Confused about identities such as bisexual homoromanitc

I think that it is like coming out as bisexual. While you can technically try to simplify or hide parts of your identity, it is very difficult when you find yourself attracted either physically or romantically to a person who is outside of the definition you use. In this example, if a homoromantic bisexual guy would simply tell people he was gay and would proceed to hook up with a woman they see in a club, it would seem really weird. Maybe shortening it to "bisexual" might be more fitting, but then dating would get awkward. This kind of stuff just really resists simplicity.

 

Yep, I am this kind of person, and it's just that sexual and romantic attraction are distinct in my case. "Bisexual" wouldn't explain why I usually don't fall in love with/don't have crushes on women, and "heterosexual" wouldn't explain my attraction to women. But I'm "mostly" heteroromantic, so in fact biromantic with a very strong lean towards men. Just generally, in any sense, I'm more strongly attracted to men (it made me think I'm straight and every straight person experiences their straightness this way), which I think makes me develop romantic feelings for them more quickly, but I'm bi, because I still am into women in a significant way. I don't know if it is the case for every person who is bisexual and homo/heteroromantic.

 

I find that the label that fits me best is "biromantic heterosexual", though I no longer like to use it and have taken to calling myself bi. Although I will likely end up with a woman and ideally would be in a relationship with someone who I can have feelings for and be physically attracted to, I find that the biromantic part is significant despite the lack of attraction to guys because sex isn't that important to me in a relationship and I'd like to date guys too.

In the opposite sort of situation (e.g. homosexual biromantic), I think it's generally more worthwhile to just sum it up to people as who you'll be dating (so probably just calling yourself gay), but there are still situations in which it can be useful. I used to put my full label on this website even though I didn't use it in real life because it let people know exactly what experience I was coming from when giving advice (e.g. in this thread, I wouldn't have had to preface the post by explaining my label; it would have just been written there already). It can also be significant because if you're a person who has casual sex, your sexual orientation is going to determine who you sleep with, not your romantic orientation, so even if you only date one gender, you'll hook up with more than one.

 

I am agnostic on the whole "separation of romantic vs. sexual attraction" question. I know some people experience this, and I respect their lived experience. But I can think of no explanation or psychological model for how this would work (i.e., where this separation would come from in the brain), and science seems to be struggling with that same issue, so neither do I outright validate the phenomenon.

BUT to answer your bolded question above, you are confusing the role of "label" with that of "identity" or "orientation". A person who is actually a homoromantic bisexual (people tend to put the adjective first in English) doesn't *want* that separation...they simply experience that separation...i.e., they don't *choose* to be a homoromantic bisexual. Given that fact, they then may choose that label simply because it applies to them. Just like many people who are gay don't *want* to be attracted to the same sex...they simply *are*. They may accept and celebrate this fact (sooner or later)...but it's the orientation that drives label; not a choice to identify as gay that leads to homosexual behavior.