Skirting the Law

A reader commented on a post a few weeks ago that made me pause.

You indicate that vandalizing a Tesla truck is wrong because it is illegal to vandalize.

Does that mean if they make it illegal to crossdress that we shouldn’t do it because it is wrong and illegal?

I believe in justice and MOST of the time, the law and justice are USUALLY vibing with each other. For the MOST part, if something is illegal I USUALLY feel it’s wrong to do it.

I’m sure you noticed how I qualified all of that.

Is it wrong to walk up to someone and punch them, unprovoked? By the definition of the law, it would likely be assault. And it’s a criminal act, by definition, to assault someone.

(I served on a jury last November so I learned a lot about the legal definitions of assault and self-defense.)

Is it wrong to punch a Nazi unprovoked? Again, by the legal definition of assault, it’s probably a criminal act, but is it wrong from an ethical perspective? No, I don’t think it’s ethically wrong to punch a Nazi. Also, if you think punching a Nazi is wrong, you may want to ask yourself why you are defending a Nazi.

Besides a speeding ticket here and there, I have a clean criminal record. I believe and hope that if a law is in place, it’s done with the best of intentions. I work in education and there are SO many laws and regulations and compliance rules I must follow. Some feel a little arbitrary but usually when you get to the root of it, the regulation makes a little more sense.

If someone thinks a law is stupid or wrong or outdated (for whatever reason), my perspective is that they should work to change the law or a regulation instead of refusing to follow it.

On a side note, I have a difficult time following a procedure if I think it’s absolutely wasteful and stupid and pointless.

Anyway, back to the question.

If crossdressing was illegal, what would my reaction be?

My first reaction is how on earth would this be enforced and defined?

There would need to be a LEGAL definition and classification of what crossdressing IS. Good luck, babe. Even in the non-binary community there is not a prevailing definition of what crossdressing really is.

I suppose the first step is classifying every single thing someone can wear.

If you were AMAB (assigned male at birth), would it be crossdressing if you wore makeup and makeup was legally decided to be a “girl thing”? Sure, I guess, maybe. But male news anchors wear makeup. Our current president wears makeup. Male actors wear makeup. The band KISS wears makeup.

So, would this be illegal? Yes, if makeup was legally a “girl thing” this would be illegal.

Would earrings be a girl thing? If so, would we arrest every guy with pierced ears?

Would panties be a girl thing? What if the panties are designed for men? Then the conversation shifts to whether or not an article of clothing is designed for certain anatomical features.

Would this go both ways? Could some AFAB (assigned female at birth) be arrested for crossdressing if she wore her boyfriend’s sweatshirt?

How would this be enforced? Would it be legal to stop a guy and inquire what color their underwear (regardless of if their underwear was a lacy thong or boxer shorts) is if it was decided that pink is for girls?

Gender identity would also need to be considered. Hannah is transgender. When I am out en femme I am not crossdressing. I am presenting in a way that is in sync with my gender identity.

When I am in male mode and I am wearing leggings, I would argue that I am still not crossdressing. I’m non-binary. The idea that certain clothes are off limits based on your genitalia is absolutely ridiculous to me.

If I don’t believe in gender as a rigid binary, it’s impossible for me to wear “girl clothes” or “boy clothes”. Clothes are clothes.

In order to fairly enforce a law, it must be enforced on EVERYONE. So, how could this be done? Would everyone be subject to being checked? Would every guy at the mall be required to prove that he is not wearing panties or does not have his toenails painted? Would every woman be forced to prove she doesn’t, and never did, have a penis?

I would have a very difficult time with this law, and not only because of what I wear and how I identify. Semantics are important to me and words need to have a specific and consistent definition. “Woke” is a term that gets thrown around a lot whenever anyone besides a straight, white male is the lead role of a movie or a character in a book or has a certain job.

“Woke” gets used so much and in so many instances that it’s almost lost all meaning. I’ve seen tweets from right-wing boneheads cheering for deforestation because it’s “owning the libs” because apparently trees are woke.

If we need to contextualize ‘woke’, then perhaps Jane Fonda said it best. “Woke just means you give a damn about other people” and by god I do give a damn about other people.

Anyway, I got a little distracted.

I can’t imagine I would stop being who I am, whether I am out en femme at the mall or reading in bed wearing a nightgown. I have a difficult time following rules that make no sense, especially when the act isn’t harming anyone.

So! To answer the question, I would need more context and definition. There’s a difference between a law that said “if you were assigned male at birth you will be arrested if you wear a skirt” and a law that said “crossdressing is illegal”. I would also want to know how the law would be enforced. Would everyone be required to carry their birth certificate on them and would be subject to random searches by the police?

I know that I have not given a definitive answer to the question but at the very least I hope I have given some insight into how complex such a law would be.

Love, Hannah