While I'm sure security will confront you if you walk into a bank in a sky mask, I don't think that is a law. I think that's an issue of private property. Just as I can require you to take off your shoes before you enter my house, or if the fungus is offensive enough, require you to keep them on. It's my house. There's no law required. I can ask you to comply, or I can ask you to leave.
However, let's look at the argument, removed of modifiers. If I understand rightly, it goes something like this. Woman A is coerced into dress a particular way. Woman B voluntarily dresses that way. Woman C voluntarily does not dress that way. If women A is coerced into dressing that way, than women B unwittingly providing cover for that coercion by voluntarily dressing like Woman A. Therefore, Woman A and Woman B should be coerced into dressing like Woman C.
This seems self defeating to me. Because the result would be that Woman B is now coerced into dressing a particular way, and women C is unwittingly providing cover for that coercion by voluntarily not dressing like Woman A. Therefore, by the argument's own logic, Woman C should be coerced into dressing like Woman A. And we go around again.