I know what you mean, and I agree to some extent.

The original pride flag was made with a specific purpose in mind - which was opposing oppression of the gay community in all its forms. It wasn't meant to include anybody else just by virtue of the circumstances in which it was made. It's also why there's like 500 other flavors of Pride flags (like the Trans flag that the trans colors on the inclusive flag are derived from). From that perspective, the original Pride flag and the new flag weren't made to include you as a straight white person any more than the American Flag was made to include Norwegians. And that's okay, because those flags symbolize a specific group of people, just like the Lesbian Pride flag doesn't include gay men or straight women. You can absolutely still identify with the Pride flag or support other groups for the exact reason you stated, and you don't need anybody's permission to do that, but it is important to remember and respect that not all spaces are meant to include everyone all the time.

I think what we need is a new, universal flag that can be focused specifically on the act/idea of being inclusive. And maybe the rainbow Pride flag will (and already has) changed meaning to be that new inclusive flag. It feels like it's been moving in that direction with the adoption of flags like this one, but I wouldn't want to assume something and accidentally appropriate an item that has cultural identity to a group. But, like you said, there's no reason to keep slapping competing colors and meanings on top of it if it already means being all-inclusive, and by slapping more stuff on there it implies that it isn't.

We either need a new flag specifically for inclusiveness, or just use the original rainbow flag to mean that. Slapping other stuff on it is giving me a headache from clashing colors.