Passionate

I am seriously irritated by the indiscrimainate use of the word passionate in the media.

"Passionate - exhibiting intense sexual feeling or desire - revealing intense emotion - easily roused to anger, quick tempered".

For some reason it's no longer enough to want to do something & be prepared to work hard at achieving it. Simply having an interest or a goal means you aren't committed enough. You have to be "passionate". It's simply not an appropriate word.

It's actually worse than that. Do we really want people to be so emotionally involved or attached to doing something that they can't think rationally & logically? Do we want people in the public eye to be slaves to their emotions? Is that sort of thinking useful to any one or any cause? 

Aren't we better off with people who calmly assess & investigate? People who can use their intellect to select appropriate courses of action & follow them through?

I was far more volatile in my youth. I felt very strongly about people & issues. The world was black & white & I felt I knew what was right or wrong. I could easily be moved to anger or tears by events. I would suggest that my younger self had a place in the grand scheme of things. We need young people to be engaged & involved.

What we don't need is self important people in the public eye, whose ego demands that they be more than anyone else. People who grab the headlines supposedly for a cause. I am certainly beginning to feel that the concept of a "passionate politician" is a complete oxymoron - with the emphasis on moron.

We need people who care. Who can make a difference. Who can see the big picture & get on with the job of actually making things better.