North Carolina legislature passed House Bill 2 (2016), and the bill effectively restricts transgender persons from using the restroom in accordance with the sex they identify with. And while that provision in of itself is monstrous, other, smaller segments of the bill have larger, more far reaching implications. But to understand those, lets first talk about the fallacy in the arguments used to pass such a bill:
These facts (men dressing as women to rape women) are statistically untrue. Of the 84,000 rapes that reported to the FBI in 2014, not a single one was attributed to a man posing as a woman (Source). Let those numbers sink in for a bit. 84,000 rapes in a single year, and not a single one attributed to cross dressing. The real health issue is the rampancy of rape in our community, not this fascination with LBGT defecation habits. If the safety of women were the priority of North Carolina's legislature, perhaps they would start with identification and education surrounding America's rape culture.Critics of Charlotte's ordinance said it could have allowed men who may be sexual offenders to enter a woman's restroom or locker room by claiming a transgender identity.
John Rustin, president of the North Carolina Family Policy Council, testified before the Senate, saying that the Charlotte ordinance "means men could enter women restrooms and locker rooms -- placing the privacy, safety, and dignity of women and the elderly at great risk."
Gov. McCrory agreed in a statement he wrote after signing the bill.
"The basic expectation of privacy in the most personal of settings, a restroom or locker room, for each gender was violated by government overreach and intrusion by the mayor and city council of Charlotte," he said. "As a result, I have signed legislation passed by a bipartisan majority to stop this breach of basic privacy and etiquette which was to go into effect April 1 (Source)."
North Carolina is now at risk of losing $4.5 billion of federal funding, according to a statement from the Human Rights Campaign, which claimed the new law is in "direct violation" of Title IX, a federal non-discrimination act.