Thomas, I think you make a fair point, but I also believe you might have settled on your view of rationality. I believe this piece makes a valid point maybe not about being weird for weirdness sake but about accepting weird as valid; for weirdness is not always something a person chooses and to write it off as irrational is fascist. Not that I think you are doing that, but you are encouraging perceived weird people too attempt to see through a lense that they don’t necessarily need to see through. I think your response is littered with the privilege of having been raised to understand and think through a single lense of rationality that happens to have a large backing of powerful people today; a lense of rationality not far from that which has been prevalent in the white culture—particularly white males—for thousands of years.
I’ve begun to question my own sense of rationality more and more over the past few years. I had a few friends who really challenged my values and out of respect for them I chose to ignore the rational I had behind those values and accept and support what they had to say. After letting going of those rationalities I’ve begun to accept things I thought to be weird is a bad way and can no understand the rationale I had before.
I’m tempted to fully agree with you that in order to convince people we must learn to speak on their terms of what is rational. But I fear that in order to truly understand someone else rational you must forget your own. Perhaps that is what everyone should be doing. It’s a scary thought, though, to imagine everyone letting go of their current systems of rational.
This is a half baked response, but it includes concepts I’ve been mulling over for the past few months. This idea of letting go of your current systems of rationality with the intent of understanding new ones is tied together with a concept of emotional reconstruction I’ve been actualizing. I could talk about this for hours with anyone willing to help me build up and crash down these theories.