Rep. Gil HUMILIATES Woke CEO For Promoting BIZARRE Pronouns She Can’t Define

In a fiery exchange during a House Oversight and Accountability Committee hearing, Rep. Gil (R-TX) left former 23andMe CEO, Miss Wiski, visibly flustered after she failed to explain the various pronouns promoted by the company. The confrontation exposed a glaring contradiction in Wiski’s leadership and left a lasting impact on the audience and viewers nationwide.

The Spark: Questions About Pronouns

The confrontation began innocuously when Rep. Gil asked Wiski about the post 23andMe made in June 2021, promoting a variety of different pronouns. The issue quickly escalated as the conversation moved to specifics, and Wiski was asked directly: “What is ‘E’ as a pronoun?”

Wiski hesitated, clearly caught off guard. “It’s E, to be honest, I’m not sure,” she responded.

Rep. Gil, not content with vague answers, pressed further. “Do you know what ‘M’ means as a pronoun?”

Again, Wiski faltered. “I’m also not sure.”

The audience in the room, along with viewers at home, could sense the tension rising. “Don’t you think it’s important to know what these mean?” Rep. Gil continued. “You guys are in this post. You wrote it or someone on your comm’s team wrote it. If you’re going to demand people use these pronouns, you should know what they mean, right?”

Wiski’s Dodging and the Rising Tension

Wiski attempted to deflect the criticism, saying, “I delegate a lot of things at 23andMe. We had six—” but Rep. Gil wasn’t having it. “You were CEO though, right?” he shot back. “I was CEO, but it doesn’t mean I can oversee every single post,” Wiski tried to explain.

Rep. Gil wasn’t buying it. “Well, this is a very, very politically charged post that you guys put out. I’d think that you would have a view on that.” His tone was firm, challenging Wiski’s credibility and leadership.

The Takedown: Ignorance of Pronouns and Woke Agenda

At this point, Rep. Gil, visibly frustrated, pushed harder, asking about additional unusual pronouns mentioned in 23andMe’s posts, such as “Z”, “Xe”, and “Faire.” Wiski, still unable to provide any clear answers, admitted: “I do not know.”

The crowd’s discomfort grew, and Rep. Gil, sensing victory, didn’t hold back. “It seems like this is politically not very popular now. You took a genetics company and turned it into a woke social justice organization. You want to run away from that now?” he asked. Wiski remained silent, clearly overwhelmed by the barrage of questions.

Rep. Gil’s Cutting Question: “Do You Even Know What You’re Talking About?”

The moment reached a tipping point when Rep. Gil asked, “You don’t know what any of these pronouns mean, but you guys are promoting it? Does it concern you that you don’t understand this might increase the risk of depression and suicide amongst trans people?” Wiski tried to deflect again, stating it was the decision of her research and social teams, but Rep. Gil’s words were sharp and unrelenting.

“You don’t know what you’re talking about at the time, and now you realize it’s politically not very popular. That says a lot about where your convictions were,” he continued. “It’s a problem.”

The Final Blow: The Woke Agenda and Leadership Failures

Rep. Gil took the final swing, laying out how Wiski’s leadership had turned 23andMe into a platform for social justice causes rather than focusing on its core mission of genetic testing. He called out her failure to understand the very topics her company was promoting, highlighting the disconnect between her corporate decisions and the reality of how her actions were being perceived.

“Sounds to me like you took a genetics company which you built, and congratulations for doing that, and turned it into a woke social justice organization,” Rep. Gil declared. “You don’t know what any of these pronouns mean, and now you realize that this is politically not very popular. That says a lot about your convictions.”

The Aftermath: Media Outrage and Public Reactions

The viral nature of this exchange quickly took over social media, with people from both sides of the political spectrum reacting passionately to Rep. Gil’s brutal takedown. Hashtags like #WokeCEOFail and #RepGilVsWiski began trending, as the public dissected the interaction.

Supporters of Rep. Gil praised him for holding Wiski accountable, arguing that it was about time someone in power questioned the virtue-signaling and political correctness prevalent in corporate America.

“Rep. Gil just destroyed the CEO. What a moment of truth!” tweeted one viewer, while others remarked on the irony of Wiski’s role in promoting inclusivity while lacking basic understanding of the very topics she was supporting.

On the other hand, critics of Rep. Gil’s approach accused him of “targeting” Wiski and focusing too much on her lack of knowledge of gender pronouns, arguing that the exchange wasn’t about the substantive issues but more about political grandstanding.

Conclusion: A Landmark Moment for Accountability in Corporate America

This showdown between Rep. Gil and Miss Wiski was more than just a typical Congressional hearing moment—it was a powerful commentary on the growing divide between corporate leadership and the public’s evolving views on social justice causes. Rep. Gil’s calculated, no-nonsense questioning forced a powerful figure in the business world to confront the contradictions in her company’s actions.

While Wiski struggled to maintain her composure, Rep. Gil’s powerful questions and relentless pursuit of the truth made it clear: when it comes to corporate responsibility, knowledge and authenticity matter. The public, both online and in the courtroom, witnessed a rare instance of accountability—a moment that may just set the tone for future political battles on corporate social responsibility.

As for Wiski, the aftermath of this incident will undoubtedly follow her for some time, especially as the spotlight on corporate involvement in social justice continues to grow. For Rep. Gil, however, this is likely just the beginning of his campaign to demand more from corporate leaders and hold them accountable for the messages they promote.