I’m sure the fundamental issue is that one person wrote the code of conduct, and another is enforcing their interpretation of it.
If the code of conduct says “you must use a person’s preferred pronouns,” I would not expect to mean that I have to use pronouns at all. But if I do use pronouns, I will use that person’s chosen pronoun.
I can’t speak for anybody else, but if I write that my real first name is “Max,” and I prefer “he,” I wouldn’t consider it a firing offense if somebody were to say “Max’s post” or “Max’s answer,” or “the advice Max wrote is ridiculously bad,” even if they could have written “his post,” “his answer,” or “the advice he wrote is ridiculously bad.”
The claim (at least as I understand it) is that somebody able to fire employees believes that a rule along the lines of “you must use users’ preferred pronouns” creates some kind of obligation to use pronouns.
If the code of conduct says “you must use a person’s preferred pronouns,” I would not expect to mean that I have to use pronouns at all. But if I do use pronouns, I will use that person’s chosen pronoun.
I can’t speak for anybody else, but if I write that my real first name is “Max,” and I prefer “he,” I wouldn’t consider it a firing offense if somebody were to say “Max’s post” or “Max’s answer,” or “the advice Max wrote is ridiculously bad,” even if they could have written “his post,” “his answer,” or “the advice he wrote is ridiculously bad.”
The claim (at least as I understand it) is that somebody able to fire employees believes that a rule along the lines of “you must use users’ preferred pronouns” creates some kind of obligation to use pronouns.