Tennessee Senate Bill 3

Clippings from news sources involving fashion freedom and other gender equality issues.
GoSkirtGo
Member
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2022 1:45 am

Re: Tennessee Senate Bill 3

Post by GoSkirtGo »

A lawsuit is already in the works challenging this law (I figured it wouldn't be long), as the article below mentions (you'll need to scroll down a bit to see that part):
https://www.yahoo.com/news/not-going-dr ... 22976.html
Coder
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2649
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 4:40 am
Location: Southeast Michigan

Re: Tennessee Senate Bill 3

Post by Coder »

I don't know how Tennessee law compares to Florida, but this is a recent event which might put some perspective on the topic:

https://www.cbsnews.com/miami/news/stat ... ueen-show/

I don't know where CBS lies on the political spectrum, but I thought the report limited the amount of editorializing. I've seen others brush this off as a knee-jerk reaction by FL, but to me this is a much clearer case where a law might have been broken.

Ultimately it comes down to this: do parents have the right to waive state law when it comes to minors? A parent doesn't have absolute right over their kids - children can be taken away by child protective services for any number of reasons. I'm not saying they should be over this - but the argument that "parents should have the right to raise their kids as they see fit" doesn't mean kids get carte-blanche approval to break the law. If a parent brings their kid to a store, and supervises them stealing - should that be allowed? How would them accompanying a minor change the situation if the law doesn't allow it? If people don't like the law, then they should change it.
FLbreezy
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 490
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2021 12:40 pm
Location: Florida, USA

Re: Tennessee Senate Bill 3

Post by FLbreezy »

man-in-a-dress.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
rode_kater
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 836
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2019 10:46 pm

Re: Tennessee Senate Bill 3

Post by rode_kater »

Because news articles never bother with actual references, I went looking.

The actual complaint

It references Section 800.04(7), Florida statutes.

I don't know the case law here, a lot of those terms can be interpreted fairly fuzzily. I do have a small problem with the venue being pursued for something the parents of the children voluntarily chose to attend. The argument about "parent's having the right to waive state law" isn't relevant, since (near as I can tell) the parents broke no law, and the children didn't either. If there's a question of misleading advertising, the attendees should get their money back.

I think it's kind of telling that all they have to go after is the liquor licence of the venue. Talk about grasping at straws.
ScotL
Chatbot
Posts: 1459
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2022 12:43 am

Re: Tennessee Senate Bill 3

Post by ScotL »

FLbreezy wrote: Fri Mar 17, 2023 6:49 pm man-in-a-dress.jpg
Hahahahaha! Hence one huge problem with the narrow minded arguing for that phrase in Deuteronomy about men not wearing women’s clothes. Men’s clothes when that was written look just like women’s clothes today.

Wonderful find sir!
Coder
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2649
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 4:40 am
Location: Southeast Michigan

Re: Tennessee Senate Bill 3

Post by Coder »

rode_kater wrote: Fri Mar 17, 2023 8:39 pm Because news articles never bother with actual references, I went looking.

The actual complaint

It references Section 800.04(7), Florida statutes.

I don't know the case law here, a lot of those terms can be interpreted fairly fuzzily. I do have a small problem with the venue being pursued for something the parents of the children voluntarily chose to attend. The argument about "parent's having the right to waive state law" isn't relevant, since (near as I can tell) the parents broke no law, and the children didn't either. If there's a question of misleading advertising, the attendees should get their money back.
The news report said that the explicit content - see complaint #10, 11, 12 - occurred when children were present. I would imagine:
in the presence of a victim who is less than 16 years of age, commits lewd or lascivious exhibition

is what they are referring to - but I'm not a lawyer - and I'm not sure some of the things they allege are illegal with minors present (all alleged is "simulated"). The performers / sponsor are ultimately at fault here - and I'm not suggesting the participants be punished -> but certainly the sponsor should have disallowed minors from entering. What I was trying to say was - even though the parents consented to their children seeing this, the law doesn't seem to have a clause that says "these statues don't apply if the parents consent".
rode_kater wrote: Fri Mar 17, 2023 8:39 pm I think it's kind of telling that all they have to go after is the liquor licence of the venue. Talk about grasping at straws.
Going after the liquor license of the venue seems suspicious/petty. They should go after the event sponsor if they are concerned about the content of what was put on - I presume the venue just hosts these things, but doesn't condone what takes place in their hall.
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: Tennessee Senate Bill 3

Post by moonshadow »

So in just two short months, virtually every Republican or Republican leaning state has banned crossdressing in the presence of children.

So we still don't have Healthcare in this country, and there's a new shooting almost every day now.... but hey, at least we don't have to worry about crossdressers reading to children. Whew! Thank God. That was close! It's comforting to know that we can all rest easy and know that our children are finally SAFE, thanks to the tireless efforts of our wonderful God fearing Republican legislatures protecting us from this evil, sinister, men in dresses!

While I realize this won't realistically apply to most of us, I have nevertheless made a personal decision to stand with the crossdressing and transgender subculture.

It is a matter of freedom. These people aren't hurting anyone, and the actions of these state legislatures are downright oppressive.

Thus until the Taliban loosens its grip on the ideals of personal liberty and starts to mind its own business again I've decided I will no longer wear feminine clothes (skirts) in Republican states.

Henceforth I will only wear my WICCAN robe when visiting "red" states.

After all.... I'd hate to get arrested by the fashion police and have an actual FELONY on my record.

And by the way.... Tennessee can rot in hell.
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
User avatar
Jim
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1551
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 1:39 am
Location: Northern Illinois, USA

Re: Tennessee Senate Bill 3

Post by Jim »

moonshadow wrote: Thu Apr 20, 2023 5:13 am Thus until the Taliban loosens its grip on the ideals of personal liberty and starts to mind its own business again I've decided I will no longer wear feminine clothes (skirts) in Republican states.

Henceforth I will only wear my WICCAN robe when visiting "red" states.
That's recognizably masculine, so while it does say "screw the fundamentalists" it is too conforming. I'd suggest wearing more feminine skirts. This would not break the law but say loudly what you think of it.
ScotL
Chatbot
Posts: 1459
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2022 12:43 am

Re: Tennessee Senate Bill 3

Post by ScotL »

Just thinking out loud here. If there’s a law that bans cross dressing people from reading to children, what are the rules for acceptable dress then?

If the laws for acceptable dress include rules that differ for men and women, as in women can wear skirts/dresses but men cannot, doesn’t this violate gender discrimination laws?

If an employer can’t mandate women wear skirts/dresses, isn’t the reverse also disallowed?

When stupidity reigns, I feel the best solution is Reductio ad Absurdum.

“Reductio ad absurdum is a mode of argumentation that seeks to establish a contention by deriving an absurdity from its denial, thus arguing that a thesis must be accepted because its rejection would be untenable.”

Rigidly defining laws for what’s legal for a man and a woman to wear would alienate Scots wearing kilts and women wearing ties. All the “boyfriend” clothing for women would have to be banned
GoSkirtGo
Member
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2022 1:45 am

Re: Tennessee Senate Bill 3

Post by GoSkirtGo »

@moonshadow - You're overreacting - Tennessee is so far the only state that has actually passed a "drag ban" that COULD be interpreted to apply to men in skirts (and it's been blocked from being enforced while being reviewed by the courts) - at least from what I've heard in the news. A few more states have similar laws pending, but AFAIK none have been enacted yet.

Florida is about to pass a law that could affect some LGBTQ+ events, but based on the language used we MIS should be safe there. Some of the other states' bills have language like this one that do not call out drag/crossdressing (specifically or with alternate language like the TN law does) per se but use language that calls out "sexualized" performances - which is less sinister for us as long as we're not trying to have a "sexualized" appearance.

It's the fine points of any such enacted laws (which would vary by what each state passes) that the MIS community would need to be on the look out for - whether or not the law could be interpreted to apply to our actions.
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: Tennessee Senate Bill 3

Post by moonshadow »

GoSkirtGo wrote: Thu Apr 20, 2023 3:33 pm @moonshadow - You're overreacting
Maybe... but here are the stakes...

If you're right I wear my skirts as I've been doing and life goes on...

If you're wrong I'm committing a felony..

So I've got skirts and tops across the spectrum from downright masculine to dainty feminine... I wonder where the courts will draw the line?

Will I be aquited in court? Probably, but there's still the thousands in legal expenses, not to mention the countless nights in jail while I await my hearing. Why? Because I offended the Taliban.

Don't get me wrong, I have ever intention to avoid red states from here on out, but sometimes I don't have a choice.. and in that case, I'm going to have to dress like a proper American traditional white man, or... wear a religious rove.

If I wear a skirt, and some bigot gets randy as a result if it, then it can be proven in a court of law that my clothes represented a "prurient interest". Yes.... even if I wear a fill length Amish dress... there are plenty of redneck Tennesseeans that get off on that too.

You could literally be imprisoned for giving someone an erection.
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: Tennessee Senate Bill 3

Post by moonshadow »

Jim wrote: Thu Apr 20, 2023 11:35 am That's recognizably masculine, so while it does say "screw the fundamentalists"
Fundamentalist are pretty much the group behind this. Sure there may be some others mixed in here and there, but they don't call it the "Taliban" for nothing!

Gender nonconforming people are a threat to the theocracy. They must be stopped.

By the way Jim... that picture you posted in Frills and Ruffles... can you say beyond a shadow of any doubt that you'd feel legally safe wearing that in Tennessee right now? Even in the thread you point out that your won't wear it in public.. why?
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
GoSkirtGo
Member
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2022 1:45 am

Re: Tennessee Senate Bill 3

Post by GoSkirtGo »

My post wasn't so much as trying to talk you out of your local concerns (I assume you live in, or frequently travel to, TN?) but rather your (as of now) factually incorrect statement about every red state now having such a law enacted. (Some of those bills are now "inactive" either due to the legislature adjourning or the bill failing to meet a deadline - of course they can be brought back in a future session though.)

Even so, you do know that Tennessee's law is currently blocked by a court from being enforced while it is being reviewed for both its constitutionality (First Amendment) and vagueness (which is what your concern is all about)? That means until and if a court upholds the law, you have no more risk than you did before - and any other states that try to enact something like it will likely have the same fate.

Also, with legal fees, you do know that if you're charged with a crime that is punishable with imprisonment, they have to provide you with a public defender? (Notwithstanding the quality of representation with that vs. a lawyer you hired with your own money)
Coder
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2649
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 4:40 am
Location: Southeast Michigan

Re: Tennessee Senate Bill 3

Post by Coder »

GoSkirtGo wrote: Thu Apr 20, 2023 5:47 pm Also, with legal fees, you do know that if you're charged with a crime that is punishable with imprisonment, they have to provide you with a public defender? (Notwithstanding the quality of representation with that vs. a lawyer you hired with your own money)
Plus, I’m sure the ACLU would be happy to take such a case up - I’m pretty sure they do pro-bono work. Maybe?
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: Tennessee Senate Bill 3

Post by moonshadow »

I don't reckon it really matters much. I don't know why I carry on so.

It's not like I travel to Tennessee often, usually only if I have to. I do live close to to border and I work in Tennessee almost daily, but I haven't vacationed anywhere south of my current location since 2019 when we visited Florida. I haven't actually "vacationed" in Tennessee since 2015.

Eh... let them have their little Taliban if it makes them happy, I survived the first 32 years of my life without stepping foot in that state... surely I can manage to entertain myself without the likes of Tennessee.

I'll vote with my wallet.
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
Post Reply