I mean I've definitely been attracted to gay men and it didn't take very long at all to see the attraction wasn't reciprocated. Later on it would come up that they were gay, but I didn't need to know that to determine they weren't feelin me.

With that being said, I'm not obtuse enough to be arguing labels like gay/straight/lesbian/bisexual/transgender are not necessary. That's not controversial. Those are labels that affect a larger subset of the population enough to be used semi-regularly and are expected for almost all people to understand. It's when the labels start getting more and more specific like, "heteroromantic but homosexual" or "skoliosexual" or what's that one thing that's like, you don't feel sexually attracted to other people until you get to know them and feel an emotional connection? "Demisexual?"

After a while that shit becomes so specific and seems to affect such a small, small portion of the population that it makes sense those words would not be part of the everyday lexicon. Why have a label if almost all people will have no idea what you mean because you identify with such a small subset of the population? It would be easier to just describe it instead of have an expectation for others to be informed about such a specific thing. It comes off as awkwardly pedantic. Plus for me after a while all these labels and shit just seem to reinforce sexual gender roles and all that shit when I think if we just let people be people and accept that people are attracted to other people...the world will work itself out just fine. I find the labels to be arbitrary. Men and women should be able to be as masculine or feminine as they want to be, "masculine presenting woman" or "feminine men"...at what point will we get to people just being people and stop reinforcing these gender stereotypes. That's just my opinion I'm not saying I'm right and any other way of thinking is wrong, just how I feel about it.