[Toy Soldier]

To be fair, I think people only feeling sexual attraction to people they have gotten to know and like (i.e. sexual feelings linked to emotional intimacy rather than basic physical impulse) is probably much more common than you'd think, and I'm not personally convinced it counts as a sexuality outside of the straight/gay/bi/asexual range.

In fact I think the argument that those are the only four "basic" sexualities that exist is pretty strong. Certainly, you'll get "subsets" within those (e.g. some straight people will struggle to be attracted to trans people, some will see no distinction, indeed some will have a preference) but surely, a man who is sexually attracted to a transwoman is not "pansexual", they are still a straight man, in terms of aesthetics.

And while there may be a gamut of descriptive genders, in terms of APPEARANCE and thus attraction it is still a binary; people who are mostly attracted to masculine features, people who are mostly attracted to feminine features, and people who can be attracted to both (or neither).

The crux of it I suppose its that it's about attractiveness to others and while you get to decide who you are attracted to - you don't get a personal choice about who YOU are attractive TO... e.g. A woman can be sexually attracted to a gay man, him being gay doesn't make him not attractive to straight females.

In that sense, the concepts of gender non-binary personal identification, and the inherently binary nature of sexual attraction, isn't 100% compatible... An attractive person with feminine features who identified as gender non-binary is not only attractive to "pansexuals"... They will still be mainly attractive to "people who are attracted to females", and probably not to those attracted to males. And I don't think it's -phobic in any way to point out that, no matter what someone's personal identification is, from an objective standpoint they are going to have masculine features, feminine features, or a mix of both. There is no 3rd/4th/5th+ feature set.