Something else to consider with the word "normal" is that a state of normalcy is strictly subjective, meaning a state of "normal" can only be identified by the perceiver of normal for themselves, not for someone else though.
The word "weird" however, implies a state of weirdness that is strictly objective, meaning a state of "weirdness" can only be identified by someone 'other than' the perceiver of "normal".
This is because we cannot view ourselves 'objectively' because to do so requires a Third Person Perspective of our situation which we cannot physically do to ourselves, but we can view others objectively because we are not in their shoes.
If we were in their shoes, we could then view their situation subjectively because we would actually BE that person and therefore, we'd be qualified to view their situation 'subjectively'.
When you say that you think you are "weird", you are not actually qualified to make that call about yourself because again, only someone viewing you from a Third Person Perspective can observe you objectively and decide for themselves if you are weird according to them, as they compare your actions to what they perceive is "normal" for them.
The word "weird" therefore, has no meaning when it is self-imposed into a subjectively-based self-appraisal of oneself, simply because you cannot view what you think from a Third Person Objective Perspective. Only someone else can do that.
If you want to know if you're weird, you'd actually have to ask someone else what they thought of you in order to have a valid argument of your self-assessment as being truly weird, but weird ONLY if the other person thought as well that you were not normal!
