Candace Owens: "Pedophilia is the next step from transgenderism"

[Ferguson97]

https://twitter.com/RealCandaceO/status/1641198814227775490

Never give conservatives a goddamn inch.

Still think that this isn't a precursor to a genocide? Leaders of the modern conservative movement are openly talking like this, and it's not going to stop with words. Calling trans people pedophiles is their way of justifying acts of violence against them.

[John Dule]

Calling trans people pedophiles is their way of justifying acts of violence against them.

That tweet doesn't "call trans people pedophiles." It points out a logical consequence of the belief that one's identity is defined by how one chooses to identify and nothing more.

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]

I didn't realize Ms. Mulvaney also identified as a child. I just assumed she meant "girl" as a colloquial term for women (similar to how "guy" is a colloquial term for men--alliteration and all that). But hey, anything to get people to turn against those damn trannies.

[Ferguson97]

Calling trans people pedophiles is their way of justifying acts of violence against them.

That tweet doesn't "call trans people pedophiles." It points out a logical consequence of the belief that one's identity is defined by how one chooses to identify and nothing more.

It's only a "logical consequence" if you're arguing in bad faith, and starting with a conclusion and working your way backwards.

It's no different than the nonsensical "slippery slope" people who said gay marriage will lead to bestiality.

[Orwell]

Calling trans people pedophiles is their way of justifying acts of violence against them.

That tweet doesn't "call trans people pedophiles." It points out a logical consequence of the belief that one's identity is defined by how one chooses to identify and nothing more.

It's only a "logical consequence" if you're arguing in bad faith, and starting with a conclusion and working your way backwards.

It's no different than the nonsensical "slippery slope" people who said gay marriage will lead to bestiality.

It might, it’s only been 8 years since the activist Supreme Court messed with Traditional values.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

Stop reading far left looney toon articles. Trans genocide isn’t a thing. I can’t take anyone who utters that phrase seriously.

Obviously whatever Owens is talking about is just her being a dumbass as usual.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Candace Owens is attention-whoring again, I see. Trolling is always the first step towards stupidification.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Calling trans people pedophiles is their way of justifying acts of violence against them.

That tweet doesn't "call trans people pedophiles." It points out a logical consequence of the belief that one's identity is defined by how one chooses to identify and nothing more.

Right. Of course the problem with this argument is that most people who say this about gender do not believe it about much else. They will often get very mad at people who identify as being a race they weren't assigned at birth, for example.  And far from saying "age is just a number" they are more likely to be scandalized by relationship age gaps even among adults than people were a generation ago.
I wouldn't be surprised if there are a few people who see trans acceptance as being the vanguard in a movement to change all this, but it shows no signs of ever becoming mainstream.

[John Dule]

Calling trans people pedophiles is their way of justifying acts of violence against them.

That tweet doesn't "call trans people pedophiles." It points out a logical consequence of the belief that one's identity is defined by how one chooses to identify and nothing more.

It's only a "logical consequence" if you're arguing in bad faith, and starting with a conclusion and working your way backwards.

It's no different than the nonsensical "slippery slope" people who said gay marriage will lead to bestiality.

You have a habit of labeling every argument you can't respond to as "bad faith." It's not. It's an extension of a principle that you believe in to a fringe case, and it's perfectly reasonable for people to ask where you draw the line in your adherence to that principle. I'll give you another chance to respond.

[DrScholl]

This is a real political scare tactic to get people on the side of conservatives and it can lead to violence against transgender people. It's no different than when Whites during Jim Crow that increased rights for Black people would lead to Black men raping White women.

[Ferguson97]

Calling trans people pedophiles is their way of justifying acts of violence against them.

That tweet doesn't "call trans people pedophiles." It points out a logical consequence of the belief that one's identity is defined by how one chooses to identify and nothing more.

It's only a "logical consequence" if you're arguing in bad faith, and starting with a conclusion and working your way backwards.

It's no different than the nonsensical "slippery slope" people who said gay marriage will lead to bestiality.

You have a habit of labeling every argument you can't respond to as "bad faith." It's not. It's an extension of a principle that you believe in to a fringe case, and it's perfectly reasonable for people to ask where you draw the line in your adherence to that principle. I'll give you another chance to respond.

I need some clarification first. Yes or no: do you believe that accepting transgender people is a "slippery slope" to accepting people who say they identify as minors so they can be pedophiles?

[Landslide Lyndon]

Why should anyone pay attention to what an ignorant charlatan like Owens says?
How is she more knowledgeable than a random person on the street?

[Ferguson97]

Why should anyone pay attention to what an ignorant charlatan like Owens says?
How is she more knowledgeable than a random person on the street?

She's certainly not more knowledgeable, but she's certainly influential. Like Carlson, Walsh, Shapiro, et al. she is leader of the modern conservative movement. Using her platform to promote hatred like this is very concerning.

[John Dule]

Calling trans people pedophiles is their way of justifying acts of violence against them.

That tweet doesn't "call trans people pedophiles." It points out a logical consequence of the belief that one's identity is defined by how one chooses to identify and nothing more.

It's only a "logical consequence" if you're arguing in bad faith, and starting with a conclusion and working your way backwards.

It's no different than the nonsensical "slippery slope" people who said gay marriage will lead to bestiality.

You have a habit of labeling every argument you can't respond to as "bad faith." It's not. It's an extension of a principle that you believe in to a fringe case, and it's perfectly reasonable for people to ask where you draw the line in your adherence to that principle. I'll give you another chance to respond.

I need some clarification first. Yes or no: do you believe that accepting transgender people is a "slippery slope" to accepting people who say they identify as minors so they can be pedophiles?

No. I think pedos are so universally loathed that nothing will ever normalize them.

[Sirius_]

Transgender identity has a solid neurological basis and gender expression can be altered medically. The same can't be said about "trans-age" or whatever you want to call it. Thus, there is a non-arbitrary distinction between the two and it is logically consistent to support one and not the other.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Transgender identity has a solid neurological basis and gender expression can be altered medically. The same can't be said about "trans-age" or whatever you want to call it. Thus, there is a non-arbitrary distinction between the two and it is logically consistent to support one and not the other.

Not sure this argument works. There are some neurological correlates of gender identity, but the existence of neurological differences in maturation among people of the same age is much better established.

[John Dule]

Transgender identity has a solid neurological basis and gender expression can be altered medically. The same can't be said about "trans-age" or whatever you want to call it. Thus, there is a non-arbitrary distinction between the two and it is logically consistent to support one and not the other.

Not sure this argument works. There are some neurological correlates of gender identity, but the existence of neurological differences in maturation among people of the same age is much better established.

Exactly. "Mental age" is something that's been used in psychological and criminal terminology for decades.

[7,052,770]

They used to say that homosexuality was the gateway to pedophilia. That proved to be false, so they just shifted all their gay attacks to trans attacks. When this one proves to be wrong too, they'll find something else to rage against.

[Landslide Lyndon]

They used to say that homosexuality was the gateway to pedophilia. That proved to be false, so they just shifted all their gay attacks to trans attacks. When this one proves to be wrong too, they'll find something else to rage against.

Republicans are always on the hunt to find a minority they can ostracize and demonize for their political benefit.

[GoTfan]

Calling trans people pedophiles is their way of justifying acts of violence against them.

That tweet doesn't "call trans people pedophiles." It points out a logical consequence of the belief that one's identity is defined by how one chooses to identify and nothing more.

It's only a "logical consequence" if you're arguing in bad faith, and starting with a conclusion and working your way backwards.

It's no different than the nonsensical "slippery slope" people who said gay marriage will lead to bestiality.

You have a habit of labeling every argument you can't respond to as "bad faith." It's not. It's an extension of a principle that you believe in to a fringe case, and it's perfectly reasonable for people to ask where you draw the line in your adherence to that principle. I'll give you another chance to respond.

Well here's mine:

Pedophiles. F**k. Kids.

Transgender people. Do. Not.

[darklordoftech]

They used to say that homosexuality was the gateway to pedophilia. That proved to be false, so they just shifted all their gay attacks to trans attacks. When this one proves to be wrong too, they'll find something else to rage against.

And before that, they said that interracial sex was a gateway to pedophilia. And before that, they said that Jews having sex with Christians was a gateway to pedophilia.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Why is Candace Owens saying something stupid proof for the Trans Genocide theory?

[John Dule]

Calling trans people pedophiles is their way of justifying acts of violence against them.

That tweet doesn't "call trans people pedophiles." It points out a logical consequence of the belief that one's identity is defined by how one chooses to identify and nothing more.

It's only a "logical consequence" if you're arguing in bad faith, and starting with a conclusion and working your way backwards.

It's no different than the nonsensical "slippery slope" people who said gay marriage will lead to bestiality.

You have a habit of labeling every argument you can't respond to as "bad faith." It's not. It's an extension of a principle that you believe in to a fringe case, and it's perfectly reasonable for people to ask where you draw the line in your adherence to that principle. I'll give you another chance to respond.

Well here's mine:

Pedophiles. F**k. Kids.

Transgender people. Do. Not.

This doesn’t address anything I said.

[Lexii, harbinger of chaos and sexual anarchy]

Yeah, that's the whole point of calling trans people "groomers"

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Transgender identity has a solid neurological basis and gender expression can be altered medically. The same can't be said about "trans-age" or whatever you want to call it. Thus, there is a non-arbitrary distinction between the two and it is logically consistent to support one and not the other.

Speaking of arbitrariness, I think the fact that racial classification itself is arbitrary could be a part of why "transracial" identities tend to strike people as so much more ridiculous and offensive compared to transgender identities. Sex, and thus gender, is, like it or not, based to one extent or another on objective material realities, so for one to pursue significant medical interventions and lifestyle changes, due to distress about what is expected of one because of those realities, come across as much less frivolous, solipsistic, and entitled than "I don't like this Arbitrary Skin Color and Facial Structure Box; put me in another one". Looked at this way, the fixed and embodied nature of sex strengthens the case for transgender acceptance rather than (as lots of people tend to assume) weakening it, because the drastic and boundary-blurring changes are ways of addressing a correspondingly drastic and overwhelming reality.