(4) If you see your fellow Israelite’s ass or ox fallen on the road, do not ignore it; you must raise it together.(5) A woman must not put on man’s apparel, nor shall a man wear woman’s clothing; for whoever does these things is abhorrent to your God יהוה.(6) If, along the road, you chance upon a bird’s nest, in any tree or on the ground, with fledglings or eggs and the mother sitting over the fledglings or on the eggs, do not take the mother together with her young.

(5) A man’s attire [weapons] may not be on a woman nor may a man wear [adorn himself with] a woman’s garment [adornments]; for the abomination of [are distanced before] Adonoy, your God, are all who do these [things].

The Gemara asks: And what does the first tanna, who holds that the prohibition is by rabbinic law, learn from this verse: “A man shall not put on a woman’s garment”? The Gemara answers: He requires it for that which is taught in the baraita, where it states: “A woman shall not wear that which pertains to a man, and a man shall not put on a woman’s garment, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 22:5). What is the meaning when the verse states this? If it teaches only that a man may not put on a woman’s garment, and a woman may not wear a man’s garment, it is already stated in explanation of this prohibition that “it is an abomination to the Lord your God,” and there is no abomination here in the mere act of wearing a garment.Rather, it means that a man may not wear a woman’s garment and thereby go and sit among the women; and a woman may not wear a man’s garment and sit among the men. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: From where is it derived that a woman may not go out with weapons to war? The verse states: “A woman shall not wear that which pertains to a man, and a man shall not put on a woman’s garment,” which indicates that a man may not adorn himself with the cosmetics and ornaments of a woman, and similarly a woman may not go out with weapons to war, as those are for the use of males. Rabbi Yoḥanan’s ruling follows this opinion.§ Rav Naḥman said: For a nazirite, it is permitted to shave armpit hair. The Gemara comments: And the halakha is not in accordance with his opinion. The Gemara reports that the Sages said to Rabbi Shimon bar Abba: We have observed that Rabbi Yoḥanan does not have armpit hairs, despite his own ruling that it is prohibited to shave them. He said to them: They fell out due to old age.

(10) A woman should not adorn herself as a man does1Sefer HaMitzvot (Negative Commandment 39) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 542) consider this prohibition to be one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. Curiously, with regard to this and the following prohibition, the Rambam departs from his usual custom and does not mention the Biblical proof-text, Deuteronomy 22:5, for these prohibitions.
e.g., she may not place a turban or a hat on her head - Needless to say, a hat that was styled for women is permitted. As the Rambam states later in the halachah, everything depends on local custom. - e.g., she may not place a turban or a hat on her head or wear armor2Many sources (e.g., Nazir 59a; Targum Onkelos on Deuteronomy, ibid.) directly associate this prohibition with a woman's donning armor or carrying weapons. Significantly, in the listing of mitzvot which precedes these halachot, the Rambam defines the mitzvah as prohibiting a woman from wearing "armament or a man's apparel." or the like. She may not cut [the hair of] her head as men do.3i.e., a woman's coiffure may not resemble a man's. The Yemenite manuscripts of the Mishneh Torah read יגלה, "reveal," instead of יגלח, "cut." According to that version, the Rambam is saying that when a woman goes out without covering her head, in addition to violating the basic laws of modesty (see Hilchot Ishut 24:11-12; Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 21:17), she is also transgressing this Torah prohibition.
A man should not adorn himself as a woman does4Sefer HaMitzvot (Negative Commandment 40) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 543) consider this prohibition to be one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.
In Sefer HaMitzvot (ibid.), the Rambam mentions two rationales for this and the previous prohibition:a) Such behavior would lead to licentiousness;b) The pagans would often dress in this manner for their rituals. - e.g., he should not wear colored garments or golden bracelets in a place where such garments and such bracelets are worn only by women. Everything follows local custom.5Accordingly, the definition of the pertinent rulings changes according to the norms of the society. Garments which might have been forbidden for men or women in one era may be permitted in another, depending on the standards set by the particular society.
A man who adorns himself as a woman does, and a woman who adorns herself as a man does, are [liable for] lashes. - Note the Ramah's statements, Orach Chayim 696:8, which state that on Purim or at a wedding, this prohibition may be waived for the sake of adding to the festive mood of the celebration. The Bayit Chadash and others, however, do not accept this leniency.
A man who adorns himself as a woman does, and a woman who adorns herself as a man does, are [liable for] lashes. When a man removes white hairs from among the dark hairs of his head or beard,6to prevent the process of aging from being detected he should be lashed7for violating this prohibition. The Ra'avad (see also Sho'el UMeshiv, Vol. I, Responsum 210) differs, and maintains that such an act violates only a Rabbinic prohibition. His opinion, however, is not accepted by the later authorities (Darchei Teshuvah 182:15). as soon as he removes a single hair, because he has beautified himself as a woman does.8Women are accustomed - and therefore, allowed - to hide their age, but not men. Similarly, if he dyes his hair dark, he is given lashes after dyeing a single hair.9The prohibition applies only when one attempts to look younger. Dyeing one's hair grey is not forbidden (Turei Zahav 182:7).
A tumtum and an androgynous10whose status with regard to gender is doubtful, as explained in Halachah 4. may not wrap their heads [in a veil] as women do, or cut [the hair of] their head as men do.11As the Rambam states in that halachah, "the stringencies of both a man and a woman are applied to them." Hence, they are not allowed to clothe themselves in a manner which is distinct to either a man or a woman.
According to the Yemenite manuscripts mentioned above which substitute יגלה, "reveal," for יגלח, "cut," this clause also must be amended accordingly. If they do [either of the above], they are not [liable for] lashes.12because we are unsure of their gender. Accordingly, it cannot be definitely said that a prohibition has been violated.

(5) A woman may not clothe herself in men's clothing, e.g. put on her head a mitre or helment, or wear armor, and so on (Rama: from that which men wear in accordance with the local custom (Tur)) or shave her head like a man. A man may not clothe himself in the clothes of a women, e.g. wear colored clothing or golden ornaments in a place where only women wear those things. (Rama: Even wearing just one of the garments is forbidden, even if it is apparent by his other garments that this is a man or a woman (Beis Yosef).) A tumtum and an androgynos are forbidden to dress like women.