Thank you all for your replies.

My jury duty week has been fulfilled. I am off the hook for a year.

The point about not messing with judges is well taken, but I would hope and expect that a person in that position would have a healthy respect for due process and the presumption of innocence and would allow me to clarify my presentation. After all, one would be there to fulfill a civic duty, not be the subject of a trial.

This brings me to my explanation. I only have a general outline because I was never called in. Had that happenned, I would have narrowed down my word choices.

I think I would start by saying that I feel I am on the transgender spectrum and occasionally present as female. I would say that I started crossdressing at an early age and in spite of my attempts to suppress this urge, it never goes away. It is part of who I am.

I would tell the court that I habitually present as female and that I could provide photographic evidence and witnesses if needed.

I would point out that being trans does not mean a person is unserious and that the most recent gubernatorial election in California had a transgender candidate.

I would argue that I was presenting myself that way so as to be upfront about my gender identity and that I believed my presentation was covered by the first amendment, perhaps adding that if courts can be accomodating of people who choose to observe certain religious requirements, they should also be understanding of non gender conforming people.

Some folks suggested that showing up crossdressed to jury selection would be a surefire way to be dismissed, but I am not so sure about that. In fact, being an active crossdresser requires many qualities people would find desirable in a juror, such as:

Being able to relate to people of both genders,
Being more tolerant of alternative lifestyles,
Being able to see things from different points of view,
Being more understanding of eccentric behavior,

And maybe even more, who knows?

Not to mention that some cases may have LGBTQ+ plaintiffs and/or defendants, so a jury of their peers should ideally have at least one person of similar persuation, if for no other reason than to educate the other jurors whose contact with LGBTQ+ may be more limited.

Anyway, that's sorta my plan. I may have to put it into action if I get called in next year.

Thank you fo your responses.