What is Gender Nonconformity? (a discussion!)
(This entire post is written under the assumption that you have read my info page on gender nonconformity. If you haven't seen it, please take a second to read that now so that we're on the same page! It's a short one, it won't take long.)
Also, right off the bat, I wanna make it clear that Iām not a professional and my formal education on this subject isnāt particularly thorough or unique, so take my opinions with a grain of salt, and anyone is free to disagree or add information or add on to this discussion.
Current Definition
My own definition on this blog has always been the one outlined in the above mentioned GNC info page: broadly, "The terms "Gender Nonconforming" and "Gender Nonconformity" refer to people who differ from the set of common/expected intrinsic or external qualities attributed to their gender (according to their culture.)"
Importantly, this definition is not the same as "breaking gender roles associated with one's assigned gender at birth," which is a definition with several shortcomings, as @finnu1223 has already discussed in her post. (Of course, some individuals feel that their gender nonconformity from their agab DOES contribute to their experience as a gnc person, etc., but my point is that this isnāt helpful as a blanket definition for reasons listed in that post ^)
That said, I think that this definition could still use some work. Specifically, I think a need is growing to be able to distinguish between types of gender nonconformity.
Issues
As I mentioned in my info page, "gnc" is such a broad term that further specification will often be necessary in order for it to be a satisfying and functional label. Here are my thoughts:
Because "gnc" is such a broad term, naturally, I feel like there's been some growing dissatisfaction about who gets "lumped together," who is "really gnc," who counts, etc.
What I think is truly causing a lot of this friction:
The lack of distinction between the aspects of a person that can be gender nonconforming. (We'll get to that in a minute.)
Additionally, I think people are forgetting that "gnc" does not necessarily imply masculinity or femininity; for instance, a gender nonconforming woman isnāt necessarily masculine. She might be androgynous, or EVEN STILL feminine. Femininity can be gender nonconforming. āTomboy femmes,ā for example, are feminine while also being gender nonconforming. They're feminine, but unconventionally so.
Suggestions for further understanding of gender nonconformity: categories of GNC
To me, whether someone is GNC isn't as simple as a yes/no, on/off switch. It's also not as simple as a measurement-- "how much" a person is gender nonconforming.
Rather, I think gender nonconformity might be more easily understood if we were to break it up into the areas of a person's identity that may or may not be gender nonconforming, because there are many people for whom the answers don't all "match." I think thereās different kinds/categories of gendered expectations.
Note: even these categories aren't as simple as yes/no! For many people, their experiences with these categories will be mixed. (For instance, few people who describe themselves as Role Reversal (relationally GNC) desire a 100% 1:1 reversal of heteronormativity. For example, a woman might be the one doing the heavy lifting or breadwinning or whatever, but have a personal preference not to take care of spiders lol.)
Roles/relational identity. Typically, this is in the context of culturally-determined gendered expectations for social interactions, relationship dynamics, or actions performed. Things like who gets who flowers, who is the breadwinner, who carries who bridal-style, who does the cooking and who kills the spiders, etc. Relational identity includes subcategories for nonsexual and sexual identity, by the way, but that probably deserves its own discussion. (RR women aren't always dominant and dominant women aren't always RR, etc. Additionally, how do we communicate the difference between "masculine/virago attraction to men" versus "feminine/gc attraction to men," etc. etc.? What should we call that? Again, it deserves its own discussion later.)
Expression/presentation. This is the image of self that one projects to the outside world. It consists of culturally-determined visual language, often (but not always) intended to convey certain messages about one's allinity. This usually involves the use of objects, such as (but not limited to) certain clothing, accessories, body proportions (such as chest shape, or shoulder-to-waist-ratio; perceived or physical), or makeup.
Intrallinity. Each gender is usually assigned an expected intrallinity. Men are expected to be intramasculine, women are expected to be intrafeminine, nonbinary people are expected to be intrangyn or intranull.
Additionally,
Objects. Objects aren't necessarily part of a person's identity. I also don't believe that any object (nor any action, really) is inherently masculine/feminine (though there's no denying that they still are often culturally associated with one or the other.) However, they are often utilized with intention within one's gender expression/presentation to create the look one is going forā usually "constructively," but sometimes in contrast. This is to say that, for example, "masculine-associated objects" can be utilized in a masculine way or in a feminine way. (Or in an androgynous way!) Example of "constructive" use of objects in gender expression: People using masculine-cut suits, sharper/shorter haircuts, etc. in order to create a masculine gender expression. Example of "contrasting" use of objects in gender expression: People using feminine-cut suits, rounded/longer haircuts, etc. to appear masculine. Note: This might be a good way to explain situations like Vi from Arcane, as Finnu mentioned earlier! In my opinion, Vi uses a lot of "feminine-coded objects" (bright pink, feminine-fitting jacket, pixie cut, makeup) in order to create a gender expression that actually, conversely, reads quite masculine (at least to me.) I think it works because the individual things come together in sort of a punk-masculine way, even if they wouldn't appear that way on their own. Iām sure part of her coming off masculine is from her demeanor/intramasculinity as well, but I digress.
The way I see it: it is possible for someone to perform āfeminine-associated rolesā (relationally feminine) or wear āfeminine thingsā (feminine presentation/expression), etc. without necessarily identifying as a feminine person (intrafeminine.)
Similarly, it is possible for someone to perform roles that arenāt expected of their gender (relationally GNC), or wear things that aren't expected of their gender (GNC presentation/expression), etc. without necessarily identifying as a GNC person (GNC as an identity rather than as an adjective.)
I think mixed GNC identities such as these can really only be fully comprehended if we understand gender nonconformity as something that is multifaceted.
Anyway, I have a few additional thoughts about this I'll write out later, after we've talked about the more basic stuff I've outlined here. For now though, I'd really love to know everyone's opinion on this way of looking at gender nonconformity!
I also want to acknowledge that, of course, I didn't "invent" everything on this list. A lot of queer theory about gender in general has already utilized this sort of multifaceted approach-- I just figured it was time we apply it to gender nonconformity specifically, as well as add a couple of needed categories ("relational identity" and "allinity identity.")
