every time.

  47. Off Plumb*

    If LW1’s employee had written in, I’d have a lot to say. I once literally passed out after an unpleasant exchange with a terrible boss (while working from home, thank goodness), but even then it never would have occurred to me to talk about diagnoses or trauma history at work.

    As a manager, I think the only appropriate responses are 1) refer to EAP if available, 2) direct them to the process for requesting accommodations, 3) give examples of the kinds of things you could do to accommodate (e.g. have them submit written updates, meet virtually rather than in person), and 4) clearly set out the expectations that they must meet with or without accommodations.

    They’ve got to involve their treatment team in navigating this (and they need to get treatment if they aren’t already) but that part is neither your business nor your responsibility.

    1. HonorBox*

      Great points. And I’ll say this, just as an addition. It is one thing to have a larger response following an unpleasant exchange, especially with someone who is a bad boss (I still have flashbacks to a particularly awful conversation with a bad boss… I can still see how red his face got). But it seems like LW1 is handling these well, not yelling, not doing anything that seems at all problematic. So the employee has to figure out how to navigate this because if a neutral good boss is triggering things, imagine when (not if) there is an interaction that is heightened in the future.

    2. YetAnotherAnalyst*

      As an employee, I can kind of see bringing it up with a boss if the relationship is otherwise pretty solid, the trigger is well within business norms, and the context is “this is a me problem, I’m doing X and Y about it, but while I’m working on it could we try Z”.
      I think your manager response is spot-on, though.

  48. cee*

    LW#2 reminds me of an old roommate. I asked where he was from and he said “West.” We were in New York so I said “oh west like Jersey or out west like California?” He said” yeah ya know just West”

    Honestly it was so off putting it kind of made me nervous to live with him. Like the non-answer and refusal to engage made me wonder if I could trust his judgement about anything.

    I know work is a more surface level relationship than roommate and some people don’t like talking about where they are from due to family issues, but there are less off putting ways to signal you’d rather not discuss your personal life than being weirdly ambiguous.

    * I found out through a friend that roommate was actually from Connecticut and had no hard feelings about that, he just thought the ambiguity made him sound cool. Ironically, CT is one of the handful of places in the US that is not west of NY so it was technically a lie as well.

    2. LL*

      omg, that’s hilarious. And also weird. Was this your freshman roommate in college or something similar? I’m having a hard time thinking of who else would lie about where they were from because saying their from “West” sounded cool.

  49. CubeFarmer*

    LW#2, it’s one thing to want to keep work and non-work completely separate, but it’s a whole different one to answer innocent questions like that so rudely.

  50. Anon for this one*

    Re: LW1: I’m someone with C-PTSD that is triggered by my current boss being constantly critical, dismissive, and reflexive in her blame for me for any problem that arises. I cannot imagine having an emotional outburst at that boss or acting the way your employee acts even though I think my supervisor is genuinely a bad boss who’s harming my mental health. (Side note, I am looking for other work.)

    In contrast, you sound like a supportive supervisor who is doing a great job at managing your employees – I would love to have a boss like you, quite frankly. It is really unfair what your employee is doing. As everyone else is saying, it is on them to seek treatment for their issues, and your role can be sympathetic but doesn’t have to involve bending over backwards for them.

    Trauma history in the workplace can be genuinely tricky, but your employee is not being constructive. I love Allison’s suggestions – kind but direct is the way to go.

  51. Keymaster of Gozer (she/her)*

    OP 2: I understand where you’re coming from, but your implementation needs some fine tuning.

    I don’t like people at work knowing a lot about my private life (not going into why) either but what I have got to be is a master of deflection.

    People (generally) love talking about themselves or things they are interested in. So if someone asks if I have kids I can easily segue into ‘no, but do you want to see pictures of my cat?’ or ‘no, but I have a pet – do you have pets?’ or fall back onto the old British option of talking about the weather.

    With a bit of practise you can work alongside people for over a decade and they know naff all about your personal life but think you’re such a friendly person.

  52. Bookworm*

    Letter 2 – if you don’t want to talk about something, deflecting to another topic is the best way to handle it. “Look, squirrel!” :) Mentioning the movies/TV shows, books, whatever you’re currently into, or a weird story you heard about in the news (like the lady whose house was surrounded by 100 racoons and she called the cops!) is the way to go.

  53. Katara's side braids*

    This adds nothing of value, but LW3 reminded me of Rachel Bloom’s “Lady Boss” video, which I hadn’t thought about in years but is (like everything else she does) absolutely hilarious.

  54. Keymaster of Gozer (she/her)*

    OP1. At the end of the day unless someone asks for concrete accomodations there’s nothing you can do for them. So it’s a two part thing: you have to enquire as to exactly what they need and THEY need to actually give those conditions. Then you can discuss whether they are reasonable.

    If they refuse to give anything but ‘I don’t know, I just don’t want to be asked for anything’ then that’s not a reasonable accomodation because you’re right, there’s no way you can work like that. And while writing this I just realised that asking about the accomodations might set off another reaction. So I’d be prepared for that.

    1. HonorBox*

      I was thinking exactly what you said at the end as I read your comment. It might be a good idea to have someone else in the room to help with that conversation. It might come across as adversarial to have HR with you, but that other person might help reduce any of the anxiety and tension.

    2. Dust Bunny*

      This.

      Obviously it’s possible for managers/employers to handle things like this badly but that doesn’t sound like what’s going on here: It sounds like the problem is that the employee’s unresolved trauma is, well, unresolved, and that the employee hasn’t articulated what they need, and neither of those are things the manager/employer can fix.

      Please refer this person to an EAP you have, and ask them for specific input. “I don’t want to be asked for anything” isn’t workable and is going to be a problem in this job or any other.

  55. Czech Mate*

    LW 5 – I’d err on the side of not putting it on my resume. I (and some family members) have worked with folks who have been in office/run for office/or been active in politics, and these are some things to bear in mind:

    -Even if you were a middle of the road candidate, by running for office your political affiliations are publicly available. Some employers may think that by hiring you, they are condoning your political positions or publicly stating that they are affiliated with your party. Ex. My mom chose not to hire someone who had worked for a US political party for this reason. Ex 2. I worked for an org that DID choose to hire someone who had worked for the state and had a very public fall from grace, but only after a VERY lengthy discussion about what message that would send.

    -If you made statements in the past that were controversial or that got bad press, you don’t want to draw attention to those. Ex. my org once was trying to build a relationship with a candidate for state governor (we wanted to make sure we had allies no matter who won) and while the guy was extremely nice and personable, he ended up losing the election in part because he made an off-hand comment about DV that really rankled everyone. (I think it was just a soundbite that went off the rails and he genuinely meant no harm, but he was slammed by everyone and it’s all over the place when you google him now.) We…were not exactly lining up to offer him a job after he lost the election. If that’s you, you may want to re-up your social media presence and work on filling the internet with positive content that distances you from that.

    1. LW 5*

      All excellent points!

      I am lucky that it is a small market and there’s nothing like that out there for me. The only major issue is I’m in a decidedly conservative area and my platform was very clearly not that.

      I had different campaign socials than private, and those have all be shut down now.

      Will think about ways to get my name in more google results that aren’t related to the campaign. (As I said, not 100% now but definitely still some page 1 stuff about it)

      And definitely leave it off and just talk about the skills I had listed with it if an interview brings it up as a “I saw this…” type of thing

  56. Texan In Exile*

    LW 5: When my husband took an unpaid leave of absence to run for the Wisconsin Assembly in 2012, I looked for a job. Not only did I not tell people the real reason I was looking – so we wouldn’t be without an income, I used my maiden name so they wouldn’t have any way to connect him to me.

    This was during the attempt to recall of the governor and after the Act 10 protests in Madison. All the division we have as a country now? We had that in Wisconsin starting in 2011. I had no way of knowing where people might stand and couldn’t take a chance that they might be on the other side and use that as a reason to reject me.

    1. LW 5*

      Excellent points!

      Did you ultimately get a job and were there discussions about your connection to him after that?

      1. Texan In Exile*

        I did get a job but I never told anyone at work – I was at that job for about two years – about Mr T’s candidacy, even though I was spending my nights and weekends working with him on his campaign. (It is, as you know, very difficult to run for office and even harder if you are not a rich person.)

        I realized I had not prepared properly for questions when my new boss told me that I probably shouldn’t tell people I had sought a job after seven years of unemployment because I was “bored.” I mean, I was bored, but that wasn’t the real reason. I’m still not sure what I could have said.

        1. LingNerd*

          Maybe something like “my spouse is looking for a career change, so I’m stepping into the role of providing financial stability for our family”

          Or if you were caring for young children, just acknowledging that as the reason, since it’s common enough

  57. SunnyShine*

    LW 1, this is something I am currently dealing with. You really need to work with HR on this one. My employee kept targeting another to the point it looked like she was trying to to get them fired because my employee was so triggered.

    Our corporate HR did an investigation and told my employee that they needed her disorder to be documented from her psychiatrist. Her doctor was able to come up with accommodations that I would have never thought of.

    Sure, there are a lot of things you can try to make it easier, but really the employee should let you know what accommodations they need in order to receive the feedback you are giving. Likewise, you absolutely can hold them accountable for their behavior. Outbursts are never okay. I have to wonder if they are affecting team morale too.

  58. WantonSeedStitch*

    I think that the worst part about LW #2’s answers to their coworker’s questions is that it seems like they’re TRYING to make the coworker feel awkward about asking what is, in fact, a very ordinary small-talk question instead of simply and openly owning the fact that they have a quirk about sharing even very basic personal information at work. LW #2, it’s on YOU that you have an issue with this. Not your coworker. If you don’t want to answer the question, don’t (though as Alison said, it will still come across as odd and chilly). But understand that there’s nothing wrong with the coworker asking. Own it as your personal issue: “I know this is weird, but I really don’t feel comfortable talking about my family situation at work. But hey, I wanted to ask you about that assignment we got today!”

    1. Alton Brown's Evil Twin*

      Yes, good point. Is LW2 trying to *shame* their coworkers for asking those questions, or just to dodge them?

      1. Elle*

        This is an important distinction. The bizarre and uncomfortable answers come off like the LW is at least trying to punish their coworkers by making them uncomfortable.

  59. LingNerd*

    LW2, it’s relevant to work because it’s part of the social ritual. Any one of these questions in itself isn’t relevant, but the act of engaging in small talk is! Dodging the question makes it sound like there’s more of a story and will make people even more curious. So just give breif honest answers in a positive tone and then ask them about themselves.

    “Oh, I actually do have kids. I just don’t talk about them much when I’m in work mode! How old did you say yours were?”

    “Nah, no partner. I’m happy to have my space to myself! What about you?”

  60. Moonbeam*

    LW2 – I am married but have no children by choice. Initially I was fine with sharing that information but then the comments came – Moonbeam hates children, you’ll change your mind, etc. These are the comments which make people *not* want to share anything about their personal lives. People can’t leave well enough alone. I have other coworkers who aren’t married, have no kids, etc., but they are men, and not one comment has been made to them about their choices. I’ve learned to say less and less, since I really don’t want people commenting on my life, what I’m eating, politics, religion, etc. I am friendly, and freely share my interests in traveling, movies, restaurants, but not my personal life. My boss asks me every time they see me how my husband is doing, I just say he’s fine, and don’t go into details of any treatments he’s having/had. I had mentioned he has back problems in the past, but I don’t need to keep my boss updated on his health.

    2. Head Sheep Counter*

      This is where I landed on thinking about LW2 – they are tired. They live somewhere with helpful biddies who set you up with their single friend/cousin and offer fertility advice. Then when that doesn’t work… tut tuts at LW2

    3. Yeah...Nah*

      Exactly. Some other commenters said OP2’s answers would make others less forgiving toward their minor mistakes because they come across as unlikable. As a pigmented person who isn’t heterosexual nor able to have children, I’m already hated, so whatever.

  61. CommanderBanana*

    It is evident in any dealings with them that they struggle with any form of authority being shown — they get upset with a simple question

    This person is not really employable, unfortunately, and it’s on them to get that figured out.

    Also, LW who is very private – you can be polite, professional, and discreet with your coworkers. You don’t have to be rude and awkward, and doing this at a new job is a quick way to get a reputation as a smartass and a jerk.

  62. Joielle*

    The LW2 situation (and ensuing discussion) is why I phrase my question more like this when trying to get to know a new coworker:

    “Do you have kids, pets, partner, roommate, plants…?”

    It’s really just an attempt to show interest in whatever part of their life they’re willing to share. Sometimes people respond with a lot of detail, sometimes vaguely. Either is fine!

  63. Eleanor Tilney*

    LW, the fact that you’re triggering this very particular type of trauma might be connected to them also having a misplaced idea about the dynamic between you.

    I’m wondering if they’re seeing a manager as a parent-type figure, and that’s why their expectations/boundaries are off.

    The answer could lie in them exploring that and unpicking it all. But you can’t do that or even help. They’d probably need to see a therapist.

  65. Dawn*

    LW3: I 100% sympathize with the annoyance, but it’s most likely an artifact of his language. Many languages require gendering every professional title; I’ve been learning French and every profession from “salesperson” to “director” has two gendered versions. Most likely, you just need to ask him to leave off the “lady” part.

  66. Modesty Poncho*

    “Lady Boss” just makes me think of fantasy/medieval/feudal characters referring to their “Lady Mother” and similar titles. Maybe that image can at least help you chuckle!

  67. Hedgehug*

    #2 Yes. You are wrong.
    You have just started a new job and are immediately burning every bridge.
    I don’t know if you struggle with social norms and social etiquette outside of a work context, but if so that might be worth looking into. Today.

    1. Zeus*

      Another comment said that LW2 was referred here from Reddit, which didn’t surprise me much. That sort of adversarial view of the world is not uncommon on some subs, as well as the “you don’t owe anybody anything” which is interpreted in a variety of ways. Hopefully they are learning from these comments that this is not the norm for most people :)

  68. Zarniwoop*

    LW2 Even “No comment, I like to keep my work and private life separate.” would be less weird than “Maybe.”

  69. I'm great at doing stuff*

    LW2, I worked at a school and we were at a social event, talking very lightly about our lives. The topic of different schools in the area came up, and someone asked my coworker where her high school aged daughter went to school. She said, “I’d rather not say.” Okay, a bit odd, but whatever. Then later someone asked what her daughter’s name was and she also said “I’d rather not say.” It was very awkward. This is someone who was already difficult to work with, and these weird answers didn’t help. Saying things like that won’t get you fired, but it certainly doesn’t help create camaraderie with your colleagues.

    1. Head Sheep Counter*

      Why did folk double down and ask her for more details when she stated that she didn’t want to offer them? I don’t think that’s a friendly camaraderie sort of thing to do either.

      3. Irish Teacher.*

        They probably assumed it was a particular concern about revealing the school. If somebody told me they’d rather not say where their daughter went to school, I wouldn’t assume that meant they didn’t want to tell me anything about their daughter. I’d assume it was something like the daughter had dropped out of school or had been expelled or was attending a school for students with special educational needs or was being homeschooled or that she was going to a private school and the mother was awkward about that, feeling people might think it was snobby or something along those lines.

        Now, I wouldn’t directly follow it up with “well, what’s her name?” but I assume it was a bi later in the conversation and possibly a different person and I doubt it would occur to me that “doesn’t want to discuss her daughter’s school meant “doesn’t even want to mention her name.” The latter is far less likely to be sensitive information and to be honest, strikes me as less personal than the fact that she is high school aged.

    2. Orv*

      Sometimes people who work at schools are sensitive to their kids becoming bullying targets because of kids not liking them as authority figures.

  70. Head Sheep Counter*

    I read LW2 as a tired woman living in a region where intrusive advice and dating setups are the norm. Perhaps sarcasm and weird answers are not the most pleasant “You should SMILE more, you’d be lovely” way to go… but offering up your single friend/cousin/brother/uncle as a date isn’t actually friendly either. It isn’t friendly to insist that if only you would join XYZ (often a church) you’d find plenty of options. Offering up that you’ll regret not having children is hostile.

    It may be normal to ask about one’s love life and further the fruit and reproduction of such but… maybe it shouldn’t be. At least at work.

    1. Falling Diphthong*

      What are the topics you would consider acceptable to broach in a workplace for light conversation, with no chance that anyone might take the question the wrong way? Are there any?

      Sincere question.

      1. Head Sheep Counter*

        Do you have any hobbies?
        Have you read anything interesting recently?
        Do you have pets?
        What is your favorite food?
        Do you cook?
        What’s the weather like outside?
        What is your commute like?
        How long have you worked here?
        Have you always worked in this position?
        Where’s the mailroom?
        What do you think of the cafeteria?
        Gosh these vending machines are… XYZ
        I’m excited that the garbage is picked up twice a week, how about you?
        Did you see the deer outside?
        What did you think about the wildlife warning yesterday?

        Really…. the list goes on and on.

        1. Coffee Protein Drink*

          I’ve never seen anyone list these all in one place. Small talk is a skill that most people aren’t taught; we’re expected to figure it out by osmosis.

          Feel free to keep going.

          1. Head Sheep Counter*

            The carpet pattern in this building is interesting, do you like it?
            I really enjoyed the rain last night, did you?
            In a fight for resources in my house, the dog wins over the cat. Do you have this issue?
            Did you see that amazing bird outside?
            I love the leaves turning color, what is your favorite thing about fall?
            What is your favorite season?
            Have you ever found a fossil?
            What is your favorite movie?
            What food would you like never to eat again?
            Coffee or Tea?

        2. Falling Diphthong*

          Upthread there is an example of people finding the pet question traumatizing. But more broadly: You can ask if someone shares their home with any animals, but not with humans? Pet hamsters are okay to talk about at work, but human roommates should be off limits?

          For any of these, I could come up with a hypothetical in which Person A thought it was normal chitchat, and person B thought it was a question that should be forbidden because it was traumatizing to them in some way. Hobbies (or lack thereof) can be cruelly critiqued; reading choices (or lack thereof) critiqued; pets or their lack critiqued; favorite food critiqued; cooking choices critiqued. And so on.

          To your list of questions it is normal to ask in making casual social chitchat, I would include “Any significant humans in your life, for example that would feature in your evening or weekend activities?” All of these questions are within social norms. Expecting people to intuit “You can ask me about dogs, but not about whether I have some form of bipedal roommate” is as unreasonable as asking them to intuit “You can ask me about most aspects of commuting, but bicycles must be strictly off limits.”

          1. Head Sheep Counter*

            I think its not that living with folk is a big problem its the assumptions there in and what people do with those assumptions. There are a lot of folk who default to “fixing” other people or suggesting how to fix other people. This is regional but deeply problematic from my point of view. Also its boring. “Do I have a partner?, Yes” dead end conversation. “Did you see that awesome bird/eclipse/tree turning color?, No, where is it? Yes, isn’t it awesome it made me think of the one over by the cafeteria” Its off center but not rude and does invite a small exchange of conversation.

            My own point is… why default to boring and potentially problematic? I can almost be certain that the LW is a woman. Why? because of the frustration. If its a dude… my whole opinion about level of rudeness changes but not the push to perhaps leave questions that folk don’t want to answer as bad questions.

            I see your point on the fact that properly motivated someone could find problems with all questions. Some of us are misanthropes and perhaps feral. I know I can be… at least seasonally.

      2. WantonSeedStitch*

        Where would you love to go on vacation?
        What’s your favorite restaurant around here?
        How did you find your way to this career?
        Are you looking forward to any movies coming out?

  71. Not your typical admin*

    Maybe it’s because of where I’m located (smallish town in the southern US), but LW 2’s behavior would be considered odd and abrasive. It would probably also lead to them being left out of the normal office chit chat just because people would assume they didn’t want to talk.

    Also, sometimes sharing a few personal things can actually make people less curious. For example, I have to rush out on Thursdays to pick up my girls and get them to dance class. I try to not schedule anything on that afternoon that might run over. When the class started a simple “Thursday evenings are going to be crazy now with this new schedule” kept people from wondering what I had going on.

    As an aside – we had a new coworker start who commented that I looked familiar. After some digging, we found out that my mom was his first grade teacher.

  72. Kmoo*

    Is LW2 named Schrödinger? I really feel like their coworkers ought to be calling them that behind their back.

  73. Zap R.*

    Letter #1:
    Trauma is an explanation for behaviour, not an excuse for it. OP #1, your direct report is making *their* triggers *your* responsibility and that isn’t fair. Allison’s advice is very good.

    Letter #2:
    OP #2, your coworkers are just trying to fill the silence with generic pleasantries. There is no agenda behind it other than “Hi, fellow person. I am acknowledging that you exist.” You can be direct in your response or you can be vague but you’re choosing to do neither; instead, you’re going out of your way to make them feel stupid and bad for asking in the first place. Not everyone who annoys you is being actively hostile.

  74. Melissa*

    LW1, I have issues with childhood trauma and I have had emotional moments with managers, as it does mean I can have issues with authority but it is my problem to work on. I have had good and patient managers, thank goodness, who take my explanations seriously especially when I go out of their way to acknowledge what they say and do my best to follow their instructions, where possible.

  75. Filofaxes*

    Sometimes, I want to be petty enough to tell someone like the direct report in letter 1 that their behavior is making me feel triggered, FFS.

    LW 1 *probably* shouldn’t do that but like, I wouldn’t hold it against them if they snapped one day.

  76. Jazzy*

    LW 2, I can definitely understand not wanting to be super open about your personal life, but you do miss out on a lot by excluding yourself those conversations.

    I’m bi & polyamorous and light, normal questions about my relationship are a conversation minefield for me. I know people are just trying to be nice but it really puts me in a bind. Like, either I look cold or mean because I’m cagey about talking about something so normal and universal, or I look bad because I do share that kind of info and the conversation derails into a game of 20 questions about “how does that work?”, and monogamous people seem to think I’m just bragging when I talk about my relationship at all, even when I’m being extremely restrained. Wish I could just talk about my partners casually the way cis/het/mono people do. It’s really exhausting being so careful in every conversation, and it’s isolating sitting out while everyone else shares nice anecdotes about their heterosexual partner and 2.5 kids. Scripting things out really helps me. I’ll pick an anecdote or two that only include one partner and rehearse it in my head so I don’t accidentally mention a whole different person that day. Also have to avoid names, so it’s still impersonal, stilted, and I’m sure everyone can tell I’m not being authentic the same way they are.

    I’d say if your private life is “normal” enough to have some light conversation about with coworkers, is it really worth losing out on possible friends or even promotions? Does it really hurt for people to get to know you? At least sit down and reconsider *how* private you really want to be and come up with a way to respond to those kinds of questions that isn’t sarcastic and evasive. It does come off as kind of mean.

    1. Sister George Michael*

      It’s hilarious that people think you are bragging. What is even going on in their heads?? They are probably the same people who think I’m a loser because I’m single lol.

  77. Lobstermn*

    LW1: Document the behavior and fire this person, then thank yourself for having written in and gotten this advice.

Comments are closed.