>First, the conclusion that the law is "likely" a violation of Title IX omits the fact that a federal judge in Eastern Virginia previously ruled that a school district didn't violate Title IX when they refused to let a transgender teen female shower with the boys. While the case is under appeal, there's no indication (and certainly no precedent) right now that federal judges will rule the NC law a violation.
>
>Title IX is based on actual discrimination, on actual denial of rights. There is no denial here. Both genders are being treated equally - both have equal access to bathrooms according to their actual gender. No one is being denied use of a bathroom. There's no basis of a discrimination claim. Any attempts by the feds to pursue legal avenues is bullying and blackmail (and arguably a violation of the 10th amendment).

How are transgender "typically" classified ? Y-Chromosome count, in/outside plumbing at the moment or self-classification not dependant on anything else ? (I think making this a matter of law is stupid - if there is objection of the group normally assigned the shower, they should be not allowed to participate)


>
>Finally, the reactions of certain entertainers and even certain companies has just gone beyond outrageous. Singer Bryan Adams refuses to do a concern in NC, yet he has performed in locations that have much worse records on human rights violations. I already pointed out the hypocrisy of PayPal. Apple Computer's potential threats are even more hysterical - they object to being compelled to break open its phone, yet they have no problem with the Feds forcing NC elementary schools to allow males in the girls room.

Outrageous is to strong for my taste. There might be reasoning to participate in the country different from moral code - but if that is fulfilled, why not select places in that country more in line with own philosophy/reasoning ?