Republican obsessions with genitals, stupidity and pretending to protect children collided in Arizona this week with a bill seeking to criminalize drag. It would be laughable if the thought behind it wasn’t so dangerous.
The proposed law from the land of Kari Lake defines a “drag show” as a “show or performance for entertainment during which a single performer or group of performers do both of the following”:
(a) DRESS IN CLOTHING AND USE MAKEUP AND OTHER PHYSICAL MARKERS OPPOSITE OF THE PERFORMER’S OR GROUP OF PERFORMERS’ GENDERS AT BIRTH TO EXAGGERATE GENDER SIGNIFIERS AND ROLES.
(b) ENGAGE IN SINGING, DANCING OR A MONOLOGUE OR SKIT IN ORDER TO ENTERTAIN AN AUDIENCE OF TWO OR MORE PEOPLE.
The idea is absurd on its face, but it’s worth exploring, very briefly, why that is. First, while the malign intention of the bill is clear, it barely makes sense grammatically. For one thing, if we take a “textualist” approach, which is how Republican judges supposedly want laws to be read (as opposed to focusing on legislative intent), what does it mean for clothing or makeup to be “opposite” of one’s “gender”? Is a dress or lipstick the opposite of a boy? Even if it made grammatical sense, the bill could theoretically capture various rock bands and actors, saying nothing of traditional drag.
Read the full article here
