okay, essential to this proof is the premise that weirdness is relative. so hang on there, and i'll look up the definition of "weird." okay, the relevent definition at www.dictionary.com seems to be: "of a strikingly odd or unusual character; strange." so un momento, por favor, whilst i look up "strange." alrighty, here we find "differing from the normal." no worries, i am not going to look up "normal." i think we can agree that that generally refers to some sort of imaginary human behavioral average which serves as a standard. however, when you consider the wide range of human behaviors out there, and also the large number of people who participate in "abnormal" behavior (for example all those people living in our prison systems), i think it becomes somewhat apparent how obscure the idea of "normal" really is. in my experience, the idea of weird usually refers to behavior which is abnormal relative to the person who cries "weird." so if somebody says, you're weird, you're weird. it doesn't matter whether they're weird too. 'cause odds are, they are.
and so, out of this (ingenious) concept is born the following proof:
1. If you have ever been called weird, you are weird.
2. If you have never been called weird, I think that is definitely weird. So you're weird.
3. Also, if you have ever written an essay about weirdness, you're weird.
Therefore: 4. You're weird. (for obvious logical reasons about not (a and b) and (a and not b) something something.)