>>4297Maybe you can't think of yourself as anything different from a man from a pure aesthetic lens, but is gender not an inherently aspirational trait? Your appearance is not the sole determiner of gender when there's also (I'm assuming) your behavior and introspection of your own gender which is already verifiably different from cis men.
As for the whole not-non-binary thing, you might not call yourself "nonbinary" with the connotations that it has, but seeing as how your gender cannot be easily explained within binary parameters, there's kind of no other way to describe you.
I wouldn't use this exact term on the regular, but "AMAB with non-masculine aspirations" shouldn't be that hard for us to grasp. There's quite a few people that can only truly define out gender, which in and of itself would still inform your gender. Any deeper, and there's muddiness to be expected.