The law requires men to use the men's room, and women to use the women's room. I don't see the problem with that. If it's really an issue, why can't PayPal just put a third bathroom in its facility for any gender?
It is far beyond transsexual citizens of NC, though that aspect of the bill is ridiculous, too. Or will police have to inspect the genitalia of M2F/F2M transitioned people in the presence of a birth certificate?
Please, by all means google pictures of transitioned people, both male and female, and look at their outward appearance versus their chromosomal sexual identity. Then imagine them being forced to use the bathroom with other people sharing the same genetic sexual identity.
Everything was working just fine before this bill. There were laws about public indecency, sexual assualt, and invasion of privacy that covered any and all bathroom misbehavior. It solves zero problems, and lost NC $20M in annual salary.
Again, and please look at the details of how it takes rights away from cities and states, and completely guts state level discrimination protection for all classes (veterans, race, religion, et al).
Stonewall all over again - "Standard procedure was to line up the patrons, check their identification, and have female police officers take customers dressed as women to the bathroom to verify their sex, upon which any men dressed as women would be arrested."[0]
You'd think the US would be doing a little better nearly 50 years on, eh?
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_riots#Police_raid
Why? What is the underlying reason for that? Is it different if your (hypothetical?) son of the same age might have a woman (regardless of dress) in with him?
I'm genuinely curious.
But, if the issue is whether we should have separate bathrooms for the genders, let's have that conversation instead of forcing it on society in the guise of discrimination.
I'm confused... in bathrooms in the US, you don't have cubicles that shut+lock? You strip naked in public areas? In my country, we have cubicles that lock and people pull their clothes back on before unlocking them.
Also, like... why's it ok for her to see strange cis women taking a shit, in case you actually do all shit in the open?
That's okay; a lot of people have reading deficits, and in fact my company works a lot to help people with them. One thing we've found helps with reading deficits is breaking things down, so let's do that.
First, load up http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2015E2/Bills/House/PDF/H2v1.pd... in another browser window. That's the actual bill text, presented as a diff.
HB2 has three parts. The first part is about bathrooms, and the second part prohibits cities have a minimum wage other than the state's, so I'm going to completely ignore those two bits.
That leaves part III. Part III has three main parts. Here's what they do:
Part III, Section 3.1(c), says that only the state definitions of protected classes matter, and that local municipalities cannot define their own: "this Article and other applicable provisions of the General Statutes supersede and preempt any ordinance, regulation, resolution, or policy adopted or imposed by a unit of local government or other political subdivision of the State". So the only protected classes are those defined by the state.
Part III, Section 3.2, adds the line, "This Article does not create, and shall not be construed to create or support, a statutory or common law private right of action, and no person may bring any civil action based upon the public policy expressed herein." This is technical language, but "private right of action", in this context, means "bring a suit." Thus, only the state can bring action; you can't. And due to Part III, Section 3.1(c), local cities cannot create their own laws that do permit this. Thus, the first part of my statement: you are now barred from suing for discrimination, and must rely on the state.
Finally, Part III, Section 3.3(a), redefines the state's protected classes to include "race, religion, color, national origin, or biological sex". Since sexual orientation and gender identity are not included here, and Part III Section 3.1 forbade cities from having their own protected classes, we have now prohibited the entire LGBT community from being declared a protected class, and therefore the state is under no obligation (and, in fact, has no legal basis) to bring discrimination complaints about sexual orientation.
Others have already pointed out that this is not all it does. It goes far beyond the bathroom.
In addition to that, it also botches the bathroom portion because it sorts people into bathrooms by what is on their birth certificate. If your birth certificate says "male", for instance, but you've had male to female sex reassignment surgery you'd still be sorted into the men's room under this law.
The proponents of the law say that it is easy in North Carolina to get your birth certificate changed to match your new sex when it changes, such as due to sex reassignment surgery.
The problem with that is that there are actually people who are born outside of North Carolina, but for inexplicable reasons move there. North Carolina did not issue their birth certificates, and so North Carolina's ease of changing a birth certificate is irrelevant to them.
Idaho, for example, does not allow amending the sex on a birth certificate. A person who is born female in Idaho, moves to North Carolina, and undergoes female to male sex reassignment surgery will be required to use the woman's room, despite sporting a penis, in North Carolina.
Maybe we are splitting bathrooms wrong. Maybe instead of men/women, the split should be stand/sit. Have one kind of bathroom that just has urinals, and one that just has enclosed stalls. If you have a penis and just need to urinate, you use the former. If you do not have a penis or you need to defecate you use the latter.
Since the latter would have enclosed stalls, you should have enough privacy that it doesn't matter who else is using the other stalls.