Candace Owens and Charlie Kirk on How Modern Feminism Abandoned Women to Protect Trans Ideology

The Paradox of Modern Feminism

Candace Owens and Charlie Kirk address one of the most glaring contradictions in contemporary political discourse: the inability of many people to answer the simple question, "What is a woman?" This basic biological reality has become controversial in a society that increasingly prioritizes ideology over observable truth.

Owens, who identifies as not being a feminist, engages with Kirk on the deeper implications of this stance. The conversation turns to what should be an obvious rallying point for feminists: the encroachment of biological men into women's spaces and competitions. "You'd think that the fight for the feminists would be when a bunch of men start pretending to be women, like that would be like the line right?" Kirk observes.

Finding Common Ground with Second Wave Feminism

Despite rejecting feminist ideology broadly, Owens acknowledges one principle she can agree with from second wave feminism: "Men and women are different and they have different needs, wants and concerns." She describes this as "one of the building blocks of society," a fundamental truth that earlier feminist movements recognized even as they fought for women's equality.

This raises a perplexing question: Why have so many self-proclaimed feminists abandoned the defense of women's sports and spaces? Kirk highlights the absurdity: feminists who have spent years advocating for women's rights now defend scenarios where biological men win NCAA championships in women's categories.

The Co-opting of Language

Owens provides insight into this phenomenon by explaining how radical movements borrow words from the past that once held genuine meaning. "They take a word that has meaning and mean something and then they just say we're gonna say this word so that if you stand against it then there's something wrong with you," she explains.

The term "feminist" has undergone this transformation, as has the word "racist." Owens notes that "racism used to mean something right, now it just means that you disagree with me, I don't like you and therefore you're a white supremacist." These words are weaponized to shut down debate rather than describe actual phenomena.

According to Owens, those claiming the feminist mantle today "are not actually feminists." They have appropriated the language of past movements while abandoning the core principles that defined them.

Disruption as Political Tactic

The conversation is interrupted by what appears to be a fire alarm being pulled at the event venue. Kirk remarks, "This is how you know your ideas are a threat to the left because they have to resort to these kind of childish tactics." He notes that while they've experienced other disruptions, including once having Beyoncé music played to interrupt them, a fire alarm represents a new level of interference.

Owens characterizes the tactic as reflecting "the petulant narcissism" of those who cannot engage with ideas they disagree with. Kirk explains that he has "heard many times that they do this across the country," indicating a coordinated pattern of disruption at events featuring conservative speakers.

Rather than evacuating immediately, Kirk takes a measured approach: "Prove there's a fire and then we'll leave the building. They do this all the time to try to stop events they don't like. Prove that people's lives are in danger and will respectfully leave the building." This response highlights the frequency with which such false alarms are used as political weapons to silence speech rather than genuine safety concerns.