Here is a summary of SB 777.  It does not state that bathrooms are going to be different sexes together as stated by anti gay
lobbyists.Here is the summary from the bill its self.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   SB 777, as introduced, Kuehl. Discrimination.
   Existing law states that it is the policy of the state to afford
equal rights and opportunities to all persons in the public or
private elementary and secondary schools and postsecondary
educational institutions of the state regardless of their sex, ethnic
group identification, race, national origin, religion, or mental or
physical disability and prohibits a person from being subjected to
discrimination on those bases.
    Existing law prohibits a teacher from giving instruction, and a
school district from sponsoring any activity, that reflects adversely
upon persons because of their race, sex, color, creed, handicap,
national origin, or ancestry.
   Existing law prohibits the State Board of Education and the
governing board of a school district from adopting for use in the
public schools any instructional materials that reflect adversely
upon persons because of their race, sex, color, creed, handicap,
national origin, or ancestry.
   This bill would revise the list of prohibited bases of
discrimination and the kinds of prohibited instruction, activities,
and instructional materials and instead, would refer to disability,
gender, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation,
or any other characteristic contained in the definition of hate
crimes that is contained in the Penal Code. The bill would define
disability, gender, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, and
sexual orientation for this purpose.
   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no.
State-mandated local program: no.

That claim was likely just the work of a conservative fear-monger extrapolating extremist information from an otherwise well-intentioned bill.

You mean it was "jim"?  ; )

Hey I sure do like the idea of letting""boys""like me use the girls potty.The girls are always very nice to me. They dont beat me up and call me names. The boys beat me up and flush my head down the toilet. Boys are mean!

So in essence, all the women should be uncomfortable having you in their bathroom because you are uncomfortable in the boys room?  That sounds a little self centered to me.

I agree awsmom8! I think rainbowman is a fraud! It's probably one of Medicone's children!! LMAO!

I think rainbowman works at McDonalds

I don't like sharing the restroom with strange men, I can deal with the lifting or putting down of the lid in my own home, but hell; I can't even stand using unisex restrooms after a man comes out it makes me think--did he pee on the seat?

Here are the facts about SB 777, which will affect all children in California public schools.

SB 777 prohibits any “instruction” or school-sponsored “activity” that “promotes a discriminatory bias” against “gender” (the bill’s definition includes cross-dressing and sex changes) and “sexual orientation” (the bill’s definition includes bisexuality). Because no textbook or instruction in California public schools currently disparages transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality, the practical effect of SB 777 will be to require positive portrayals of these sexual lifestyles at every government-operated school. Otherwise, “discriminatory” schools will be subject to intimidation and lawsuits by the State Department of Education.

Under SB 777, which will go into effect on January 1, 2008, the following could be eliminated from California public schools because they are deemed to have a “discriminatory bias”:

• Textbooks and other instruction that portray marriage as only between a man and a woman
• Textbooks and other instruction that say people are born male or female (and not in between)
• Textbooks and other instruction that leave out transsexual, bisexual, and homosexual historical figures
• Sex education and school assemblies that omit the option of hormone injections or sex changes
• Homecoming king and queen contests that allow only boys to run for king and only girls to run for queen
• Boys’ and girls’ bathrooms that separate biological boys from biological girls

How SB 777 is written to sexually indoctrinate schoolchildren
http://www.savecalifornia.c...

What implementation of SB 777 could look like in the classroom
http://www.savecalifornia.c...

Parents and everybody who cares about children should be concerned about this bill. Because these changes to instruction and activities are a state mandate, every local public school in California will be impacted.

Randy Thomasson
President
Campaign for Children and Families
Sacramento, California

Let me get this straight:  Because of hate crimes, there's a bill that will allow everybody to go into any bathroom they want to? 
What purpose would this serve?  It seems to me that this opens the door for  sexual crimes or inappropriate behavior to take place in the bathroom.
 If you're a boy, go to the boys room...if you're a girl, go to the girls room...Trans gender children can make arrangements as to which bathroom
would be appropriate for them. 
We all have a right to live and be protected (especially children).  The problem doesn't lie with the people who are different; the problem lies with the
the bullies who are committing crimes against these kids.  There needs be punishment for people (kids)who dare to single out others and bully
them.  Security should be implemented to keep these things from happening...this Bill is a passive approach, and possibly a gay rights tactic.
  I know there are definitely people who are not comfortable with homosexuality.  I, myself have a hard time relating to adults who live a gay life style.

  What I do know is that we are all human beings and we need to take a stand and protect people who need our help and understanding.
We must begin reaching out and teaching our children to embrace other people no matter what their appearance or circumstance.
I absolutely agree that we need to prepare our children for the real world and this is a good time to start.

A while back in Europe, feminists wanted to ban all male urinals because they represented male triumphalism. Feminists in Sweden, Germany, and Australia were demanding men sit down while urinating because a man standing up to urinate is deemed to be triumphing in his masculinity, an insult degrading to women. Feminists are campaigning to ban urinals from Stockholm University campus though their success has been limited to one elementary school so far. I don't know about anything current on that but what makes it salient to me is how the legal system can be utilized for philosophical ends that no one could have ever anticipated.

All it takes in our country is an enterprising lawyer to make a case, and personally, I see a feeding frenzy coming. The ambiguities are opportunities for the opportunistic.