So I was thinking about identity and labels again (ha. ha ha. When am I not?), and what I realized is that, although it’s been personally significant for me to recognize that I experience some nebulous kinds of special attraction to more than one gender, it’s also… oddly important to me to not identify as bi.
And that’s not because of any blanket ideological objections, but because of the particularities of my situation and how, as a gray-asexual whose romantic orientation is whatever, there’s this pressure to respond to “Well but what are you really?” or, worse, “You’re just straight,” and all that. And my way of resisting that, and affirming gray-asexuality as the central fixture in my pattern of attractions (and the associated community I have the most involvement with, and, consequently, the identity my sense of self is most impacted by), is to deny any secondary descriptor that I don’t feel as much relevant connection to.
For reasons I can’t explain, bi just doesn’t happen to fit right. I think of it as a label that describes an experience that isn’t mine. And… well, it feels strange to reconcile that thought with an internal need for recognition that my attractions skew all different ways.
So. My point, I think, is that I’m trying to emphasize the centrality of gray-asexuality in my experience while conceptualizing the associated specifics as being specifics within gray-asexuality, as opposed to overlapping or modifications to, because… that’s how it appears to work for me. It’s what feels the most right.