Attention divas, daggers, dykes, sissies and studs: sashay shante, y’all. According to Oakland's Code of Ordinances, your style is illegal.

Immoral Dress Code 9.08.080 has been in place since 1879: “It is unlawful for any person in the city to appear in any public place nude or in the attire of a person of the opposite sex, or in any indecent or lewd attire.”

In terms of concentration of same sex couples, Oakland is ranked among the top five major metropolitan areas in the nation. Certainly our city is as socially conscious as it is diverse.  Yet shockingly, in 2010, cross-dressing remains an offense “against public peace and decency.”

I first learned of this wacky time warp while attending an Oakland LGBT Roundtable meeting. Stephanie McLeod, pictured above, an intern with City Council Member Rebecca Kaplan’s office, created a slide show presentation which contextualized the ordinance.

The civil war ended and the 15th amendment was ratified. Population explosions accompanied the gold rush and the transcontinental railroad; the latter saw Oakland grow from 1,500 people in 1860 to more than 36,000 in 1880. As the railroad’s western terminus, Oakland experienced a rush of new businesses, new manufacturing industries and new jobs. Migrants from the south, and immigrants from China and Southern Europe, changed the demographics of the area.

“People who were not perceived to be part of the social ‘norm’ were marginalized and criminalized,” said McLeod. “Everyone is affected by this, not just queer people. If this law was enforced today, all the women on the police and fire departments could be charged with a misdemeanor for cross-dressing.”

Though I have been out of the closet for 18 years, I admit sometimes I avoid learning about atrocities of the past; I'm already overwhelmed and frustrated by present day inequality. But after McLeod's presentation, I got curious.

San Francisco preceded Oakland with a similar law in 1866. By 1930, most cities in California had dress code laws. From the mid-19th century, the state enacted all kinds of legislation against LGBT behavior; convictions led to forced sterilization, castration, indefinite hospitalization and life imprisonment. The law lumped child molesters and homosexuals together as “perverts.” Women suffragists wore pants in protest. German theorist Karoly Maria Kertbeny disputed the criminalization of “homosexuality” (a term he coined). Racist medical texts linked the idea of "degenerate" races with "degenerate" sexualities.

In the wake of immigration legislation in Arizona, legislation that enables racial profiling, can we afford to leave vague laws on the books, laws that are subject to the interpretation of the times? Political climates change. In 1850, the state of California outlawed “crimes against nature.” Before 1900, this mainly applied to public sex, rape, and sex with a minor. But the early 20th century experienced a heightened anxiety over visible gender difference in urban communities, and homosexuals were increasingly arrested for “crimes against nature.”

As McLeod emphasized, “It could happen again.”

Shush! What’s that sound? Is it the bang of 1,000 fairies fainting in disbelief, falling to the floor? Nope. It’s the vogue boom of butch-queens dropping into suicide dips, their backs clapping the ground. An elegant tranny lip syncs Mary J. “You can’t keep a good woman down!”

Those who want to support an amendment to remove the prohibition of cross dressing from the Immoral Dress law can attend the Public Safety Committee meeting on April 27 at Oakland City Hall, 5:30pm. Contact Ada Chan (of City Council Member Rebecca Kaplan’s office) at 510-238-7083, or Achan1@oaklandnet.com.