Let Tennessee parents decide if children go to drag shows, not lawmakers | Opinion : The TENNESSEAN

There’s a famous story about Dolly Parton years ago. She entered a drag queen celebrity impersonator contest in LA, dressed as herself, but without revealing her identity – just one of several Dolly Parton impersonators entered that year.

Even though she made her already bigger-than-life appearance bigger (“my eyes bigger, hair bigger, everything” she told ABC), she lost to a drag queen. All in good, clean fun. 

As the Tennessee General Assembly begins its new session, one of the first proposed order of business by the GOP is Senate Bill 3, proposed by Sen. Jack Johnson, R- Franklin, which aims to ban the following from happening in public, or in front of children, by making it a felony:

"Adult cabaret performance" means a performance in a location other than an adult cabaret that features topless dancers, go-go dancers, exotic dancers, strippers, male or female impersonators who provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest, or similar entertainers, regardless of whether or not performed for consideration.

On a rather surface level read, it seems reasonable to ban strippers and exotic dancers from performing in front of children. Do a little more digging, and it starts to seem more nefarious. 

Why do we need more laws for acts we already ban?

The high priority of the legislation in the current session would seemingly imply that a ban of this nature is a response to a massive problem that Tennesseans are dealing with. Like there’s a scourge of strippers in the streets scarring the minds of young children.

Rather, those paying attention know this is a response to the GOP outrage machine that has vilified drag queens for committing terrible sins like … (gasp) … reading to children while wearing costumes. 

Tennessee already has plenty of laws on the books dealing with public indecency. It is already illegal for an exotic dancer to get naked in public. So this proposed law is unnecessary, redundant, and only creates additional ways for Republicans to legally bully the LGBT-plus community. 

It is also extremely short-sighted for the legislature to find ways to regulate entertainment and performance, in a state that relies on entertainment as one of its primary economic drivers. It’s a pretty obvious First Amendment violation to apply the law differently to men and women based on the gender expression of their dress.

Who gets to decide what ‘prurient’ means?

But Laura, I can hear you say, the bill says that “Male or Female impersonators are only banned if they appeal to a prurient interest.” Tennessee law defines “prurient interest” as a “shameful or morbid interest in sex.” The problem with this language is that this definition is largely left up to the imagination. 

For example, consider the case of the Blount County Pride festival, which made news for hosting a Drag Queen story time at the local library, where drag queens read to children – and it is just that, someone dressed in a costume, reading a children’s book.

Conservative critics of these events all over the country have likened these events to “grooming” and “child abuse” and “pedophilia,” - all words that describe a “shameful or morbid interest in sex.” So even while there is no obvious “prurient interest” inherent in the event itself, it has been painted that way by critics. 

So, who is to decide what counts as a “prurient interest”?

Republicans, when discussing other areas of society, like schools, would say that parents should have that power. That same standard should apply here. Parents should be the ones to decide if their kids can see a drag show, not the Tennessee General Assembly. Alas, even their own standards don’t apply when it comes to using the power of the government to bully the LGBT-plus community.

Laura Brown is a Tennessee native and businesswoman with graduate degrees from Vanderbilt University and Middle Tennessee State Unviersity.