I’m not really rooting for a post-label world per se, for some of the reasons I describe in the piece, but I do think a label can only do so much. It’s very Aristotelian, very black-and-white in its logic. Whereas describing what you like and how you feel in detail is a lot more illustrative and effective. But also, when looking at ways in which you’re marginalized, it’s easier to search for fellow aromantic people than it is to search for fellow people who like quick flings and cuddle dates and who don’t want a partnership.
Even the labels that I adore — nonbinary, bisexual — don’t actually sum me up so perfectly. My nonbinary is pretty different from a lot of other people’s nonbinary. I’m like, 40% male, 60% genderless elf thing. That means when people invite me to “women and nonbinary only” events, I don’t feel comfortable, because they’re excluding a gender that I partially am (men). But I don’t want to be shunted into the category of “man”, either. So even the word that I use to escape binary, categorical gender, is itself a little categorical in people’s minds.
And my bisexual is pretty different from many people’s bisexual too! I’m attracted to men, enbies, and women, but I’m generally attracted to a larger segment of the male and enby population than I am the female one. However, if I am attracted to a person, it is equally intense, no matter their gender. It’s not like the women I’m into are an afterthought. I also feel especially affirmed by being with someone who is also bisexual — because I feel like their orientation truly captures who I am, gender wise. So yeah, that’s a lot to describe, so I usually just go with bisexual and find my natural allies and comrades in that way.