In April of 2023, a law in Tennessee banned “adult cabaret performances” from happening in the presence of children or in public. The wording of this bill is so vague that it is not really clear what type of performance is intended to be targeted by simply reading the bill. However, when looking at the overall context and conversations that are taking place by politicians, one specific form of performance seems to be the most talked about when it comes to this new ban: drag.

Drag is an art form that has been around for centuries, involving the performance of exaggerated gender expression, usually through clothing and physical presentation. Although anyone can participate in drag, drag artists are often a part of the LGTBQ+ community. As many other states consider this ban as well as bans on healthcare for trans people and talking about LGBTQ+ issues in schools, it has become clear that there is a pattern in legislation affecting the LGBTQ+ community.

The bill seems to be very vague, which makes it appear as though it may be more lenient, however, the vagueness is exactly what makes it dangerous. What is an “adult cabaret performance”? Politicians are not making it clear, which leaves it up to personal opinion. The language has to do with age-appropriateness, but everyone has a different idea for what that entails, so an “adult cabaret performance” could end up applying to anything.

Public conversation around the ban mostly centers on drag performers, which means that most people associate this law with drag. This public conversation has been encouraged by politicians as well as people who are prominent in the political sphere. Without directly targeting drag artists in writing, the interpretation of this law has been swayed to apply to them. It’s a sneaky, roundabout way of doing it, but the law’s application is definitely being aimed towards drag performers.

In terms of direct legal effects on drag artists, they may face misdemeanor or felony charges if they are reported breaking this law. This can result in a fine or even prison time.

The law discourages establishments from employing drag artists for shows, as well. Even if the show will not include any explicit sexuality or language deemed inappropriate, someone may find the idea of a person dressing in clothes that are not stereotypically associated with their gender inappropriate, and report the establishment for that. This creates a culture of fear and secrecy around drag.

Certain cities have been considering canceling pride parades, or not allowing drag performers to participate, even though many would not even be performing, and would just be present in drag.

Wearing different clothes or makeup is something that people are allowed to do all the time, and we haven’t created laws that say you can’t dress certain ways in front of children. Why does this apply to diverse forms of gender expression? Some people certainly believe it does, which is why pride events are being canceled.

And what about people who are simply dressing to express themselves and going about their life in public? Will consequences come to them for living their life the way they want to live it?

This legislation also has many consequences in the social and cultural spheres. When politicians start to draw attention to a group of people and label things they do and things they are associated with negatively, it validates people who carry bigotry against that group. According to the FBI, anti-LGBTQ+ hate crimes have been rising in recent years, and this year there has been a lot of very loud talk from individuals spreading unwelcoming and hateful rhetoric. With these bills, the government is encouraging this, by labeling LGBTQ+ people as dangerous to children. This is making it more dangerous to live out in public as an LGBTQ+ person, and will end up forcing many people back into the closet.

Drag isn’t dangerous. It’s a form of art. Banning drag is similar to banning something like TV shows from being played in public places. Not every TV show is seen as appropriate for children, but no one is saying that TV shows with bad language or sexual situations should be removed off of streaming services. It is up to the parents to decide what their child can be exposed to, and there is a rating system that guides them. Drag also works like this. Some drag could be deemed as inappropriate for young children, but some drag is not. Some drag performers simply read children’s books and sing to young kids at libraries.

Any performance that is only targeted towards adults will be rated 18+, and kids will not be let in. No one wants kids at a performance that may be inappropriate for them, especially the performers and the staff of the venue. Like any other medium of art, drag can consist of a variety of types of content, and the current conversation around it is not acknowledging this.

Young kids are much more likely to find inappropriate content on the internet, or on streaming services, where everything is a click of a button away. In order to get to a drag show, a young kid would have to be taken by a parent. The parent, in this situation, would get to have a say in whether their kid was exposed to the art form, whereas on the internet, parents do not have supervision over their kids unless they are directly watching them all the time.

Politicians speak as though there are drag performances going on in public all of the time, but this is not true. If parents wanted their children not to be exposed to it, it’s fairly easy to avoid without flat-out banning the art form. And what about parents who are fine with taking their kids to drag events? Parents may want to bring kids to drag events such as story-times in libraries or family-friendly shows because they want to expose their kids to all sorts of cultures and people, and show their kid an environment that celebrates people however they choose to express themselves or appear. Those parents have a right to determine what they want their kids to experience, and deem what is appropriate for their children, just as much as the parents who do not want their kids to see drag do. The effects of the ban do not allow parents to make that choice. It only encourages the parents who are upset with the idea of their kids seeing people express themselves in creative, nonconforming ways.

Teens should also be considered when looking at the effects of this ban. By the time they are a teen, many LGBTQ+ people have finally recognized that they are LGBTQ+, whether they are out of the closet or not. Banning people who are 16 or 17 from attending drag shows can isolate them from their community and culture, all because of a two-year difference.

Teens 16 and 17 years old know what they are comfortable with viewing, and are mature enough to make decisions about what they think is appropriate for them to view. They are practically adults. Drag shows can create environments that encourage everyone to be themselves, have fun, and not be concerned about what mainstream society or others think of them. Environments like this are appealing to teenagers who may still be getting used to their identities, or do not feel like they are able to fully be themselves in most places. If a show is not 18+ only, these people should be allowed in.

It is not up to the government to tell people what they can and can’t experience, as long as they will not be hurt by it, and drag isn’t hurting anyone. In fact, it may inspire young people to embrace who they are and the person they want to be, regardless of their identity.

Anti-drag laws are subtly saying the opposite. By creating these laws, the government is saying that one can only embrace who they are if they are deemed acceptable by everyone else. U. S. citizens supposedly have freedom of expression, but apparently it is only freedom of expression if it is deemed appropriate by the government.

According to the ACLU, 467 bills in the United States Legislature proposed this year have targeted LGBTQ+ people. From drag bans, to book bans, to healthcare bans, to bans about even speaking of LGBTQ+ identities in schools, the U. S. is becoming a more and more hostile place to be in this community, especially as a young person. Even if the bills don’t pass, or are so vague that they are ineffective, the adverse message the government is sending is loud and clear, and it is encouraging those who carry prejudice against the community.

Everyone should have the right to be who they want to be, as long as no one is being hurt. No one will be hurt if someone puts on clothes that stereotypically, people of their gender would not wear. What is hurting people are these policies that set the precedent that LGBTQ+ people are not welcome to be who they are in public spaces.

According to The Trevor Project, 45% of young LGBTQ+ people consider suicide. This is not inherently because of their identity, but because of discrimination they face from the world’s view of their identity. In order to help these kids, we need to create more open, accepting environments for them to exist in. The pattern of legislation in the U. S. currently is doing just the opposite.