It’s a fallacy that just because something is common — “everybody judges” — that it is good, or right, or just.
It is true that we are wired to judge our potential experience with people based on what they do or say. That is prudent: someone who steals may indeed steal again, for example. Someone who is willing to beat up someone for being weird may get around to beating you up, too.
However, a cruder form of that impulse is to judge people based on what they look like, what they’re wearing, etc. We still owe everyone around us to investigate our animalistic impulses to “other” people based on things that we’re old enough to know has nothing to do with their character:for example, a man’s choice in denim, or who he sleeps with.
I don’t think you can make the argument that because everyone has subconscious biases, that those inherent biases are good. “Good”ness is related to someone’s actions and how they harm others. If you instinctively judge a man for being in a dress, you have a moral obligation to investigate your own judgments and whether they hold up to scrutiny. Is the dress harming anyone? Therefore, is it immoral to wear? Moreover, if you believe dresses or skirts are inherently feminine — an idea that decidedly varies amongst cultures — is femininity inherently something to be valued as undesirable?
In conclusion, yes, “everybody judges.” But more importantly, everybody is still responsible for the judgments they make, whether those judgments are well-founded, and how their behavior and beliefs affect those around them.