Why do I have to be a pro?

Why is it that just about everybody and just about every photo resource and every other place on the Internet where you see photographers, including G+, assumes that if you have a dSLR you must:

a) Be a pro
b) Learning to be a pro
c) Aspire to be a pro
d) Be a wannabee pro

And that if you have something that is more expensive than a entry-level dSLR with a kit lens, these assumptions become stronger and stronger?

Why is it so incomprehensible that there are (a lot of) people out there that enjoy photography, the toys that come with it and aspire to become better at it, without wanting to be a professional and make money out of it?

Why do people keep telling me I should only put the very best of my photos in a portfolio, without even asking why I am putting my photos online in the first place?

Why is it so completely off this world to understand that I don't want to cull 400 photos of a trip I took down to 3 or 4 great shots I can show off to complete strangers when it is a documentary of my memories I want to be able to share with my friends and family?

Why is it that if I want to put snapshots online for myself, my family and my friends, I should not be using my D800 and it is a total waste? Is it not I who gets to decide the price of my toys?

But worst of all, why do people assume that if I don't want to be a pro and I just want to put my all snapshots online I can't possibly want to learn to be the best possible photographer I can be? After all, I am just a poser wannabee with an expensive camera...

Both my photography and post-processing skills have improved dramatically after watching countless videos from +KelbyTraining.com , ThatNikonGuy, +Adobe Photoshop Lightroom and weeding through Matt Kloskowski's excellent LR resources @ http://www.lightroomkillertips.com. But I still don't want to be a pro.

Please stop assuming I do!