Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
During a heated exchange, Representative Brandon Gill from Texas confronted Anne Wojcicki, the co-founder and former CEO of 23andMe, about a controversial social media post regarding transgender pronouns. This took place in a U.S. House committee hearing, where Wojcicki admitted that she was not well-versed in the meanings of various pronouns, raising questions about the intersection of corporate responsibility and social issues.
The inquiry comes at a critical time as lawmakers are assessing the implications of potential data privacy breaches at 23andMe, particularly in light of the company’s recent bankruptcy filing. During this high-profile hearing, Wojcicki testified a few months after stepping down as CEO of the genetics analysis firm, which has undergone significant changes in its operational structure.
While the hearing’s central focus revolved around data privacy concerns as the company might transition to new ownership, Gill took the opportunity to address a politically charged post that 23andMe’s official account on X shared during her tenure.
Woke Messaging and Corporate Responsibility
In his pointed remarks, Gill emphasized that 23andMe had notably embraced a progressive identity over the past few years. He highlighted a Pride month post from 2021 to underscore this shift. “23andMe has really gone out of its way to show how woke it is,” he remarked.
The contentious post stated that research indicates the correct use of pronouns can significantly affect the mental health of transgender individuals, potentially lowering their risks of depression and suicide. It displayed a range of pronouns, from traditional options like ‘he’ and ‘she’ to less commonly known ones such as ‘ze’ and ‘hir.’
Scientific Backing for Pronoun Use
According to the tweet, 23andMe committed to enhancing its offerings for transgender and non-binary customers by promoting awareness about the importance of using correct pronouns. The post included a link to a company blog titled “Trust the Science by Supporting Trans Health Care,” which advocated for medical support aligned with gender identity and offered insights into pediatric guidelines concerning gender-affirming care.
Delving deeper, Gill probed Wojcicki about her understanding of the specific pronouns mentioned in the post. He questioned her directly, asking, “What does ‘e’ mean as a pronoun?”
Wojcicki’s Response Sparks Concern
In a moment that drew considerable attention, Wojcicki acknowledged, “To be honest, I am not sure.” When pressed further about the pronoun ’em’, she responded with the same uncertainty, admitting, “I’m also not sure.” This exchange raised critical questions about the responsibilities of corporate leaders in influencing social narratives, particularly concerning sensitive topics like gender identity.
Critique of Corporate Messaging
Gill pointedly asked, “Don’t you think it’s important to know what these mean?” This inquiry focused on the implications of 23andMe’s statement that emphasized the health impact associated with the correct use of pronouns. He noted the seriousness of claiming that such awareness could reduce risks for transgender individuals, questioning how a company could advocate for something without fully understanding it.
Wojcicki shifted the conversation, highlighting that as CEO, she could not oversee every single public statement made by the company. Her defense raised eyebrows, as Gill articulated the necessity for leaders to maintain a comprehensive understanding of communications emanating from their organizations, especially on delicate issues.
Shifting Focus on Inclusivity
The dialogue continued with Gill highlighting the importance of having a clear stance on pronoun definitions. He challenged Wojcicki on whether a lack of understanding on her part could marginalize transgender individuals. In response, she maintained that her research team saw the significance of inclusivity within the company, suggesting that they aimed to ensure everyone’s representation.
However, Gill contended that regardless of the involvement of other team members, as the CEO, she could not absolve herself from responsibility. He raised the matter of 23andMe’s policies on bathroom access during her leadership and reiterated her obligation to ensure inclusivity without compromising clarity on critical issues.
Gender Policies and Public Backlash
In the ongoing conversation, Wojcicki stated that 23andMe instituted non-gendered bathroom facilities to comply with applicable laws. Gill, however, pressed further about the company’s support for transgender medical procedures for minors, which she defended by referencing specific pediatric guidelines.
The exchange culminated with Gill asserting that Wojcicki had transformed a genetics company into a platform for progressive social justice. He suggested that her approach now seems at odds with prevailing public sentiments regarding such issues, indicating a fallout from the once-popular narrative.
Reflecting on Corporate Leadership
This confrontation serves as a reminder of the complex relationship between corporate messaging and social accountability in today’s climate. As businesses navigate their roles within larger societal conversations, the expectations on leaders to be informed advocates grow. The challenge lies in balancing corporate identity with social responsibility, particularly when it comes to sensitive matters impacting diverse communities.
The implications of this discourse extend beyond 23andMe, highlighting a broader dialogue on how companies align their practices with their proclaimed values.
