Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

samfreez t1_jaetavt wrote

Reply to comment by TrustedChimp495 in TIL it used to be illegal for women to wear trousers in the USA by fatboyslick

Arkansas Senate Bill 43 (Warning: PDF) --- Edit: Correction, Arkansas, not Alabama as I initially listed

Edit: Also some proposed bills:

Iowa Senate File 348

Arizona SB1028

Edit 2: There's also the Tennessee Bill SB0003 (Warning, also a PDF)

32

chuuckaduuckpro t1_jaexz86 wrote

Iowa is slipping so hard lately. So minors can’t go to drag shows BUT they can go work in slaughter houses, despicable I’m so ashamed, god I hope neither of those bills pass

33

samfreez t1_jaeycam wrote

Yeah... Repugnicans are trying REALLY hard to ram their agendas down everyone's throats these days. It's truly despicable and evil.

10

chuuckaduuckpro t1_jaeyvrx wrote

Iowa governor is stripping social services of money, turning away federal aid and then celebrating a surplus budget. It’s swung so far right that Iowa has lost the honor of being the first state in the nation to vote in the democratic primary. To paraphrase Field of Dreams “Is this Hell? No it’s Iowa”

13

samfreez t1_jaez593 wrote

He'll also be the first one to beg for money behind the scenes the next time we see massive flooding in the state again, I'm sure.

I have a lot of friends in and from Iowa, and every single one of them is ashamed of what's happening in their state right now, but until Sinclair Media properly fucks off, there won't be much anyone can do to de-claw the right-wing misinformation that keeps everyone scared of their own toenails.

7

killerklixx t1_jaev05c wrote

Am I missing something? You said "dancing" is open to interpretation, but this Arkansas bill specifically defines adult-oriented performances (like stripping/burlesque) and bans it from public spaces, in front of kids or being funded with public money. I don't see the issue?

0

Narcowski t1_jaewr49 wrote

It's a different bill, but TN just changed its definition of burlesque to include any "male or female impersonator"; all it would now take to arrest and charge a cis Tennessean woman in pants with a felony over her clothing is a claim on behalf of a cop that her presentation appealed to a puritent interest.

The first and primary targets are trans people, of course.

33

Bardfinn t1_jaezedk wrote

Yep. That’s the tactic they’re all using — passing a law that bans a narrowly defined set of behaviours, knowing they have the power to redefine a single word used in the bill-now-law to have sweeping social policing powers targeting anyone and anything that doesn’t conform to their desires.

In Tennessee, if this bill is signed into law (and the Republican governor has said he intends to sign it into law), all it would take is for a married lesbian couple (where one of them is butch - wearing pants or having short hair) to kiss in public — and puritanical morality police could arrest and charge them.

With a felony.

Even if no kids see them.

Because the law specifies that the “performance” happen where children could see them.

It outlaws Pride parades. It outlaws men with long hair. It outlaws gay men wearing makeup. It outlaws everything except what they decide it doesn’t outlaw.

28

samfreez t1_jaey40k wrote

Thank you for the reminder! That's the particularly damning one I'd been thinking of but couldn't remember.

4