OPINION: Anti-DEI laws put Ohio U students at risk

Photo via: Alexander Smith/Public Domain/Wikimedia Commons

Ollie Hunt, a Freshman studying Journalism, argues that SB 104 and other anti-DEI legislation is harmful to students at Ohio U.

On Nov. 25, an Ohio law, SB 104, was signed and will go into effect this semester on Feb. 25. This law outlines a ban on transgender individuals and their right to use the bathroom that reflects their gender identity. The restrictions pertain to schools from kindergarten to 12th grade, as well as Ohio universities. There is an exception for children under 10 who need assistance using the restroom. 

President Donald Trump signed an executive order to end “radical and wasteful government DEI programs and preferencing” which has led to a lot of confusion and concern for what is to come for diversity programs around the country. 

Both SB 104 and the executive order could prove harmful to the diverse community of Ohio University, one that strives to interconnect everyone from all different backgrounds. 

Ohio U has a big and diverse population of LGBTQ+ community members and has a plethora of resources for the community, including a section of dorms specifically meant to foster connection and promote comfort in one’s surroundings. The Pride floor and gender-inclusive housing is a section of dorms where LGBTQ+ students can choose to live with other students within the same community. The dorms are set up in a mod style to foster connection with peers. Additionally, there is a single bathroom in each hallway, housing one stall door, toilet and a shower. 

When students returned to their dorms for spring semester, each door to every bathroom had been fitted with a lock. Communication with students via a floor meeting with the RA only went as far as saying that the locks were there to prevent any further action needed to adhere to the new legislation. According to the University Communication and Marketing Department, “locks have been added to the ‘mod-style’ residential doors within the Pride Experiential Learning Opportunity in order to provide the space with single-use restrooms.” 

Many members of the LGBTQ+ community, especially transgender individuals, find this new bathroom ban hard to navigate. While the law does not outline enforcement, transgender people have long struggled with public restrooms. Nearly 60% of trans and nonbinary youth have reported feeling unsafe or pressured to use the bathroom that does not align with their gender. While this study may not be indicative of the struggles of our transgender community at Ohio U, it could be similar. 

Ohio U has been diligent in providing many gender-neutral bathroom locations, especially in Alden Library, but more often than not, transgender students are made to choose. While it may be easier than others to choose between bathrooms, it shouldn’t be a choice at all. Transgender individuals should feel safe going into the restroom which reflects their gender identity. 

When asked about what SB 104 means for their day-to-day life, an anonymous transgender student from Ohio U said, “It’s called for avoidance of all public restrooms when possible.”

The DEI order signed under President Trump could also prove hazardous to the strong and diverse student body of Ohio U. As of the signing of the order, the U.S. Department of Education has been ordered to remove and archive a plethora of resources for institutions that mention or pertain to Diversity, Equity and Inclusion. 

This could mean a lot for Ohio U, not just housing. Non-merit-based scholarships could be in jeopardy. These scholarships afford the right to education to a lot of students and, without it, we could see a financial struggle for students who depend on these funds to get their education. 

Students could also see restrictions or even an end to everything that falls under Ohio U’s Division of Diversity and Inclusion. These are unprecedented times and no one is sure what could happen, but the U.S. Department of Education has already made moves to eliminate their DEI initiatives. Additionally, funds given to universities across the nation to allow inclusion efforts could be put on pause or not renewed. 

Ohio U has not spoken on this matter. When I reached out to the RA of the gender-inclusive Pride dorms and the resident director of the Pride dorms, both declined to comment on what the bill would mean for the living situation of more than 30 individuals. When directed to the University’s Communications and Marketing, the information was given as such: “Moving forward, [in accordance to SB104] we [Ohio U] will work to ensure that our public restroom signage and accommodations can meet the needs of our University community while remaining compliant with all applicable state and federal laws.”

As a university that prides itself on promoting diversity and “making all people visible and valued,” it is its duty to provide explanations and next-step directives to their student body. The university must protect the identity of minority students in education. Everyone should have a chance to further their education and to “eliminate” these programs which even the playing field for all students will only do more harm than good. 

The erasure of diversity and inclusion initiatives promotes the idea that minorities are afforded opportunities simply because of their status as a minority, which is a harmful and wrong notion. This order is proving more harm than good and institutions should do their part to protect the diverse culture of education.

Please note that these views and opinions do not reflect those of The New Political.