Everyone loves Ezra Miller, the "genderfluid" new Playboy bunny!

Well, this is mostly the consensus among millennials across Twitter and Tumblr, on the release of the Crimes of Grindelwald star's Playboy spread.

In various shots by Ryan Pfluger, Ezra squats in front of a camera, poses virginally in a Britney-Spears-esque kneel wearing a nightgown, and arches his back suggestively while wearing fishnets. Oh, and bunny ears.

Loading

Don't reduce us to 'cross-dressing'

The response seems encouraging.

"Queer actor Ezra Miller is the hero we need right now. Even Playboy gets it!" wrote the Guardian.

Billboard likewise celebrated Playboy's first "gender-fluid bunny".

Yet I'm suspicious of this framing and not just because, of the hundred or so trans friends I have, hardly any of them seriously uses "gender-fluid" to describe their orientation.

We might assume the patriarchal Playboy is shifting towards accepting gender non-conforming identities. But what this may actually signal is an embrace of gender non-conforming aesthetics, not necessarily the personalities behind them.

To me, it suggests that readers are open to gender-fluidity as a passing moment of interest or intrigue in the social imagination, but are non-committal about our humanity and complexity.

Loading

The over-emphasis on the sartorial choices of gender non-conforming people often strikes me as corny and infantilising. These headlines often reaffirm the unspoken belief held by the larger population that we're merely playing dress-up, and that living outside the gender binary isn't a precarious existence, one that invites constant antagonism and alienation.

The emphasis on that word, "genderfluid", a term largely misappropriated by the media, seems like a way to situate gender non-conforming identities as something based purely on clothing, rather than being defined by lived histories, material experience and tangible relationships.

A trans friend says to me: "I think it's very easy for [media people] to consume gender fluidity and move on without learning much about trans personhood or changing their behaviour.

"These people tokenise and consume gender fluidity and make it about clothes."

The news that gender non-conforming people are, statistically, the most at risk of sexual assault and abuse, for example, is rarely discussed. It's not such a glamorous or clickable dispatch. It doesn't make for "good content".

When we make it about clothes, gender fluidity becomes a benign commodity to sell. Quickly, it's become an art buzzword which allows media to monetise "transness" and consume it more easily.

Playboy's progressive veneer hides the truth

Loading

Ezra's presence in the men's magazine isn't really an unexpected break in tradition. Playboy has long been known for "pushing the boundaries". Hugh Hefner and co were, "rebelling against right wing moralism before most people", as Jessica Valenti put it, and used the magazine as a platform for (select) civil rights and feminist writers.

But this was always calculated. Its use of a gender non-conforming star should be interrogated as a similar PR stunt.

History shows us Playboy has expertly used the veneer of progressive causes to tidily wash clean its blood money. Behind closed doors, Playboy has a history of treating black "bunnies" more disposably than their white counterparts and repeatedly snuffing out former playmates' allegations of abuse.

Playboy has been, and probably always will be, a rulebook for the 21st century renaissance man, to boost his ego through superficial affiliation with transgressive sentiments without interrogating his behaviour or thinking critically about female objectification. And I think we all know men — in our personal or professional lives — that follow that blueprint in pursuit of "woke" points.

If gender non-conforming aesthetics cohere with progressive behaviour in a new generation of young men, I'd be interested, but I'm not sure that's always the case.

Ezra stands by disgraced Depp

I'm also interested in the claim that Ezra's photoshoot is somehow dismantling "toxic masculinity". What does toxic masculinity really mean, anyway? Like "gender fluidity" it often feels like a purposefully non-specific media phrase, one that fails to properly diagnose the mechanics behind male violence.

Could toxic masculinity be a less abrasive term for rape culture?

If so, I'm not so sure Ezra is dismantling it, unflinchingly working alongside alleged abuser Johnny Depp on the set of Fantastic Beasts.

Loading

When Playboy's journalist asks whether Ezra's comfortable working with Depp, Ezra offers a bizarre, non-committal reply that possibly requires a degree in coding to understand:

"Look, I bring forth my work to this job, and I do the best that I can … I would say that literally every single aspect of my reality, inclusive of a lot of things that are not fine with me, are fine with me. It's amazing how far the banner of all good can extend."

It's a curious answer from someone who also refers to Hollywood as "a racist, sexist, rape-culture mess that we still sort of celebrate".

Claudia Kim and Ezra Miller star in the Crimes of Grindelwald alongside Johnny Depp. ( Supplied: Warner Bros. )

Separating gender and behaviour

But we can accept Ezra's gender identification without finding him blameless; it's probably fairer to recognise that trans and gender non-conforming people are just as fallible as the rest of the population.

There's a tendency to either dismiss gender non-conforming and trans people as a whole, or to fetishise, or over-hype, our differences. Both are equally dehumanising.

And we shouldn't expect millionaire celebrities to necessarily reflect the sensibilities of trans people the world over.

As Andrea Long Chu writes, "The ethics of gender recognition compel us to accept without contest or prejudice the self-identification of all people. They do not, however, compel us to find those identities likable, interesting, or worth writing about."

Jonno Revanche is a non-binary freelance writer.