Which is a bit of a washout of a phrase, let me tell you. I mean, it just sounds like you need more sleep. And sometimes it does. As someone who gets up waaaaay too early in the morning, sometimes I just need more sleep. But sometimes I say, “I’m just tired,” because it’s a more socially acceptable way to say, “I’m depressed,” without somebody asking why or a short version of the equally unacceptable, “I’m tired of your opinions, I’m tired of your drama and I’m tired of you.”
Now, I don’t want to begrudge people their opinions. I clearly have one myself. But……..I’m just tired.
See what I mean? It’s so easy to say rather than explain. Because the explanation isn’t very nice and dealing with it the great, amorphous, non-specific You without resorting to violence is wearing me out.
What is the explanation in all of it’s not niceness? I feel since I brought it up I should give it, but it won’t make me feel good about myself:
The truth is, I’m tired of being told what to do; of how I’m doing it wrong; of how terrible it is that I’m not dedicated to your cause with the same fervor; that not wholeheartedly believing the same set of facts you cling to makes me a bad person; that my opinions are wrong; my facts are in error; that I’m not only wrong but I’ll never be right until I agree completely and totally with you; about how my inaction is crushing the weak and enabling the oppressor; about how my race/nationality/species it the worst thing ever because we <fill in the blank with today’s outrage>. And mostly I’m tired – nay, let’s call it what it is, completely exhausted – of attempting to see your side of things. I’m tired of trying to understand why you feel this way in hopes of coming to some sort of understanding, at least in my own head, of your behavior.
Sounds terrible doesn’t it? It’s the non-specific you that makes it that way, I think. If I substituted “someone” for “you” it would be much less abusive, but it wouldn’t quite get across the way I’m feeling right now.
I think it started this morning. I was listening to NPR and the woman being interviewed said, “if we’re not emotionally involved on a deep level nothing is going to happen” and I thought, “Isn’t that the problem?” Yeah, I guess, being deeply emotionally involved gives you drive to get stuff done, but deep emotional involvement can also keep you unreasonable, illogical and incredibly narrow-minded. For those so deeply involved there are few solutions and little room for anyone else’s ideas.
Religion and politics are the two that frequently beat me down the most, but climate change is a close third. I’ve got people on both sides of the climate change fence, one group claiming it’s a natural phenomenon and the other that it’s entirely humankind’s fault. Each side has scientific data claiming theirs is the right answer, each side claims the other is omitting important points that prove their argument is wrong.
Has anyone sat down and tried to work out where and why the discrepancies happened? Has either side tried to use their opponents method to see if they get the same answer? I don’t know – so far, all they’ve done publicly is accuse each other of lying.
And you know what? I’ve watched it go back and forth for so long I don’t care anymore. The best intentioned person in the world could to direct me to accurate data and I still wouldn’t care, because the debate’s worn me out just listening.
If I’m being 100% honest, it’s other people’s emotions that are wringing me out. That deep, emotional commitment they have to their cause is fascinating, but exhausting. I don’t know how they do it, because I need to recharge just after listening to them.
So I say I’m just tired….because I am.
Strange Salmagundi 