2025-04-05_uncontained gender

what does it mean to ‘pass’ as non-binary to m(e)? fluidity and confusion. constitutive confusion. a significant aspect of m(y) gender expression is the illiciting/effecting of confusion. it feels good to feel confusing. not confused. confusing.
this obviously requires connection to others perconception of m(e) and m(y) gender. m(y) non-binarity as gender is not self-contained, it needs others perconceptions of it along with others perconceptions of their own gender(s) as different to it to exist, to move. stating this clearly, openly, publicly is risky. since i/we exist in a society that valorizes the myths of essential individuality and self-contained identity and sees these as prerequisites any claim of being must fulfill to be taken seriously, to be real. Admitting that your ‘identity’ or ‘gender’ depends on others, especially if it is marginalized in the current political landscape, is tantamount to discrediting your entire existence. ‘Masculinity’ doesn’t need non-binarity to exist, after all.
The catch is, of course, that the statement i just made, along with the concepts of essential individuality and self-contained existence, are absolute bullshit. in order to exist, to be real, masculinity needs non-binarity as well as every other form of gender identity and expression. the differences are that ‘natural’ masculinity (and femininity) have entire societal protocols and infrastructures imbued with arbitrary power that let them appear to exist on their own. if one does not analyse and question them. once one does, it becomes clear that there’s more to their stories and myths. and that most importantly, they don’t have ‘their own’ stories and essences at all, but that they exist within a wide web of life and nature-culture, matter and discourse. Nothing exists on its own, so let’s stop acting like it.