[quote=Robeatics]Look, not to be rude, but sexuality is something that actually affects people differently and is much more easily discussed when one has an array of terms to choose from. Trying to discuss nonbinary panromantic demisexuals would be pretty damn hard to do if you had to say "You know those people? Like, the people who don't conform to the gender binary and who like other people either within or outside of the gender binary, but they don't like them sexually unless they have formed a strong, trusting connection? Those people?"To just say "Let's just call them people!!!" essentually erases their identity and makes it much harder to gain visibility and community. You wouldn't look at a cake, a donut, a cupcake and a cookie and start yelling about all the terms for them because "Why can't we just call them sweets all the time!"[/quote] Imagine if what you said there was applied to say sex, or race. Would we insist on going around saying "I am an Asian", "I am an African", "I am a Scot who lost my freedom!" etc? Or would we go "I'm a human being?". That's what people are trying to get across, that at the end of the day we are all human beings despite who we're attracted or not attracted to. Now, that being said I understand sexuality is a bit different. It's not something physically noticeable that a person can know about you without asking, it's something inside. And I'm all for the variety of LGBT terms there are available in order to better clarify/define one for a descriptive sense. So say instead of going on for 5-10 minutes saying "I like ______.... but not _____ and only in ______ way" you can quickly go "I'm a Pansexual/Asexual etc.". But there also becomes a point where it stops being a descriptive term, and people start using it to define themselves. You are not your sexuality, your entire personality is not simply who you are attracted to. You have feelings, interests, hobbies, opinions, friendships etc. All those help make up who you are too, and that's part of what people are trying to say.