You're the one being ****ing ridiculous here.
Of course it's nice to have a label, it simplifies things, it makes things easier.
But I'll show you how complicated it can get.
I'm sexually attracted to men, I'm romantically attracted to women, but I get more sexually attracted to them the better I know them.
So I'm a heteroromantic pansexual-with-women bisexual. (Still far more nuanced but I'm not going to go into that level of detail.)
There isn't even a consistent definition for the word pansexual!
Anyway, I don't even hold the view you spout I have!!! I never said "don't define it!" I said in other words one needn't fit perfectly in a category, because sexual attraction and sexual orientation are both so nuanced.
I'll add a bit more to complicate the mix:
sexual orientation is your sex / gender in relation to the sex(es) / gender(s) to which you're sexually attracted.
Keep up?
This is why sexual orientation and sex and gender are distinct, yet so intricately linked. (Gender is your "sense of self" in relation to your sex.)
So once people start transgressing the sex binary (intersex) or the gender binary (e.g. transgender) see how complicated these labels become? (This can also be induced by hormone therapy or genders reassignment surgery.)
So let's sum up: sex, gender, sexual attraction (which branches into paraphilias and sexual orientation.) Sexual attraction is often conflated with behaviour by the way.
If everything is so relative how can you possibly ascribe a label / a new label to everything? You'd need thousands. It's good to concisely know what they are / how to describe them, but it's silly and there's no need to sum it up all into one word / a few words.
Unless this post was bait and I got hooked.
Anyway, I have figured myself out, to a far greater degree than you can ever imagine; so pinpoint. And I have intellectual curiosity.
Posted from TSR Mobile