Consider the sentence: “I’m annoyed.”
There’s a past participle (-ed) on the end of the word annoy, which implies external causation.
So the important question is, “Annoyed by what?”
A stimulus in the environment?
If that stimulus is the cause of how we feel, then everyone might feel the same reaction to it. But we know that’s not true.
Person A might feel “annoyed” (bad) and Person B might feel “excited” (good) in the presence of the same exact stimulus.
In many cases, that stimulus is neutral.
For example, the sound of a loud revving car engine. Is it bad or good? (I personally HATE it, but it sure seems subjective.)
A sound can’t do anything other than be a sound. It can’t carry the quality of “annoying” or “exciting.” The same goes for a heck of a lot of things.
The (-ed) structure of our language can trick us into assuming our internal state is beyond our control. That external things create our experiences. That we’re victims of whatever happens to us.
In some circumstances, especially emergencies, that’s fair. If someone punches us in the face, our internal state is going to change.
But in general, it’s helpful to take ownership of our thoughts and emotions. We can try not to blame other people, places, and things for our behavior. It’s in the frakin ship!
It’s hard do, but it can lead to a better outcome.
Next time you’re annoy(-ed), maybe get rid of that past participle and go with, “I feel annoyance.”
Note: this reminds me of E-Prime, a form of English in which the writer avoids all forms of to be (am, is, are, was).
I am annoyed by band names that are structured like “_____ & the ______s”
I am annoyed that something so insignificant annoys me.
My misophonia is also aroused by my own chewing noises and my sporadic mandibular dysplasia as it causes an innocuous popping sound when I chew.
Hence, I am the source of my own annoyance.
I guess the positive reframing of this is that sure, I am annoyed by other people, but I am an “equal opportunity” curmudgeon.