Ohio university displays 'biological' sex bathroom signs in wake of new state law
One of Ohio's largest universities has begun displaying signs limiting restroom use to 'biological men' and 'biological women' following the enactment of a new state law.
The University of Cincinnati began displaying the new signage last week in its residence halls and some other on-campus buildings in response to the passage of a law that restricts bathroom use in public and private K-12 schools and colleges to members of the same 'biological sex.' Signed into law by Republican Gov. Mike DeWine in November, the legislation officially goes into effect Tuesday.
A public institution with more than 50,000 students, the University of Cincinnati appears to be the first Ohio college or university to comply with the new law. A representative for TransOhio, a statewide transgender advocacy group, said the school is the first it is aware of that's 'taking any action in response to the bill.' The law does not specify how exactly it should be enforced, making it unclear how other schools will comply.
At least 15 states restrict which restrooms trans people can use in school settings, but only five have laws that apply to colleges and universities. Of these five, only two — Florida and Ohio — have measures that include private colleges and universities, according to the LGBTQ think tank Movement Advancement Project.
A spokesperson for the University of Cincinnati confirmed there have been 'signage updates in some residence halls and locker rooms' on campus.
'As a public institution, we are following the law and seeking to meet our mission to create an environment where we provide opportunity, develop educated and engaged citizens and enrich our city, state and world,' the spokesperson, M.B. Reilly, said in an email.
News of the college's new signage quickly spread after a photo of one of the signs, which reads 'biological men,' was shared Thursday on the social media platform Reddit, drawing thousands of comments. Multiple school employees and students who spoke with NBC News said they did not receive any communication from the university about the new signage beforehand.
A QR code linking to a list of single-occupancy restrooms across the campus is attached to the new signs, two students said.
Supporters of the law say it is necessary to ensure the safety and privacy of Ohio students. When the bathroom policy was signed into law in November, its chief sponsor, Republican state Sen. Jerry Cirino, called its passage 'common sense' and said the measure 'protects our children and grandchildren in private spaces where they are most vulnerable,' according to The Associated Press.
Several transgender students at the University of Cincinnati told NBC News they expect the new bathroom law will make their daily lives more difficult, forcing them to walk longer distances to find restrooms to use.
'I had a panic attack for the first time in a while,' Corvo Hopkins, a 21-year-old junior who is transgender, said in a phone interview. 'I haven't been able to think about anything else.'
Hopkins added that the new bathroom signs send a message to trans students that 'we're not valued, they don't want us here, and that living on campus, we're not safe.'
Noah Ciolino, an 18-year-old freshman with irritable bowel syndrome, said he moved 10 floors down in his on-campus dormitory building Saturday, because his former suite didn't have a single-occupancy bathroom nearby. In order to 'legally use the right restroom,' he said that he would have had to ride the elevator to a girls floor or take the stairs. He said he worries about what will happen if his current floor's only gender-neutral bathroom is occupied during an emergency situation.
'It's been hard to complete assignments, because I already struggle with depression as it is,' Ciolino said of grappling with the changes on campus. 'Have you ever tried to swim in the opposite direction of where the stream is going? It's like that.'
The new bathroom signs aren't the only changes the university has seen this month. On Friday, the school's president, Neville Pinto, sent a letter to students addressing its rollback of diversity, equity and inclusion policies following an executive order by President Donald Trump mandating the elimination of DEI in higher education.
'Given the extent to which our university, like most educational institutions, relies on federal funding to deliver and sustain our core mission, it is untenable to operate as if noncompliance with these directives is an effective option,' Pinto's letter read. 'Our leaders have begun evaluating jobs and duties related to DEI and examining our DEI programming, initiatives and projects to bring all areas into compliance. In addition, we have begun removing references to DEI principles across university websites, social media and collateral materials.'
On Monday, hundreds of students and staffers gathered on campus to protest the DEI rollback, according to NBC affiliate WLWT of Cincinnati.
'I spent three years on this campus helping make a space where students can feel welcome and feel like they can take that mask down and just can be themselves,' Christian Caffey, a student assistant at the school's LGBTQ Center, told WLWT. 'To have Pinto send out the epitome of the end of office day at 3:45 email, then get out the door and hope everybody cools off over the weekend. That email says, 'Hey, we're going to scrap all the DEI effort as quickly as possible.' That felt like a shot of the heart.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
41 minutes ago
- NBC News
New GOP bill would protect AI companies from lawsuits if they offer transparency
Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., is introducing legislation Thursday that would shield artificial intelligence developers from an array of civil liability lawsuits provided they meet certain disclosure requirements. Lummis' bill, the Responsible Innovation and Safe Expertise Act, seeks to clarify that doctors, lawyers, financial advisers, engineers and other professionals who use AI programs in their decision-making retain legal liability for any errors they make — so long as AI developers publicly disclose how their systems work. 'This legislation doesn't create blanket immunity for AI — in fact, it requires AI developers to publicly disclose model specifications so professionals can make informed decisions about the AI tools they choose to utilize,' Lummis, a member of the Commerce Committee, said in a statement first shared with NBC News. 'It also means that licensed professionals are ultimately responsible for the advice and decisions they make. This is smart policy for the digital age that protects innovation, demands transparency, and puts professionals and their clients first.' Lummis' office touted the bill as the first piece of federal legislation that offers clear guidelines for AI liability in a professional context. The measure would not govern liability for other AI elements, such as self-driving vehicles, and it would not provide immunity when AI developers act recklessly or willfully engage in misconduct. 'AI is transforming industries — medicine, law, engineering, finance — and becoming embedded in professional tools that shape critical decisions,' her office said in a release. 'But outdated liability rules discourage innovation, exposing developers to unbounded legal risk even when trained professionals are using these tools.' Exactly who is liable when AI is used in sensitive medical, legal or financial situations is a bit of a gray area, with some states seeking to enact their own standards. The House-passed 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' which is advancing through Congress and supported by President Donald Trump, includes a provision that would ban states from enacting any AI regulations for 10 years. Senate Republicans last week proposed changing the provision to instead block federal funding for broadband projects to states that regulate AI. Both Democratic and Republican state officials have criticized the effort to prohibit state-level regulations over the next decade, while AI executives have argued that varying state laws would stifle industry growth when the United States is in stiff competition with countries like China.
NBC News
2 hours ago
- NBC News
Families file suit challenging Arkansas law that requires Ten Commandments be posted in classrooms
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — Seven Arkansas families filed a lawsuit Wednesday challenging an upcoming state requirement that public school classrooms have posted copies of the Ten Commandments, saying the new law will violate their constitutional rights. The federal lawsuit challenges a measure Republican Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed into law earlier this year, similar to a requirement enacted by Louisiana and one that Texas' governor has said he'll sign. The Arkansas law takes effect in August and requires the Ten Commandments to be prominently displayed in public school classrooms and libraries. "Permanently posting the Ten Commandments in every classroom and library — rendering them unavoidable — unconstitutionally pressures students into religious observance, veneration, and adoption of the state's favored religious scripture," the lawsuit said. The suit was filed on behalf of the families by the American Civil Liberties Union, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State and the Freedom from Religion Foundation. The lawsuit names four school districts in northwest Arkansas — Fayetteville, Bentonville, Siloam Springs and Springdale — as defendants. A spokesperson for Fayetteville schools said the district would not comment on pending litigation, while the other three districts did not immediately respond to requests for comment. A spokesperson for Attorney General Tim Griffin said his office was reviewing the lawsuit and considering options. Attorneys for the families, who are Jewish, Unitarian Universalist or nonreligious, said they planned to ask the federal judge in Fayetteville for a preliminary injunction blocking the law's enforcement. The attorneys say the law violates longstanding Supreme Court precedent and the families' First Amendment rights. "By imposing a Christian-centric translation of the Ten Commandments on our children for nearly every hour of every day of their public-school education, this law will infringe on our rights as parents and create an unwelcoming and religiously coercive school environment for our children," Samantha Stinson, one of the plaintiffs, said in a news release. Louisiana was the first state to enact such a requirement, and a federal judge blocked the measure before it was to take effect Jan 1. Proponents of Louisiana's law say that ruling only applies to the five school boards listed in the suit, but The Associated Press is unaware of any posters being displayed in schools as the litigation continues.
The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
Dear Vix: I feel ashamed to admit it – but I really don't like my parents
I feel deeply ashamed to admit this, but I don't think I like my parents as people, very much. Obviously they're my parents – they did the best they could for me and gave me a home and food and worked hard to provide what little we had – and I'll always be grateful for that. I had a tough upbringing – we didn't have much to spare and it has taught me a lot about grafting and working hard and really setting your mind to 'better yourself'. But now that we are all adults, I find excuses not to see them very often, because honestly? I don't really like spending time with them. They have lived in the same house for 40 years, in a tiny place. As a result, they have 'small town' views – they blame immigrants for everything and if someone of a different race or sexuality appears on the TV, they'll always make racist or homophobic comments about them. I'm a gay man living in the capital – we couldn't be more different. They idolise Nigel Farage and think Reform UK are the great hope for Britain – which I can't bring myself to tell any of my liberal London friends. I find their views disgusting and depressing. I always bite back when I hear them say something awful, but I hate conflict and it makes me shaky and upset. I find their constant suspicion of 'others' so tiring and it makes me not want to see them. How do I reconcile these differences and maintain some sort of relationship, even if the scales have fallen from my eyes and I think less of them? Or do I cut my losses and cut them off? Sad Son Dear Sad Son, I can feel the grief in your dilemma. On the one hand, you sound like you have a deep appreciation for the way your parents raised you, under very trying circumstances. And I'd invite you to remember that however you feel about their views now, you are who you are because (or in spite) of them. That can be worth reflecting on, whenever we're in situations (or conversations) that make us uncomfortable. Would you be as passionate about equality and diversity today if you hadn't felt the intrinsic wrongness of what you describe as 'small town views'? Perhaps it was those exact views that cemented your own beliefs and made you so passionately opposed to intolerance. I am not, under any circumstances, seeking to justify homophobic, transphobic or racist comments – they're unacceptable wherever we find them. I also personally believe that these kinds of comments should always be challenged. If we allow them to pass without objection, then we risk being complicit. Not speaking out when someone says something objectively wrong – even dangerous – also runs the danger of imbuing those comments with a veneer of acceptability. And that in turn can allow this kind of prejudiced and bigoted thinking to fester. So, bravo for not staying silent. I know how difficult that is, especially if you are conflict-averse. The major issue here is, of course, the fact that your parents are making homophobic comments about people on the telly – when they have a gay son. I can completely understand why you feel so devastated, disgusted and disappointed. It may be that your parents are doing that lazy, 'but I didn't mean you!' thing where people think they have immunity, because they ' know someone who's LGBT+ '; or assume they can't be called racist 'because they have a Black friend'. Either way, they're being (at best) thoughtless and (at worst) downright offensive. How confident are you in talking to them about it? I think you should, for your own peace of mind. You absolutely have the right to point out that making negative comments about gay people on the TV affects you personally and deeply. And it simply isn't acceptable. I would advise focusing on your feelings, rather than going on the attack: 'It really hurts me when you say XYZ, because it makes me feel judged and invalidated' – rather than, 'you can't say that'. They're more likely to listen and less likely to dismiss you. As some kind of tonic, I'd also invite you to try, as difficult as it may feel, to put yourself in your parents' shoes for a moment. They have lived in a 'small town' for their whole lives, likely only ever encountering the same sorts of people. What does hatred and suspicion stem from? Fear. And fear stems from a lack of understanding. It is this fear that (in my opinion) people like Nigel Farage and Reform UK capitalise on. Stoking fear of 'the other' gives them power – and power allows you to control. Can you find it in you to hold some empathy for your parents? Consider that they, too, are the product of the views they grew up hearing. Of course, ideally we would all look to grow and learn and educate ourselves and ultimately shed these horrible views, but they might not know how. That's why I think, not withstanding how hard this is, your voice is important. Take a break from seeing them (or limit the number of times you 'go home') to protect yourself – put in boundaries so that you're not feeling drained or upset by each encounter. But when you do, keep doing what you're doing and speaking up for what you know is right. You're helping them – and they love you. So we just have to hope that even the things that have been said in the heat of the moment might just be sinking in.
