I'm going to go ahead and make it a point to not answer your question. I'm not trying to be rude or anything. It's a good question. But there are three main issues that I can see arising from me trying to answer. The first is me. I have a set of beliefs and a set of interests, but there isn't one belief or interest that I feel strongly enough about compared to the others that I would use it as a label. The second is labels. Humans are complex creatures. To condense someone into a single word or phrase is a disservice to that person and all of their nuance. Not only that, but label carry their own complex meanings as well. Your perception of someone will undoubtedly be colored by your perceptions of the labels they choose, or perhaps didn't choose. Labels are fast and easy, but they lack accuracy and precision. Lastly there is language itself. Language is clumsy. There are so many things that simply cannot be expressed through language. Take emotions for example. I have emotions that I can't put into words almost constantly. What was that feeling that I got when watching season 7 episode 25 of Adventure Time? I have no idea, and neither do you. The only way you could know is to literally be me, because I don't have to words to describe that emotion. The 'simple' emotions don't translate very well either. When is anger just anger. When is happiness just happiness. I can't think of a single time in my life when I have felt a single pure emotion. There is always some mixture of feelings that creates an indescribable form of anger, happiness, sadness, etc. This is where it ties back to labels. There are so many things that people do/enjoy/believe in so many different ways that you just can't fit all of that nuance into a word. In any case, I feel that I've gone a bit off the rails with this. The point here is that I'm the type of person that makes a point of not answering questions. Edit: Sorry for the incoherent rant. I've been feeling a bit, uh, existential (?) lately.
I see your point(s), and agree that it's a bit hopeless to convey ourselves by picking a label and expounding. But. I view this question, and a lot of the others asked around here, as an opportunity to be cajoled. By asking lots of questions, framing and stating them differently, asking the interlocutor to speak to a different aspect of something, a lot can be gained. It's an opportunity to see how our different brains work (like how you chose to address the limits of this question, which I appreciate for the little bit it reveals about you). I don't really think that we're moving closer to cold fusion as a result of some of our conversations. But I learn a lot about the other folks who use this site, and occasionally, some answer is given that warps my brain slightly, or even not so slightly. When I'm with interesting people, it almost doesn't matter what we talk about. We can go on a walk, point at different things, and ask each other, "what do you think about that?"
I see what you're saying, and I agree. My response was largely meant as a subjective telling of my own disdain for labels and my inability to communicate. I have no doubt that there are many people on this site who are perfectly comfortable answering this question. I don't see anything wrong with that. For me, however, using a label would be in conflict with who I am and who I want to be. I'd like to put myself out as undistorted by preconceptions as possible. This method is probably much slower, but I think it leads to a better understanding of me for both myself and those who wish to understand me.
That's an interesting point. It's probably impossible to go completely label-less. Just by virtue of being part of a society, you're going to acquire labels weather you want to or not. Even as an individual we can unintentionally label ourselves, as you have noted. Though, I think my 'answer' is a bit of a half-answer. Saying "I'm the type of person to _" is a way to give a descriptor of your personality without actually latching on to a label. It's more nebulous, and it lacks the grouping tendency that labels have. You don't see people gathering behind the idea of "we are the type of people to _," but you can look at just about any label and see people attaching themselves to it and forming groups. These groups tend toward homogeneity. The groupthink becomes so loud that any dissenting opinions get drowned out. That's not to say that labels are necessarily bad, but it's important to be careful when using them. It's easy to fall into the trap of "I'm a _, therefore I think this" instead of "this label accurately represents my beliefs on this topic." Labels can be useful tools, but they should be descriptive not prescriptive. I avoid labels because the descriptive capabilities of the labels I could adopt are outweighed by the baggage that those labels carry. The "type of person" descriptor doesn't carry that type of baggage, and I don't have to worry as much about falling into that prescriptive trap.
Fair enough, you did specify "type of person". Specifying that you relate but are not only a label, that you are a "type of person", is a good way to keep a label from some of its ability to dictate what you are or are seen as. I also agree with your reasoning for not liking labels because they tend towards becoming limiting and exclusive. That is one of the things I like most about travel. The moment I get on a plane or in a car headed somewhere new I feel free from the labels that my friends, family, and acquaintances put on me. I can be almost anyone and I am free to try out new mannerisms, thoughts, and behaviors without anyone raising an eyebrow and saying that I am not acting like myself (not conforming to the labels that they have chosen for me).