Ohio’s Proposed “Drag Ban” Could Easily Be Abused to Become a Tool of Anti-Trans Harassment

Getty Images.

Let me first preface this by saying that I am a transgender person who wants to educate everyone about the LGBTQ+ community.

When I first became aware of Ohio House Bill 245, I became extremely upset and worried that we would once again be doomed to repeat the mistakes of our past. You may have heard this bill referred to as the Ohio Drag Ban. This bill, whose primary sponsors are State Representatives Anglea N. King and Josh Williams, was created from a position of fear and misinformation.

Many who support this bill have argued that drag performances should be banned in places where children can watch; to protect children from ‘obscene’ entertainment. Many point out that performances taking place in public libraries, community parks, churches and other public locations are considered inappropriate. In their eyes, they believe that drag is an obscene display of the woke culture and gender revolution they so desperately want to protect their children from.

First and foremost, this bill is written in such a way that much can be left to interpretation; which is extremely dangerous.

The purpose of this bill is written to prohibit any action deemed to be “adult cabaret” in any location other than that determined to be adult cabaret. They define cabaret for adults as: “with topless dancers; go-go dancers; exotic dancers; strippers; performers or entertainers who exhibit a gender identity different from the performer’s or entertainer’s assigned sex at birth, using clothing, makeup, prosthetics or imitation genitalia or breasts, or other physical characteristics; or other similar performers or entertainers who provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest, whether or not the performance is for consideration.

If you look at the language here, you might notice how vaguely it is written; especially in identifying the section “entertainers who exhibit a gender identity different from the performer’s or entertainer’s sex assigned at birth, using clothing, makeup, prosthetics or imitation genitals or breasts, or other physical characteristics”.

This is what is extremely dangerous. Not only is legislating and banning art being towed from public locations a violation of the First Amendment; but this wording can easily be interpreted as a variation on the three-article rule that once plagued our country.

For those who didn’t know, the three-article rule was a ban that never actually existed as law, but was used by police in the early to mid-20th century to discriminate against and prosecute transgender people and to troll entertainers .

Although there were previously laws prohibiting cross-dressing; this rule was used to target those who were expected to wear garments intended for the opposite sex. According to Anita Dolce Vita of DapperQ, “A person had to wear three items of clothing of the gender they were assigned at birth or they would be arrested. If you were assigned female at birth but were caught wearing pants and a shirt, you could be arrested for not wearing three items of women’s clothing.”

This rule played a crucial role in the Stonewall riots and uprising; while those targeted fight back against truly despicable and hateful oppression.

Fast forward to today: This bill, Ohio HB 245, and others like it across the country want to bring back the three-article rule, but this time it will officially become law. If Ohio HB 245 were to pass, it would create a society where people openly question a person’s gender and police the way they present themselves.

This fear of the gender revolution will take us back to the past and reintroduce oppressive measures.

Let’s be completely honest: this fear comes from a person’s belief that they need to be able to look at someone and know exactly what gender they are so they know how to treat them. It would be foolish not to recognize that the driving factor behind this anti-LGBTQ legislation is not protecting children, but ensuring that everyone buys into a standard practice of traditional family values ​​and gender roles.

Why else would lawmakers continue to introduce these bills when it has been proven time and time again that the public does not want them? Here in Ohio, the public spoke and passed the constitutional amendment to protect reproductive rights; after Republican lawmakers passed bills to ban nearly all abortions. People spoke loudly and said that the choice of what to do with someone’s body is not up to the government, but up to that person.

I am extremely afraid that Ohio HB 245 will die because it would create a world where it would be illegal for me to exist.

As a transgender person assigned male at birth, I present femininely on a daily basis, wear clothing intended for women, and have undergone gender-affirming surgeries to ensure my gender identity and body align. The passing of Ohio HB245 creates an environment where I can be accused of breaking the law simply for living as myself in public spaces.

Although I do not dress in a provocative manner or display nudity in public, the way the bill is written opens the door to the possibility of someone accusing me of obscene gender presentation because I do not conform to my gender assigned at birth has been assigned.

While many will argue that this is not the intent of the bill, it must be understood that the intent behind bills and the way they have been implemented can often be very different throughout our history.

Instead of focusing on legislating and policing LGBTQ+ identities and expressions, we should focus on providing education and creating environments where everyone is accepted for who they are. Whether you agree with LGBTQ+ identity or not, everyone deserves the respect for being who they are in this world.

The post That Ohio’s proposed ‘tow ban’ could easily be abused to become a tool of anti-trans harassment appeared first on Ohio Capital Journal.