My decision-making process is made like any other human being. What will the benefits be? And what will my decision cost me? [In most cases, a few friends] When I do decide to not do something, what really infuriates me is that people always want another reason for why I’ve chosen to be apathetic. Surely “I don’t want to” or “I really can’t be arsed” should put an end to the matter. But this just seems to bring more questions. THERE IS NO UNDERLYING REASON. I REALLY, TRULY, GENUINELY, 100% CANNOT BE BOTHERED AND/OR DON’T WANT TO.

A factor that greatly influences my decisions is travelling. I HATE TRAVELLING. I dislike leaving the house unless absolutely neccessary, and even then, I won’t stray far because of the time it’ll take me to get back (for example, concerts). I refuse to spend hard-earned money and waste too much valuable time travelling just so I can see someone perform.
I hate the weather as I wait for a bus (with no guarantee of getting on), the smells of the people around me, and the constant chatter I hear as I try to catch up on the sleep I missed the night before. The less time I spend on public transport, the better. However, I am reliant on it to get to places because I currently don’t have the funds to buy a car.
If you invite me to something, and the location is near some form of transport that can get me home (whether it be a train station, bus stop or tram station) without much walking in between the two, then I’m all yours. However, if you do not live anywhere near one of these places and expect me to walk to the place in my stupid shoes*, then I’m going to drop said event like it’s hot. Ahem.
So, given the choice to relax at home or to go to a place where I’m going to have to walk for ages to get to any form of public transport, I’ll take the staying at home choice every time. And if I’m a bitch for not wanting to waste my time, so be it.

*I no longer own any shoes that are good for actual walking. Shiny and beautiful, yes, but blister-causing and useless to walk in after half a mile.