 |
| Chase Culpepper |
Anderson, SC-- Chase
Culpepper is an ordinary 16 year-old and like millions his age it’s time to apply
for a driver’s license.
Well it turns out that Chase is not exactly
ordinary but a male that apparently identifies as a female. That may bring discomfort to a lot of people
but not Chase or his mother. He dresses
as a girl and looks the part.
The lad completed and
submitted the license application and passed both the written and actual
driving test. Now it was time to stand
before the camera for that driver’s license photo.
The motor vehicle clerk could
not help but notice Culpepper’s face adorned with cosmetics and his application indicates he is male. There is apparently a departmental directive
that prohibits applicants from wearing a disguise. Ignorance and the clerk's rather nasty attitude took over and the boy was told to
wash his makeup off or not get a driver’s license.
The make up was no disguise
like a fake beard, wig or mask. The
makeup did not really alter Culpepper’s appearance. The other factor was that the lad like many
girls did not want to be caught in public without it.
The boy buckled to the clerk and washed
his face but frankly with his blond tresses and female attire he still did not look much like a boy. The license was issued.
That’s not the end of this
tale because the boy and his mother felt this action by the clerk was both
discriminatory and insulting. They have
unsuccessfully demanded a new photo with the makeup.
The argument here is quite
simple. Culpepper wears makeup all the
time and without it he may appear different. He is who he is.
The funny part about this is
that women are routinely seen in public with and without makeup and they for
the most part are readily recognized as the same person.
I think it’s fair to say if
this were a woman not wearing makeup that same clerk would have thought nothing
about taking the photo and issuing the license.
This was not about concern of
a disguise but an effort to exercise a bogus authority over the young gender
bender. Pretending this was really out
of concern for some kind of identity fraud to fool cops during a traffic stop
is laughable.
I guess we have forgotten that photos never appeared on our driver’s licenses until the late 1970s! We had the photo technology for many decades before that but did not bother to use it!
I guess we have forgotten that photos never appeared on our driver’s licenses until the late 1970s! We had the photo technology for many decades before that but did not bother to use it!
When did we give government
the power to tell us how to dress, wear our hair or use makeup? The answer is we did not!
This was really about a
clerk’s personal disapproval of Culpepper’s lifestyle. You may not agree with Culpepper or his
approving mother but when did we ever allow government to get involved in
absolutely every aspect of our lifestyles?
The motor vehicle clerk involved
was unreasonable, petty and abusive. Culpepper
should get a new photograph the way he actually appears every day.
Young Culpepper has since found a lawyer and filed a lawsuit. As usual the taxpayers will get punished for the misdeeds of government officials.
This is not about a lifestyle
or morality but simple government tyranny.
There is a way to end this kind of abuse and that's to strip government workers of the personal immunity that we mistakenly have given them.
Comments