In a recent council meeting held in St. Charles County, Missouri, an anti-LGBTQ+ activist named Rachel Homolak drew attention and online mockery after her ill-conceived attempt to showcase the perceived “dangers” of men wearing women’s clothing. Homolak, known for leading protests against a bearded public library worker who expressed their gender identity through makeup, hoop earrings, and heels in front of her child, decided to make a statement by appearing at the meeting herself while wearing a fake beard, hoop earrings, and heels.
Homolak’s goal was to demonstrate how she believed the worker’s attire was inappropriate and harmful to children. However, her choice of outfit, which she described as including “gaudy makeup with facial hair, large female jewelry, painted nails in bizarre colors,” and a combination of a corset, sweater vest, and dress that she claimed emphasized the crotch area, was met with ridicule. In reality, her attire did not draw any significant attention to the area she intended.
The activist’s actions stemmed from a previous protest she organized outside the Lindemann library, where she expressed her disapproval of a male library clerk who occasionally dressed in drag while working at the children’s area. Homolak argued that this behavior was unacceptable and inappropriate for children, stating that her tax dollars should not be used to support individuals “forcing their sexuality” on kids. However, she clarified that her intention was not to have the library worker removed but to establish a dress code that she deemed appropriate and neutral for all staff members.
Homolak’s rhetoric aligns with that of other anti-LGBTQ+ groups who assert that gender non-conforming individuals and drag performers “sexualize” children. Despite her efforts, the library CEO, Jason Kuhl, emphasized that the library adheres to workplace protocols and state and federal employment laws. The library’s existing dress code already requires staff members to wear workplace-appropriate attire. Homolak’s appearance at the council meeting, instead of supporting her cause, became the subject of online mockery.
The incident sparked a debate on social media platforms, with commenters questioning the activist’s reasoning. Many pointed out that wearing makeup does not equate to pretending to be a different gender, and they highlighted the everyday presence of makeup in various professional settings. Online critics noted that Homolak’s attempt at drag lacked effort and authenticity, comparing it unfavorably to the artistry and dedication exhibited by actual drag performers.
The backlash faced by Homolak illustrates the complexities and ongoing challenges surrounding gender expression and acceptance. It serves as a reminder of the need for inclusivity and understanding, as well as the importance of recognizing and respecting diverse identities and experiences within our communities.