HOT TAKES: 'Transfeminist Bioethicist' Calls 'Gendering Animals' Wrong, Only Serves to 'Normalize' Gender

(AP Photo/Nick Ut)

As if we needed more proof that the Looney Tunes left is traveling down the crazy train tracks at an ever-increasing degree of silliness, a “transfeminist bioethicist” activist in Toronto is on the warpath against people who “gender” animals — refer to animals as either male or female. In other words, pretty much everyone on the planet.

Florence Ashley — who prefers the pronouns “they” and “them” — explained in a tweet:

“Gendering animals serves to normalise [sic] bioessentialist conceptions of gender. When we gender animals, we forget that sex is assigned. We begin to believe that sex is literally ~in~ the body.”

The more you read or listen to this woman, the more likely you are to ask, “Um, huh?”

“Bioessentialism,” as noted by The Blaze, is the belief that biology determines specific attributes and traits, including those related to gender identity. In other words, settled science. Nonetheless, transgender activists claim that bioessentialism is a fallacy and leads to transphobia and gender-based exclusion — proving once again that the left only accepts science that supports left-wing narratives.

As is the case with all facts, data, history, logic, and common sense, any or “all of the above” that flies in the face of the left’s various narratives is to be discarded and ignored. (See: “mask mandates,” “lockdowns,” “Fauci.”)

So, the bottom line, people: stop taking it upon yourselves to assign male or female names to your pets, lose the gender-specific pronouns, and for the love of God, stop attempting to “normalize bioessentialist conceptions of gender.” Or something.

Needless to say, “Instructor Florence Ashley” was widely ridiculed on social media following her “guidance.” Canadian professor, evolutionary behavioral scientist, and author Gad Saad responded with this masterpiece:

“Exactly. I never assign a sex or gender to my pets or children. I simply refer to them as non-arboreal carbon-based multicellular agents. I feel that using “carbon” is a bit constraining as I believe in Periodic Table Fluidity.”

Intelligent snark. Doesn’t get any better.

“Gayle” responded with this perfect tongue-in-cheek blast.

“I owe my birthing-cat a huge apology. It hated wearing the pink dress and the lipstick, that really should have been the giveaway she (sorry, he) identified as a different sex. He is now booked in to the vets for prosthetic testicles and miaow-deepening hormones. Thanks!”

“Prosthetic testicles.” Nice touch.

Speaking of prosthetic testicles, it wasn’t all that long ago that the following prediction would’ve been at least laughed at, if not burned to a crisp.

“Said it before but no one listened. There will come a time when these people will start having their pets’ genitals cut off, cut out, and parts sewn on to make themselves feel better.”

I think we’re there, Jerome.

Ben Shapiro weighed in with a mocking shot — short and to the point.

This humorous shot from “Watson” was among my favorites.

“My cat was assigned female at birth, but I refused to gender it and allowed it to live gender free. Somehow, it still got pregnant after shagging about!?”

Florence?

And, finally, from British director and author Peter Whittle, the question that begged to be asked, from the beginning.

In a video posted to YouTube in December, Florence Ashley spoke in-depth about — hell, I’m honestly not sure — her belief that “sex is not literally in the body,” among other issues related to “transgenderism,” “de-transition,” “conceptions of gender,” and other nonsensical stuff.

The video is eight minutes long; I doubt you’ll last more than two minutes. At best.

And the band played on.

In somewhat related news, check out my previous articles:

Poll: One in Four Americans Actually Think It’s Fair to Make Women Compete Against Transgender Athletes

In Celebration of Pride Month, Virginia Library Invites Babies and Toddlers to ‘Drag StoryBook Hour’