Nice try sol. But its BS. 1964 was about giving rights to a group that had rights taken away (or never had). The SOLution correctly was to allow everyone to use the same lunch counter, the same drinking fountains, the same sections of the bus and the same classrooms. That was the correct accommodation for all.Oh, so it's about comfort instead of rights. Ah. Where have in our country had that discussion before?Its not about a threat. Its about "comfort". The tranny is uncomfortable in a boys BR. The girls are uncomfortable with a biological boy in the girls locker room.
Who's comfort is more important here? That's an honest question that no one is bothering to address.
The girls in the locker room have the same rights as the tranny does. What rights does the tranny have that the girls don't? Since those rights to privacy and access obviously conflict - who wins here? Unless you are advocating for single gender-neutral locker rooms, your race analogy falls on its face. Because we have segregated the sexes in these areas since the beginning of time, and that was and has been by mutual consent and by choice. I don't recall the feminist movement demanding access to men's bathrooms or vice versa. Title IX is all about segregation and separate but equal. You can deny that all you want, but that's exactly what it is.
This is not about "comfort", this is about rights to privacy. That lack of right to privacy is causing discomfort for the girls. The lack of equal access for the tranny is causing them discomfort.
Look, we've gone around and around about this..... the fact of the matter is that what I predicted came true. There are girls who don't want trannies in their bathroom and now their rights are being taken away in favor of one person who demands to bring their penis into the girls locker room where culturally and historically that was frowned upon. They are pushing back. This will be fought out in the courts, but that should stop us from discussing what WE think the solution should be. Its never stopped you or rzr before, why start now, lest you invoke the Dog/Plame standard again. Or something.