Becoming a Felony

When I was three or four years old, my sisters and I were going to play in the water in our yard. I put on my swim suit, but I refused to go outside without a swim top like my sisters had on. They took one of my Dad’s handkerchiefs and tied it around my chest so I would go outside with them. In NC and AZ, there are bills in the legislature that would make that a felony.

When I was in Fifth Grade, my sisters took a dress form that our mother had, dressed it in one of her dresses, and slipped it over me. Then they took make-up and painted my face. We went to the Halloween party at our American school in Recife, where my parents led the costume parade as the headless and two-headed monsters. That bill in the NC legislature would classify that as a felony, as I was wearing make-up and the clothing of the opposite gender while speaking in front of more than two people.

When Karen and I were serving as Southern Baptist missionaries in Mexico, I dressed up one day as a female Biblical character to present a monologue from that character’s perspective on a Bible story. That would be considered by these bills as a felony.

We went to a Halloween party in Virginia, where a male friend (Marine) put a couple of balloons under his shirt, donned a wig, and pretended to be a woman. That would no longer be seen as a jest under these laws. It would be a felony, viewed even harsher for presenting as such in the presence of a mixed company with many children from the local elementary school present.

If a pastor or choral director were to allow a female to represent a male character in a play, they would be committing a felony and contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

If a transgender individual were to dress accordingly and sing in public, speak to more than two people at a time, offer any kind of theatrical or entertaining performance, these proposed laws would make such a felony.

Should a school such as Central Academy for Technology and the Arts here in Union County, NC allow girls to dress as and represent a male character in a dramatic production, the school would be committing a felony.

If Robin Williams were to be filming Mrs. Doubtfire or Tootsie after passage of these laws, it would be a felony. He would also be in trouble along with Disney for the Genie in Aladdin.

If Shakespeare were to return and present any of his plays as in the Globe Theatre during his lifetime, it would be shut down by these laws, as only male actors were allowed on stage back in that time period. Juliet’s character would be committing a felony, as would Lady Macbeth, Ophelia, or a host of other characters played by men.

Mulan could not be presented on stage under these laws. Any representation of the French Revolution featuring Joan of Arc would become illegal. There is probably no episode of M.A.S.H. that would be presented under these laws. Barbara Streisand’s portrayal of Yentl would be illegal under these laws.

Southern Baptist hold as a primary hero of missions across the world a woman from generations ago, Lottie Moon, who wore dresses in China, though that was considered clothing only suitable for men. Should a Chinese woman dress in pants according to her social gender norms, while her husband wore a skirt in Charlotte, NC, this law could be used to prosecute them as criminals due to a cultural conflict in definitions of gender-appropriate apparel.

How many times have we seen a Bugs Bunny, Tom and Jerry, or Pepé Le Pew cartoon in which characters dress as the opposite gender? I’ve watched Mrs. Doubtfire, Tootsie, Yentl, and Mulan, as well. I can’t see that watching those movies or multiple episodes of M.A.S.H. had any effect of my gender-identity, or that of my peers.

How is it we have become so afraid of Drag Queens that we would draft such laws which abuse and criminalize such as this? Are we that insecure in our gender identity that we must criminalize such things to score political points with a riled-up base? Many are pushing the narrative that cross-dressing or being transgender is categorized by God as sinful. Jesus certainly never said anything to that effect. Instead, he told us to love one another with no holds barred, no exceptions. There is nothing Christian in attempts to write and pass such laws. If anything, they are declarations in opposition to Jesus, who did not come to condemn, but to redeem us all.



— ©Copyright 2023, Christopher B. Harbin 



http://www.sermonsearch.com/contributors/104427/

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Gospel Is Not Conservative

Image
Fundamentalism and conservativism are intrinsically averse to change. They are tied with conserving a status quo or moving back to a former era. They seek a safe place, a respite from change and transformation in the world around them. They are threatened by new ideas. They fear that the foundations on which they base their lives will be uprooted, causing their view of reality to fall apart. Growth depends on change. Life requires change. Survival depends on responding to changes in our environment. It requires new ideas. It requires new answers to old questions, as well as new questions with even newer answers. Jesus was by no means conservative. Jesus challenged the status quo. He fought against the groundwork of much of the religious thought around him, as well as the structures erected to empower its values. He called out those who benefited from social, religious, and political power. He demonstrated God's love, forgiveness and grace to those deemed una...
Read more

God in the Hands of Angry Sinners

Image
Jonathan Edwards’ famous sermon, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” set a very poor direction for much of Christianity in the Colonies. His Puritan tradition presented God as an essentially angry deity whose desire was to condemn and torture. Grace or mercy existed simply in regard to how long God waited until calling down judgment upon sinners. That is not good news. It never was. Such is not the message of Jesus whom the gospel writers claim as good news. They echo the words of the celestial messengers declaring Jesus’ birth as good news of great joy to all peoples. Rather than look to Jesus as the clearest example of God’s identity, character, and will, that tradition surrounding Edwards began with an altogether different understanding that could not account for what Jesus actually taught. The Puritan perspective began with angry sinners and projected that upon God. Anger begins with fear, uncertainty, discomfort, and the inability to control one’s environment, ot...
Read more

Our Language of Choice

Image
I woke up this morning and decided to be a woman. I really like the idea of earning less money on the job. I like the idea of being passed over for promotions. I like that I will be held more accountable for the care of my home and familial responsibilities than any of the men around me. I’m looking forward to having my expertise ignored. I like that I’ll more likely be treated as a lower-level assistant to male colleagues than an actual colleague. It should be a good experience to live as more of a target for domestic violence and abuse. It will be so freeing to let go of my bodily autonomy and place it in the hands of men who will not understand me. With so many voices in our society shifting back toward the attitudes of 70 years ago, I am really looking forward to setting aside all trappings of male privilege and power to live as a second class citizen whose voice and opinions are essentially irrelevant. Just look at all the advantages women have! They get t...
Read more