I think you are coming from a place of having a bit more knowledge than the absolute minimum you'd pick up through osmosis by never doing any research or due diligence. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that awareness campaigns deliberately ignored facts that might make the vaccine sound less appealing. It's hard to make good decisions if you don't really have a full picture.
There is no other vaccine routinely administered to large numbers of people that requires a booster every 6-12 months in the general population.
Of the vaccines that require ongoing boosters in the general population, Tdap is probably the most common, and the booster is every 10 years.
The "flu shot" is not an annual booster. It is a different reformulated vaccine every year that, in the case of the trivalent vaccines, targets the 3 strains of influenza that are predicted to be most prevalent in the coming flu season.
Otherwise, even if natural immunity to influenza lasts for a lifetime, most people don't get influenza very often (however people often confuse colds and influenza and don't realize this), so merely having a large existing number of strains would make it incredibly difficult to get natural immunity to all of them even if it wasn't continuing to mutate.
If you don't want people to be able to get influenza 10 times in their lifetime you would still have to give flu shots, and since their effectiveness decreases rapidly you would have to do this every year.
And that's assuming that natural immunity really lasts longer than flu shots.
Anyway that whole point is somewhat irrelevant to your original point that I was responding to that no other vaccines require boosters but it is clear based on your response that you are essentially engaging in circular reasoning (you don't think that boosters are required because no other vaccines require boosters, therefore flu vaccines are not boosters, therefore no other vaccines require boosters).