Ohio’s proposed “drag ban” could easily be abused to become a vehicle of anti-trans harassment

Getty Images.

Let me first preface this by stating that I am a transgender individual, who is seeking to provide education to all regarding the LGBTQ+ community.

When I first became aware of Ohio House Bill 245, I became extremely upset and worried that we once again will be doomed to repeat the mistakes of our past. You might have heard that this bill is referred to as the Ohio Drag Ban. This bill, with its primary sponsors as state Reps. Anglea N. King and Josh Williams, was created from a standpoint of fear and misinformation.

Many who support this bill have claimed that drag performance must be banned from places that children would be able to view; in order to protect children from “obscene” entertainment. Many point to drag performances taking place at public libraries, community parks, churches, and other public venues as inappropriate. In their eyes, they believe that drag is an obscene display of the woke culture and gender revolution that they desperately want to protect their children from. 

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

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

When looking at the language here, one might see how vague it is written; especially when identifying the “entertainers who exhibit a gender identity that is different from the performer’s or entertainer’s gender assigned at birth using clothing, makeup, prosthetic or imitation genitals or breasts, or other physical markers” section.

This is what is extremely dangerous. Not only is legislating and prohibiting the art that is drag from public locations already a violation of the First Amendment; but this wording can easily be interpreted to implement a variation of the Three-Article Rule that once plagued our country. 

For those unaware, the Three-Article Rule was a ban that never actually existed as law, but was used by police throughout the early to mid 20th century to discriminate and persecute transgender individuals and drag entertainers.

While there were laws previously banning cross-dressing; this rule was used to target those who were deemed to be wearing articles of clothing designated for the opposite gender. According to Anita Dolce Vita with DapperQ, “An individual had to be wearing three articles of clothing of the gender they were assigned at birth or else they’d be arrested. If you were assigned female at birth but caught wearing pants and a shirt, you could be arrested for failing to wear three articles of women’s clothing.”

This rule played a pivotal role in the Stonewall Riots and uprising; as those who were being targeted fought back against the truly despicable and hateful oppression.

Fast forward to today, this bill, Ohio HB 245, and others like it around the country are looking to bring the Three-Article Rule back, but this time make it officially a law. If Ohio HB 245 were to pass, it would create a society where people will openly question a person’s gender and police the way that they are presenting themselves.

This fear of the gender revolution is one that will lead us back into the past, and reinstitute oppressive measures.

Let’s be completely honest, this fear is driven from a person’s belief that they should be able to look at a person and know exactly what gender they are, so that they know how they should treat them. It would be foolish to not acknowledge that the driving factor behind these anti-LGBTQ legislations is not to protect children, but to make sure everyone aligns to a standard practice of traditional family values and gender roles.

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

I am extremely fearful about Ohio HB 245 passing, as it would create a world where it would be unlawful for me to exist.

As a transgender individual who was assigned male at birth, I present feminine on a daily basis, wearing clothing designated for females, and having had gender affirming surgeries to ensure that my gender identity and body align. Ohio HB245 passing creates an environment where I can be accused of breaking the law, simply for existing as myself in public spaces.

While I do not dress in provocative ways or display nudity in public, the way that the bill is written does open the door to the possibility of someone accusing me of obscene presentation of gender because I am not aligning with my sex assigned at birth.

While many will claim that this is not the intention of the bill, it must be understood that many times throughout our history the intention behind bills and the way they were implemented can be very different. 

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

The post Ohio’s proposed “drag ban” could easily be abused to become a vehicle of anti-trans harassment appeared first on Ohio Capital Journal.