This is legitimate- the definition of weirdness was kept open-ended. I intended weirdness to be any behavior that is divergent from what most in a certain group considers to be the status quo, but even within a group, each member may have a different definition of what weird behavior is, and a consensus will be difficult to pin down. 

I would consider rudeness to be weird behavior under this definition. It is a social behavior that comes with the cost of disrupting social cohesion. What is considered rude, vs. frank and straightforward, will vary from person to person even within a group, and may change over time as people within the group analyze whether the cost of the behavior is worth the social cost of ostracizing the individual who engages in that behavior. For example, cursing was considered much more rude by my parent's generation than the current generation. It took time and discourse for the status quo to change, and for people to decide that cursing is less harmful than was once imagined. 

As for whether I'm trying to excuse my character flaws, that may well be the case. In learning how to more effectively examine the costs and benefits of my behavior, I hope to recognize what is a flaw, and what is not, and to mend the former.