Crumb's Rejected Cover

In 2009, celebrated artist R. Crumb was commissioned to do a cover for the June issue of The New Yorker.  After agonizing over it for a number of months, Editor-in-Chief David Remnick returned the work to Crumb, refusing to give an reason.  This led the artist to vow never to do work for The New Yorker again.

The work in question is at left.  It features a couple whose genders are indeterminate -- or is it their biological sexes that are?  They are applying for a marriage license, and the individual dressed in a blouse, skirt and heels is a caricature of a man in drag, bulging muscles and all.  The individual holding her/his hand is slight, delicately featured, and dressed in man's business suit.

At first glance, I thought it was mocking slap at gender variance, but as I began to look closer, little details began to change my mind.  The most obvious is the sign with one red arrow, pointing to "GENDER INSPECTION."  Then there are the two arrows of the "MARRIAGE LICENSE" sign, which point decisively down to the gentleman filling out the license, and his expression of ... what?  Dismay?  Confusion?  Terror?  on his face.  And if the person in female drag is a caricature, as is the one in male drag, so is the man in the window decked out in bureaucrat drag, complete with white shirt, skinny tie and pocket protector.

Why was the cover rejected?  What did Crumb want to say?  What do you think?

Thanks to Allison Atwood for the pointer; more info can be found here.