RI Laws and Policies Regarding Gender Identity and Sexuality

Throughout the state's history, Rhode Island has presented itself to never be a truly "first-to-do" state, but has always been part of pioneering efforts to push for progress in all sorts of issues (societal, financial, environmental, etc.). In the confides of societal issues such as gender identity and sexuality, RI played a role in some of the first breakthroughs in protecting the right of expression for thousands of students and adults alike. Although always not the literal halt of societal prejudice, legislation (at all level of government) are extremely impactful driving forces in gaining more support on a large scale, leading then into further reform. Rhode Island, being a progressive state, took great initiative in these sensitive issues in the early 2000's:

"In May, 2001, Rhode Island became the second state in the country to explicitly prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression, thereby protecting transgender people from discrimination in employment, housing, credit, and public accommodations" (ride.ri.gov).

Following RI adding its support into the nation-wide movement of inclusion, many states came to follow. As for the changes that happened within the state due to this legislation, the obvious positives were the concrete guidelines that employers, schools, and communities had to follow under state-wide jurisdiction. But, a simple slip of paper law can not immediately reverse the lulls of societal ignorance, as people who held opinions on the topic before were more likely than not, to maintain their viewpoints. But the schools, some at the very least, attempted to truly apply these policies into their system of education. In a scenario like many school setting, groups are often separated into biological groups, sport teams, gym classes, locker rooms, and even certain clubs. But does it need to be like this, not really:

"...rather than divide or group students on the basis of biological sex (e.g. boys and girls), educators could employ other creative strategies to create teams to work on problems or projects. Gender-based policies, rules, and practices can have the effect of marginalizing, stigmatizing, and excluding students, June, 2016 Page 10 whether they are gender non-conforming or not" (ride.ri.gov).

What is truly necessary in life that we need to separate people on "science-based" stigmas? In my eyes, the political climate of this issue is one that lies along an emotion vs. logic axis. One side believes why not let a person be who they want to be without the constraints of the outdated mindset commonly applied in our society's systems. While the other thinks that is a dramatic response to adolescent angst, and people are just in a phase. Which one is more sound? Well, to me the answer is pretty easy, but if it were as easy to everyone as it is for me, well the world would be a pretty simple place. Maybe one day, I guess?