It depends on your definition of "pedophilia". If you mean a sexual interest in children, but where that interest is never in any way acted upon, then I agree. People are free to desire whatever they want - their thoughts are none of anyone else's business. Same applies for someone who desires to be a different gender but never acts on this desire in any way.
If instead you mean people who engage in some sort of sexual activity with children as compared with people who change their genders, then there is all the difference in the world.
Children cannot consent, so sexual activity with a child is rape, a very serious crime, and a moral outrage. Changing ones gender does not directly harm anyone else, so it is completely different. Its like the difference between masturbation and rape.
For clarity, by "children" I mean people to young to consent. I don't agree with the present laws on the age of consent.
Also for clarity I am referring to adult trans-gender people. Transgender children has the potential for the same sort of consent issues.
Could you break down the logical issues with such a comparison? Or is it just that you don't like it?
If you're going to pick up the cause for relativism, then go for the gold.
I think it is a great analogy for the discussion. It is generally thought that there is some imbalance causing a pedophile to have such desires. Just like a "trans".(any trans, ie age gender, species, etc) It is neither the fault of a pedophile nor a trans person for their "feelings", they can't help it. The argument comes into its full beauty when we add in the trans age concept.
Also, if we just want to appeal to sensibilities like "that's offensive" then I shall posit that trans anything is by definition wrong and offensive.