Personally I find labels incredibly helpful. I've never had a problem with labels or the practice of labelling and I wish people wouldn't be so hesitant to accept them. While I appreciate the validity of the "I am who I am, I like who I like" school of thought, I can't help but feel that unwillingness to adopt a label to describe who you are is just buckling under the pressure of the stigma that bigots put into them. It sort of feels like we're being scared out of the lingo that we use to define us, and that feels like a win for them.
Saying "I'm a guy and I like guys" and "I'm a gay/homosexual man" are essentially the same thing. "Gay" and "homosexual" are just words that have been invented to describe the former. To use the former in an active attempt to avoid labelling may seem bold and progressive in a world where our main goal is to train everybody in the art of apathy, but it just looks shame-based to me. It feels counterproductive to the point we're trying to make because we are trying to teach people to either accept or not care about who we are, but it sends mixed messages if we're not even willing to use the words ourselves.
I'm gay. That's the word I've been given to describe who I am and I use it without shame. I won't be forced into dropping that word because you have attached connotations to it that do not necessarily fit me. I'd prefer to let you get to know me and change your mind about the word instead of changing the terminology I use to make you more comfortable. Because if I'm changing myself to evade your perceptions instead of remaining stagnant and forcing you to change your perspective, then I'm giving you the balance of power. I'm not going to do that, because bigots like you have had that power for long enough.
That's how I see labels anyway. It might be different for people whose labels are less clean-cut than mine, though.