in regards to the first story, the fact that they went on a spiel about the litigious pedantry of redditors only for joseph to immediately flip to talking about how the last requests of the dead dont matter cus theyre not alive to see them being disrespected gave me a special kind of whiplash
@@wideassairvents because joseph is straight up implying it wouldnt matter what you did in the wake of being told someones request for their own funeral because theyre dead, really cant get more pedantic than that like yeah no shit they wouldnt know that's literally why you would be such a fuckin immeasurable asshole for saying "fuck that" the second they peaced out.
Joseph consistently tries to "optimize" morality in a way that leaves me unsurprised when he says dying wishes don't matter. It's all about maximizing the gains, baby! Follow the correct line. Sure you respect the dead person, but think about how you can "improve" things with the living!
53:00 is the hardest ive disagreed with them. They are saying that HER ADDICTION is HIS FAULT for not curing it with a talk. She was pulling money out KNOWING she couldnt afford to do so: why? she cant help herself because she has a problem. Why is it his responsibility alone to fix it?
Real talk I appreciated that all three posts were very geared to have really introspective thought-provoking conversations. There were not a lot of jokes and I hope it continues as an occasional thing in between the hilarious episodes.
why does the brother need closure for a person he doesn't even have a relationship with anymore? why is the only path of closure to go to a funeral you weren't invited for? if you had a conscience, wouldn't going to a funeral uninvited make you feel worse?
I like how it has gotten to the point that they just use the term "bottle night" as just a part of their vernacular. They use it without it being a reference back to the story, but rather just as part of what they're talking about.
#1 - There is another sort of final wish. A will. Think of how this story would change if the Sister had been rich and left the guy out of her will, only for him to show up at the reading and demanded he be given some of the money. Edit: Also, the brother is being the AH for forcing this on the living sister. He is putting OP in a position of breaking her word to the dead sister. He didn't give OP a call and ask if he could come. He just showed up uninvited and unannounced. Edit2: You are not entitled to anything of someone else. Just being family does not give you some magical automatic right to another person.
#2 - She spent more than my monthly rent on takeout. I spent, like, a tenth of that on all of my food last month. And that isn't the cheapest junk either. I just recently had some health things come up and had to completely change my diet for the healthier. However, in this specific situation and not the cutting off thing, OP is the AH. He did not communicate to even tell her the card was being canceled. Yes, she was the AH for spending so much on delivery. She is wrong for that. HE is wrong for not even bothering to tell her the card was going to be canceled. Edit: It is not like he cut her off from all food. The fridge and freezer are full of food. However, he should have told her about it and for that specifically he is TA. COMMUNICATE! TALK! YOU'RE MARRIED! Edit on the Update: Yep, guy's the AH. However, even if she is an addict, she went too far. Though just as equally, he should have done something before it got to this point.
#3 - On one hand, you get celebrations for doing things. On the other hand, yep, people not doing as well don't like being told that. Sometimes though, you have to. However, it seems they are doing things that could be celebrated. She's learning to drive. When she has learned how to drive, celebrate that! However, just as equally, they can't be a professional internet browser. Well, I guess they could? That is basically some of the Streamers out there. Edit: The OP should have asked her what she wants to celebrate. What has she done that she thinks should be celebrated. Maybe she isn't just browsing the internet. Maybe she is writing stories, drawing, or something of the sort. The more invisible things. If she thinks she should be celebrated, find out what she thinks that celebration should be about. Edit: If I was forced to do something at that age and then my parents tried to celebrate me doing it? I would have loathed that. Like, please, you made do! What is there to celebrate. Might as well celebrate the fact I breath because my body forces me to do it.
For the first story, as much as I agree that the living should get closure, Jordan and Joseph need to realize that attending the funeral is not the only form of closure. While John can't attend the funeral and can't get any of his sister's ashes, John is still able to see the ashes at a later date and get his closure. It'll require more effort, cause John will have to get permission from a person who holds the ashes. But that is the bed he made for himself. There's more than one way of doing things, and you need to acknowledge when your own actions, or even values, have prevented you from certain ways of doing things.
That's exactly what this story came down to me. I agree with a lot of the points they made in the video, especially the part that it's hard to make any decision without knowing what exactly happened between those siblings. Yes, completely denying the brother from getting any form of closure probably wouldn't be correct. Maybe it really was something that he simply couldn't face earlier. Maybe he even wanted to visit this funeral out of regret for not making up with her earlier (like a "you don't realize what you had until you lost it" kind of thing) But ultimately, there are ways for the brother to get said closure that wouldn't involve splitting the family up further than it already seems to be.
Also on Story 2, it is financial abuse on both sides. Having a joint bank account comes with responsibilities and if you are living paycheck to paycheck single income, Im sorry, it is reckless, unfair and abuse towards your significant other to waste money like in this case. This goes both ways. If it isnt severe, you can set boundaries on allowance money for BOTH SIDES but having a 1K take-out bill is crazy.
The first story makes me think of that one A Softer World comic (167) that goes "Mom is buried out in these woods." "She wanted her ashes spread at sea." "But it's like she always said." "No."
The funeral question seems fairly simple to me. When you cut ties with someone, you need understand that you are FULLY cutting that tie. Right or wrong, that's what you've done. Any work to repair that connection must come mutually and i'm not sure that anyone owes you that. If someone hurts me, then I peace out, and want to reconnect later, I need to accept that they may not want that like I do. A dying wish isn't some special request, because it's made BY the living. If this were a bride making a request for her wedding to keep someone out, would they be obligated to allow someone into their space? No. Funerals are for the living, but they are ABOUT the deceased. It's the second-last vestige of an entitlement to space that most of us will have before our grave, and that entitlement doesn't end just because I died. Nobody sounds like an asshole here, just normal hurt people.
According to the comments on the first one the Sister and Brother were pitted against each other by their parents with the sister coming out on top much more often. I'm not sure if that would change my opinion, but it's a helpful addition I think.
Absolutely 0 of the redditors under this comment would allow any amount of nuance or information about the situation, change the fact that they think that guy should be murdered for daring to show up to his own sisters funeral.
My thing on the first one, it doesnt matter what the surrounding situation is, if my sister on her deathbed said not to allow someone to the funeral, id die before they're allowed in
Same here. And if the dying wish was anything unreasonable or would cause harm, then I just wouldn’t do it. Telling someone to sit out a funeral isn’t harm.
Right! And Joe's point about maybe she was an abusive monster in life stands, regarding it not being the brother's job to reconcile. But when she was on her deathbed, that no contact policy is out the window. That person is on their way out, at that point you either say goodbye or you have severed your ties completely. He gad zero right to go to the funeral after that.
@postcaesar4564 but it is an important moment for a lot of people though. It's where you can remember that person that was close to you with others, appreciating what they've done, who they were and what they meant to you. For a lot of people it's just that one moment they could get that close with other people to remember that person, it's not just something you clock in and then clock out for. Personally I'd say to the brother that the sister didn't want him to come, but he's free to attend the funeral if he feels it's something he needs.
@@IronpeckerI wish we had more context on *why* she was willing to reconcile several times but he was not. The situation is very different depending on what happened there imo
As someone who is no contact with a close family member - you guys are writing the brother too many cheques. This is a case of conflating boundary setting with trying to unilaterally dictate the terms of a relationship. Why is he entitled to come for closure that he denied the sister? We also have no idea what he was planning when he came either; it could have been exactly this drama for all we know. TLDR you are entitled to cut out family but you can't then complain about them revoking a privilege from you
Hearing them dunk on Joker this week makes me really hope they come back to this next week to dunk on it again after Terrifier 3 made 9 times it's box office in like a day
Yeah Joseph was in creative reading mode when he postulated that the sister did some horrible unspeakable things that warrants the brother’s decision to only show up AFTER she’s died. (I mean it’s totally possible but the dead sister would’ve had to have been EVIL to the brother to warrant his stay at the funeral)
In the case of the first story, I want to point some things that many (including the councel) didn't point out that I feel should have been adressed regardless of lack of info: 1) The poster is also related to these two but is so impartial. Joseph keeps saying "I can picture many horrible things someone can do to another that would separate them", but how does the third sibling fit into this? Poster doesn't mention having issues with the brother (the whole post was made cause she had doubts kicking him out), and I personally wouldn't communicate with a abusive sibling. This doesn't discredit Joseph's theory, but how could dead sister have a irreperable relationship with brother, great relation with poster, but poster and brother don't have issue? 2. As someone who's been in a funeral where I knew there were people there that hated and were hated by the dead family member, it sucks griefing while there is someone in the room there to enjoy the family reunion. It's "my baby shower in your wedding" levels of selfishness. 3. I personally think of myself as very reasonable, and in my opinion, if the last time I had talked to someone, I had successfully burned down any hope of a bridge with them, and was told not to go to their funeral, I would not have gone to their funeral alongside the people who actually got along with them. Him going to the funeral, and caused this whole family drama has compromised the poster, his other sister. Is his selfishness and wish to resolve his emotion that important he can trample over the feeling of his other two siblings? I would say he's an asshole for showing up. Idk maybe it's just me
I think you’re onto something. If the poster just let the brother and perhaps some other family members know about how the dying wish then it might’ve helped the brother process his grief. But instead OP waited for the worst timing to tell the brother.
Hearing these guys fully acknowledge that Scenario 2 is about a woman taking her addiction out on her husband and abusing their finances to sate it and then hearing Jordan still fucking day "this wouldn't have happened if you just talked to her dude" was next level whiplash, they all just dug their heels in on the Yes The Asshole even after it was revealed she was trying to STEAL HIS MONEY FOR TAKEOUT. Insanity.
He really said "If the genders were reversed, I'd have the same opinion". If the roles were reversed, he would've called the guy a bum for not working and leeching of his wive before telling everyone to use the kill button when voting
Nah, I'm with the card-cutting husband. If you got over $1000 in takeout, that's an addiction. And before you talk to an addict about their addiction, you have to cut off their access to said addiction (in this case the credit card). That's not being an asshole, that's doing what you are supposed to do given the context. Edit: Hey look I predicted them talking about her food addiction. And they are downplaying it because the OP has Redditidis. Also, "none of this would have happened if he had talked to her" sorry peeps, that's not how addiction works. Try talking to an alcoholic about their drinking problem and you will quickly understand why that doesn't work.
With regards to Story 2 its astounding to me how quickly yall can just invent a books worth of pretend scenarios or motivations and then extrapolate from the pretend scenario you construct to get angry at someone. If that guy's wife is that much of a food addict, escelates that much, and goes into that level of theatrics, I highly doubt one session of "hey babe you really gotta cool it on the spending a grand on delivery" is going to hack it. Even if he was completely silent as the behavior got worse, and their solution was to cut them off without warning, which it doesnt sound like they did despite your framing of it that way, if you were hemorrhaging that level of money for any reason youre damn right to cancel that card and drain that account. If you lost a grand in a week out of nowhere youd think you got hacked or someone swiped your info until you looked back over the transactions. Its not great to cold turkey that level of addiction but having delt with both my own food addiction and other's more normal addictions it isnt something you just frank and open dialog your way through there has to be some level of actionable accountability, such as getting cut off from your means of doing the irresponsible shit
If you notice in like a lot of these posts they read they never try to assume that the people involved have tried to communicate, and, even when the post states they've clearly tried to communicate, they argue that they should have communicated harder. In regards to the second post I understand blocking the account as an emergency response, but he should have tried to have a talk with her, or at least made his stance clear. By not telling her anything he probably just made the situation more confusing for her, and she ended up taking loans and such.
No, under absolutely no circumstances does he get to deny his dying sister peace and then immediately puppeteer her memory for a false peace of his own, least of all at the funeral people who chose to be in her life are using to grieve.
a dying wish beyond "cause signifigant physical harm to a person" is almost entirely unignorable to me, i dont care how much of an asshole i am being to the person who it affects, i would feel signifgantly worse ignoring the wish than following through with it, so id say NTA
There’s an episode of the midnight gospel that goes into depth on how Americans push away from the death on a cultural level which differs from most other cultures that view a funeral as send off rather than viewing it as the cessation of all vital functions. And hearing Joseph’s stance on the first post had me like “well of course he’d say this”. Simply put, dying wishes hold cultural weight and those who don’t subscribe to those traditions aren’t burdened by it
How would you weigh a wish that "causes mental harm" to someone when you say that? Like, if a loved one has a dying wish that basically amounts to needlessly fucking with someone, would you do it?
So you'd cause a huge scene at a funeral, disrupting it and ruining everyone else's peace and attempts at quite, dignified, closure for your personal closure and the vague, spiritual concept of a dead persons final wish? That's pathetic. Grow up. You're an adult. Shoulder the guilt so everyone else can have their closure too like a fucking grown ass adult and get over yourself.
@@ashikjaman1940Most of the time dying wishes are just “Don’t let X go to my funeral” or “Spread my ashes here”. They’re not as malicious as “needlessly fucking with someone”. If excluding someone from a funeral or a couple at a beach being weirded out by seeing ashes spread, then that’s just something small they have the rest of their lives to deal process. Also dying wishes that are out of reason like “egg my ex’s Car” are just ignored.
I have to agree with the sister on the first one and personally, it's an easy decision for me. While I understand the idea that the brother is sorta being disrespected here, we need to remember the dead sister knew she was dying, tried one last time to reach out, and got crickets. It's one thing if she was healthy and suddenly died, but she was dying, he knew she was dying, she also had to go to therapy over what they went through, and he still didn't at least see her off. I understand wanting closure, but he also really disrespected her (based on this lack of context about their pasts) by not at least seeing her the one time. And then he goes to the funeral when she's finally had enough? I'm sorry, but I think the living sister was in the right, because the brother had multiple chances to try and get closure and just wouldn't take it.
John is being extremely selfish trying to get closure when it is literally no longer an option for the sister. You made your bed dude, you gotta lie in it now. If anyone here is a true jerk, it might've been the dying sister tbh. Asking your sibling to fuck over your other sibling(whom she presumably has a stable relationship with), is kinda not cool. Put it in writing or something idk but don't saddle the innocent 3rd party with this
No. We all make our beds and some people need help getting out of it. He fucked up, this is his chance for atonement. The pain of never actually atoning to the sister's face is penance enough. This was just one last cruel act that should've never happened. OP let their sibling hurt because a hurt dead woman said to.
@@Kirinmon She apologized. If it was an earnest apology, his response wouldn't have mattered since an apology is about taking accountability. Her getting so upset at the lack of forgiveness shows it might not have been an earnest apology and was seeking absolution for her sins from a person who wasn't ready to absolve them. She apologized for her actions. He will never be able to. OP has only hurt him more now.
@@escriel just because she was sorry about how they were to each other in their youth doesn't mean she can't be upset at him again. They are adults now. He chose no contact. She accepted that. He tried to change it AFTER she's dead. You don't get to do that. You don't get to rob the other person of their agency and decide for them EVER, especially not after they passed. Regardless of it all, it was HER funeral, HER wishes. The fact she even had the foresight to make this request also says a lot about her brother. She knew he would pull this crap.
@Kirinmon You're injecting a lot in here, bud. Just look at what this has caused. It's fractured the family and further hurt their brother. Just so OP can feel good that they respected their sister's selfish wish. Glad the sister can be comfortable at her funeral. Oh wait, she's dead. Doesn't feel anything.
My biggest annoyance with the second one is that they say the guy should confront her about it and potentially get a divorce then in the update he confronts her and gets a divorce then they get mad at him for it??? just insane takes on the second one My addition to the third one though would be to see if the daughter feels she’s doing anything worth celebrating cause I wonder if the parents idea of what’s worth celebrating is just currently unreachable for the daughter but isn’t for the son. Like for me going through school I would often fail tests or only just pass so when I would put a lot of work in and get higher than a passing grade, it wasn’t an amazing academic accomplishment but it was a lot for me and while it stuff like that was never acknowledged by teachers cause I’m not top of the class my mum would and we’d celebrate, and eventually I got better at school and performed better but if the daughter is in a similar situation to me then potentially that’s the way to go
Damn that last one triggered me because I had something kinda similar happen when I was around their same age except I was on extra curriculars and getting accolades but I didn’t blow up about it after the fact. 15 years later I kinda wish I did
Not only did Jordan not know that joker 2 was a musical. But if you look at most of the reviews none of the people on the indestry seemed to know either. Everyones been acting like its some huge suprise deapite it being one of the first things they announced
So reading between the lines on the first one. I feel like the OP just didn't approve of John's stance. Like they said in the episode John is well within his rights not to forgive the sister. Grief and trauma are complex and he is allowed to process that on his own schedule. And I can even understand the dead sister feeling a bit vengeful on her deathbed. Knowing you're gonna die without ever closing that chapter of your life has gotta suck. But if I were to put myself in OP's shoes, beyond the principle of respecting the sister's last wishes I think I would be in my own feelings about it. If I were stuck between 2 siblings, and I was still close enough to the sister that she would trust me with ehr dying wishes, I'm probably also close enough to see and understand the struggles she went through to improve herself. I can see the perspective of "Hey she tried her hardest to reconcile in life, this funeral is for the people who cared about her go away". Does that make OP kinda an asshole? Maybe but I think if they were close to the sister, wanted to respect her final wishes, and probably has their own opinions about how John chose to handle things that they're kinda justified in being the villain and denying him closure.
Just assuming John didn't care about her is insane. He obviously cared about her, he showed up to the funeral. If OP was close to the sister, they should've recognized this wasn't them, this last decision went against all those years of therapy and healing, just to hurt John, BOTH their brother, one last time. It's understandable that OP chose to respect her wishes, but that doesn't change the pain it caused.
@@escriel I don't think this dying wish does go against all those years of therapy or is just to hurt him. They did wrong by each other in the past, and she tried to make amends as best she could. Then he chose to inflict new hurt on her in her final days by refusing to see her. He has the right to do that, but the dying sister is completely right to say that if that's what he wants, he doesn't get to undo it as soon as she's dead. He made that decision, and she was just stuck with it. And if he did care about her? It would be a lot more "obvious" if he showed up while she was still alive.
I cannot get past story 1. So since dying wishes dont matter since the person is dead, Jospeh is fine with deadnaming trans people after death if that makes the family "more comfortable"? The brother should have taken the chance when it was actually offered to him, if he didn't want anything to do with her in life, why does he "deserve" to be at the funeral?
For the first one Joseph is putting the brother as the main character of life. In Joseph's view the brother was clean and perfect and the dead sister was literally hitler. Remember the sister didn't just reach out once she reached out multiple times. If what she did was really unforgivable then why is the brother suddenly shifting gears once the sister is dead? If what she did was really the egregious and he wanted closure he could've done it after the funeral. The fact that he went there despite knowing they're not invited them making a scene just shows how petty and selfish he is. I think it did show a little here but Joseph is soon atheist brained. Like his view most likely stems from him thinking that this is the only life, there's no afterlife so there's really no need to respect the dead because they're fucking dead who gives a shit right? If he wasn't so funny i prolly would've blocked him in every platform lmao
Do you understand that grief is a complex emotion and that you don't just feel it for the people you love? If a person was close to you, either for good or bad reasons, it'll shock you mentally when they die and you'll have to process it. Also it's reasonable that someone doesn't believe in an afterlife, personally I don't either, it's just a way of viewing life and the world and either I find respectable. Imo even taking care of the wishes of the deceased is more something that someone has to do for their own sake, because they accepted that responsibility not really because it'll impact the dead person in the next life. Also prioritizing the peace of the living beyond the wishes of the dead doesn't mean that a person doesn't care for the deceased, just that if you have to choose you'll do it one way instead of another, not just saying "fuck you if you're dead I'll disrespect you to no tomorrow".
I think the issue at play in the third story, and why I think the parent is the asshole in that situation, comes down to how their perspective was presented to the kid. Instead of saying straight up: "well, you don't do anything worth celebrating," instead they should've turned the question back on them and asked "Okay, what do you feel that you've done that we didn't properly celebrate?" It communicates the same basic idea, but it helps the kid to figure it out on their own terms and is more constructive than just telling them to "do more." Because maybe the kid does have hobbies or interests that the parents just aren't as interested in as they are, or don't fully understand. Or, if the post when taken at face value is really all that there is, it helps the kid realize "Oh shit, I don't do anything. Maybe if I want these things, I should do something." It allows them to define their own motivation as opposed to just reinforcing the idea that they need to chase after their parents' approval.
@@spectralphantom380 Eh, agree to disagree. They upset their child with the way they addressed it, and there was a better way to do it, so I think that’s sufficient criteria for a “the asshole” determination.
This comment has a great reminder that posts are made from one person's perspective. And as they've stated on the Councel before, it's very common for posts to be massaged by the OP in certain ways. I definitely do want to know more about the "stays indoors all the time" but "has no hobbies". It really feels like the Mom just doesn't care about anything her daughter enjoys and does not acknowledge anything she does as worthwhile when there could actually be something. Which might explain the outburst even more.
if the girl felt loved by her parents and they actually cared about her feelings maybe she would be excited to go do stuff or maybe they'd actually find out why she wasnt. a teen isnt gonna just watch tv all day and act depressed for no reason. If she's been forced to do activities she didnt want to do her whole life she's probably not gonna just go and do them on her own once they stop forcing her because that would just be like admitting the parents were right in forcing her. Also theyre her parents they should celebrate her for just existing, she's not doing anything bad and it kinda sucks to instil into a child that they have to have outstanding achievements to get love and attention from parents
23:27 if someone trusted me enough to give me a dying wish like that, I couldn’t break it. Not knowing what they’ve done to each other makes it hard though.
I have to say I disagree with Jordan that Movies are all bad nowadays. For example I watched "The Substance" last week and was blown away how much I liked it. I agree that horror is an pretty niche genre but there are good and original movies you just have to find them.
I'd be willing to bet the guy on number 2 must have told his wife she was ordering way too much before he cut her off. Besides, there's also the detail of the wife apparently never taking out the trash or buying groceries. If she's unable to microwave food, then it's not a wife the guy's keeping at home, it's a kid. And kids shouldn't have a say in the running of the finances. It's not owning her, it's taking proper measures. Edit: Also giving extended details would have given the wife an opportunity to swipe the savings since this is a joint account. I would definitely have been mindful of that and not warned her that it was going to be the move once I'd settled on it.
Yeah agree, sure blockbusters sucks ass but can't really say movies suck these days in the same year fucking Challengers, Love Lies Bleeding and Monkey Man came out
In the first one, John's in the wrong 100%. He wouldn't give the sister closure on her deathbed, but expects to just be allowed in for his own closure? He can go f himself. Even IF he changed his mind afterwards, that's too late.
Also, he can get closure on his own. He can honor her memory on her own. He does not NEED to go to the one place that the sister specifically asked to NOT go. He can visit her grave, he can do his own night with some family, etc. The "Right to say goodbye" goes out the window in this situation
You're literally just angry You didn't even listen to anything anyone said in the discussion, lmao. Calm the fuck down and stop being an outraged Infant child when adults are talking. What about the closure of everyone else at the entire funeral? Who had theirs disrupted and disputed by the giant altercation caused by two people's fight and selfishness about their own closure being supreme? Not a drop of maturity in you or anyone with your positions minds.
Why don't you calm down and let the adult talk, kiddo. Nothing you said here has any value or meaning to the actual conversation or question at hand. You clearly just got so fuming, foaming, seething mad listening to these smart, thoughtful, men talk. That your tiny little boy brain boiled over and you came down here to vomit up your flattening, vapid, pointless, driven so you could feel better about yourself and move on without having to think. Ya gotta work on your self soothing.
48:23 while i generally agee with the guys on this, its not "her money". Its his money in which he is providing for her. Thats a weird fuckin way of looking at this. You dont have the responsibility to provide for anyone's addiction, even if its your wife. The lesson here is to not become financially dependent on another person, assuming you want to spend money as freely as you please.
OK so on the first story, people need to understand he went no contact with the sister. On her death bed she wants to talk and he says no. IMO, that forfeits the right for the closure at the funeral. You can hang outside. You can visit the tombstone. You can pray or whatever. But this other sibling who clearly has a good relationship with this girl got one very simple request from her. Its the simplest death wish ever. To follow this up. Lets shift the perspective. Lets say the one who dies is still the girl, and the second party is her mom. They had a massive falling out. Go no contact for 20 years. The daughter reaches out to her mom on her death bed and wants to fix things. The mom says no. The girl says she doesnt want that woman at her funeral. Do you let the mom in when she shows up uninvited?
I cane to the same position as Joseph on the first story but for an entirely different reason, there are clearly members of the family that feel the brother should be there and are likely to draw comfort from his presence in s difficult time
The first story seems almost childishly spiteful in a way I can't quite comprehend, not on the part of the poster, but the dead sister. These siblings very clearly had a lot of personal issues between them that we'll never know, but in the context of the post where he refuses to try and make up after she reaches out, so she responds by doubling down and on her deathbed saying "don't let him come to the funeral" as if she expected this guy who obviously wants nothing to do with her to show up. It just seems outlandish, and spiteful in such a bizarre way. He cut ties, and presumably you've not spoken nor seen each other in quite some time, why are you still so focused on him.
Also like you'll be dead, as long as the brother acts appropriately at the funeral what would be the harm? As the family members have said "the funerals are for the living", was she afraid that by him being there maybe he'd remind people that she wasn't that good of a person? Especially seeing how many family members didn't mind the brother being there, I can't help but feel like the dead sister just wanted to get back at her brother one last time
For number 2 I feel like you're the bread winner you're allowed to cancel the card after +1k on fast food but you should've communicated this before $500 was spent (long before this was figured out to be an addiction)
This is what bugged me the most about op in the last one, like how can you say your daughter doesn't do anything worth celebrating when she is learning to drive, learning how to maintain a car etc. Even if its a smaller/different celebration than the brother it can go a long way to making your daughter feel loved.
Man that first one is so thought provoking. Honestly, it's not the sisters job, but the way she describes the story she never talks to the brother either, and she fails to provide anything resembling support or perspective from him. I think at any point she could have attempted to mediate this divide, to maybe understand the brother more to have enough empathy to allow him to grieve the sister he ultimately clearly loved (because he showed up) but couldn't accept. Where our story ends is this sad, grim reality where the narrator is the asshole because she's describing her own frickin family in 3rd person omniscient like some kind of aloof arbitrator of justice. I can't even say I wouldn't do the same thing in this situation if my sibling asked something similar, but I damn sure would have tried to have a more nuanced understanding of my own family's interpersonal conflicts.
Yeah, this comment hits the most for me. She felt so firmly she had to carry out her sisters will but speaks of her entire family as if she exits outside of it and has for the extent of this entire life long falling out. I guess there was some info in the thread about how the parents turned the kids on each other in the household, and took this dead sisters side when she would go in on the exiled brother. Making this even more insane. Also making the psychos in this thread calling him a PoS or whatever, even MORE the type of kneejerk, black and white, no nuance, worthless, Reddit Trash the boys read for filth in the clip. TRIPLE so since it sounds like those guilty parents and family were split on just letting him in. Joseph once again just right to question the absolutism and Redditors SEETHING to hear a different opinion ALLOWED To exist.
For story 1 i think the guy gaves up his rights to attend the funeral when she asked to met with him on her death bed and he said no. You were given the opportunity to make amends while she was alive and i think its very selfish to try and give yourself closer after denying hers.
For story 1, this is not a dying wish. we're enacting a blood feud. And I don't think you are compelled to carry out a blood feud. In the absence of knowing how and to what extent they were cruel to each other, it's hard to come down either way. In the same vein, I kind of take the view that Joseph put forward: did she really grow as much from therapy as is reported? To take such a spiteful action, splitting the two remaining siblings down the middle, when John found her actions so egregious that he couldn't bear to reconcile with her on her deathbed. I don't know. I hope I never personally hate someone that much.
So this last scenario is the EXACT thing I live with everyday. In high school I started marching band and did well academically. My sister holds a lot of resentment towards me, including the fact that I got to way more opportunities growing up. However, there was plenty of time for her to develop her own hobbies, she started high school when I went to college. Though I will admit, her being dyslexic did hold her back in some ways, and covid ruined her senior year, I'm not sure what my parents could have helped her do more. There was so little she ever showed interest in that I wonder if counselor or a therapist could have even made a difference. To some extent kids have to forge their own identity, a parent can help, but only so much.
First one was a really great discussion. Still not sure where i stand on it, but the Councel had great points all around 2nd one... well, ill just say that i really enjoyed Jordan saying "I'd feel the same way if the genders were flipped, trust me" and then 5 minutes later "i really hate when men do this... i mean when people do this"
Regardless of the rights of the deceased vs rights of the living bit on the first question, I really disagree with the idea of the rest of the family's opinion mattering at all on what path one should take. Either you think john's wishes matter more bc he's not yet dead, or you think dead girl's wishes matter more bc it's her funeral. If there was abuse here, even mutual, I wouldn't want other people in my family to get to weigh in on whether the abuse was severe enough that I should or should not be allowed to exclude someone from my funeral for that reason. Ignore me bc I'm gone or believe me when I decide who gets to still counts as MY family.
16:55 I think Jordan is a little bit too quick to assume that it's not a vindictive closure. I totally get the sister's perspective of not wanting him to be at the funeral, because if he was unwilling to make amends even with his dying sister, what is stopping him from humiliating her even at his sister's funeral?
How is it not YOU people's automatic and "too quick" assumption that he IS there for a vindictive closure? This man GHOSTED her HIS ENTIRE LIFE. What POSSIBLE evidence is there he's there to suddenly cause some huge scene and "humiliate" her?!! what the fuck are you even talking about?!? Is this comment section on heroin?! Did the people form this reddit thread show up here?
@@spectralphantom380 That's my point, It's not evidence. Just like this guys implication that his not making up with her before death but showing up anyway is in anyway a sign or implication of some nefarious plan to "Humiliate" her. It's just made up, fictional. Nothing OP said in the OG post, even if you go read it, even comes close to implying anything of the sort. People are just basically making up scary things he MIGHT have done to justify their feelings.
@@polishpipebomb Take a chillpill. If he didn't even want to speak to her on her deathbead because of bad blood between them, it's perfectly reasonable to assume that this bad blood didn't magically disappear after her death.
I agree with MBT on the first story. If I was in this situation, I’d likely ignore a dying wish if I felt it conflicted with my personal beliefs on how things should be done. The brother being alive has a greater right to his wish that the sister who is dead, in my mind
In the first story I don't think there is anything to do with right or wrong. Fulfilling someone's death wish is entirely up to the individual. If they don't want to or think it's important they aren't in the wrong to do so and vice versa. So I don't even understand why this is a question when it's entirely up to the person that's fulfilling/not fulfilling someone's death wish.
1. Correct 2. Correct 3. Correct Bottle Night mentioned: 9 episodes (two on patreon) KILLS: 7 (two on Patreon - Kill Button merch when?) see ya next time :)
As someone who grew up around multiple cultures who honor dying wishes, it was grueling to sit through Joseph’s take on the first one, cuz it’s like?? Yes? You honor the dying wish if it’s within reason and in the first post’s scenario the living sibling has the rest of their life to find closure and can afford to miss out on this one day. I think the way joseph put dying wishes as “Genie Wishes” is a bad faith take to have because if a dying wish was something unreasonable then it just wouldn’t happen. I think OP in the first post should’ve let others know about the dying wish instead of waiting for the last possible moment to let someone know they’re not invited. It’s not that hard.
I think the problem with how you're going about this is that "unreasonable" is subjective. Like, you're saying it's not a big deal that the sibling misses the funeral because they have their entire life to move on but that's because you don't view being at the funeral as a big deal in the grand scheme of things. If, for example, the brother is from a culture that really puts an emphasis on the funeral as their absolute last chance to see them and they view that there's not going to be another moment that matters when it comes to reconciliation, then the rest of their life doesn't matter. Personally I disagreed with Joseph too but with the limited context we're given this isn't the kind of scenario where any answer is definitively correct.
If the dying wish involves hurting another person, physically, mentally, or emotionally, the wish isn't worthy of respect. This was a last act of selfishness by the sister, an undoing of everything she worked on in therapy. This doesn't help her at all, it just leads to more pain and hatred. I don't fault the OP for not recognizing this and "being the bigger person", but their sibling died and their other sibling is in a lot of pain. A person should never be denied the chance to grieve a loved one with their family.
@@escrielhe's not being denied that, because she isn't a loved one. You don't get to explicitly refuse to see someone on their deathbed and call them a loved one a week later.
@@spectralphantom380 yes you do. life is very complicated. he made a mistake, he should be given the chance to apologize same as she was given. He didn't forgive her and now she's hurting him more.
I'm disappointed that the councel didn't even mention the most important part of the first post: the sister specifically mentioned the brother not attending her funeral... AND not getting any of her ashes.
Bro Joseph has been on a streak of dog ass opinions lately lmao brother in first scenario has no right to show up to the funeral imo denied the sister her closure in life but he wants his closure in her death? gtfo at that point why does the brother even care? the sister was ostensibly a stranger in his life to the point he would not visit her in death but is like "ohi have to show up at the funeral of this person who is basically a stranger?"
You guys are really reading into the second one and making up a lot of stuff that might not be happening. It's not an "own" I could easily understand that act being done as stopping the constant drain on their finances because they can't afford it.
I could see your side if after cancelling the card and moving the money out of the account, he at that point told his partner. I can support the financial steps taken even if he should've communicated better earlier. But there is no excuse for giving your partner no warning that they now have no access to money.
I like how because the post didn't say "We had a long conversation where we both outlined how we feel and it went like this" they assume the married man with control of the money who takes out the garbage had literally never talked to his wife about her fast food bills steadily growing by literal hundreds of dollars, and instead just noticed it one day and said "Erm, nope! no more money for you beach!! Reddit's gonna love this one!"
@@spectralphantom380 I would say that it is ok in this case because the wife is using the money to feed an addiction. Before you address someone having an addiction, you have to remove their access to said addiction. Especially if they are using your money to get it. Then you have the conversation. You don't talk to an alcoholic while they have easy access to alcohol for example.
The guy does have a big case of Redditidis, but he certainly was not in the wrong, and in fact did exactly what he needed to do (especially considering the fact that the wife was using his own money to feed her addiction).
@@obiesenpai3869 I already said this but I will clarify again. I understand not warning them before you move the money so they cannot stop you. It is unforgivable that AFTER THAT, she found out that she had no access to money by trying to use money. You absolutely must inform someone that their money has been taken away once it's been done. It was relatively fine in this case but there are a lot of ways for things to go very badly if someone goes somewhere under the misapprehension that the card(s) they're carrying means they have money if they need it.
While I can’t agree with Joseph’s take on the first story I can understand why people would allow someone who is alive to get that closure regardless of a dying wish
I'm gonna be contrarian that says dying wishes mean absolutely nothing. By all means, make whatever promises you must to give a dying person peace, that's only a good thing. But once they're dead, renegging on the promise is a victimless crime. Life belongs to the living. All that the first poster achieved was straining family relations, for no reason.
@@gamekid537 It's a very simple moral system, you prioritize who's still here compared to who isn't here anymore. At least for me it doesn't mean to completely ignore EVERYTHING that a dying person wishes for, but if it's between the wishes of a dead person and the peace/wellbeing of the living I'll prioritize the living. And even then I'm conscious that when I'm realizing the wish of someone who's dead it's more for my own closure than anything else, I don't really believe in an afterlife so I don't think that anything I do will have an effect on the dead person or anything. The one thing I care the most about a dead person is their memory, remembering them and making sure that nobody spreads lies about who they were. I think it's a perfectly valid belief system
@@Ironpecker thats pretty valid, and what i said doesn't really apply to you since you actually think about the wishes of that dead person. Im not claiming that that person even exists anymore after they died, but i am saying that how they felt and what they wanted in that moment matters, the things they ask of you shouldn't be thrown out the window the moment they die. If they ask you to take care of their plants or something after they die you should at least try to make it work and not throw your hands up because theyre dead and you aren't obligated anymore. It is the LAST THING they asked of you, its probably kind of important to them even if you see it as ridiculous. And as for the actual post, i dont think the poster is in the wrong, the guy had no way of knowing that him refusing his sister however shitty she was would get him barred from the funeral but thats just how the cookie crumbled. The dead person at least has a right to say who can be at their funeral. That said the guy isn't really an asshole either, hes obviously still going through shit about the sister, and sure the other sister could help or reach out, but its hard scenario to be inside of.
I very much unironically liked a Joker 2 very much! I think the large majority of people who didn't like the movie were actually the people who thought "whoah joker is so awesome when he killed those guys" and are upset about how Fleck faces the consequences of his actions and spoilers, doesn't want to be the joker anymore. I might be a little bit of a contrarian but, I thought the reckoning with his actions and his past was super super interesting.
I went into the movie expecting to hate it and to see the worst slob ever, but the movie is surprisingly fine. Idk if people just lost the ability to take a movie for what's it worth, but a lot of the criticism I hear can be boiled down to: "well, it's not what I expected" at best and at worst "why joker not comic book evil man? 😡". It's totally fine to not like the movie for whichever reasons, I certainly didn't like *every* aspect of it, but the hate is definitely overblown and a meme in of itself. Same thing with Megalopolis (Which also: not the best movie ever made, but definitely not nearly as bad as people made it up to be). It just feels like lots of people don't see movies as an art form anymore, but as a type of product that has to fulfill rigid expectations in order to feel "satisfying" or whatever. Movies cannot be experimental, self-expressionistic/indulgent or plainly weird anymore.
Anyone defending this either says "It's not what *you* expected" or "It's different". No, it sucks because nothing happens. The idea, I assume, was to re examine if Arthur really wanted to be the Joker considering the events of the first one. I gained 0 insight for most of the movie except when the little person goes into testimony.
The second story feels like something parents like to do where they take all autonomy away from their kid for some wrongdoing. So obviously this will be the way you react to a partner because you’ve never had a healthy relationship with someone you live with.
1st one is potentially the asshole. If what the guy did was super egregious and not just petty, then yeah, I get it. When somebody dies, they don’t get a vote anymore. That person is dead. They’ll never know who was at their funeral. The living will continue with whatever feelings they had after the funeral. To a degree, I think dying wishes are okay, it’s okay to put a thought out there for something you’d like after you die, but there’s no decision they get to make a final judgement on, it ain’t a birthday party or a wedding.
She had a vote when she was alive, and this was how she used it. He had a vote when she was alive too, and he used it to not have any connection with her.
The framing on the first story is so strange. The OP is talking about their older brother like he's just some guy. He's their brother too. It sounded like the sister was a very mean person and this was their last act of selfishness. In their last moments, they reverted back to a nastier version of themselves and the OP indulged in that. To deny your own brother from having any kind of closure or mourning for THEIR sibling, while understandable, is never acceptable. I understand the OP just lost a sibling at the time, but their other sibling was in pain as well. To just block them off from an event like this so callously.
yeah, that whole story is insane and Joseph sniffed how weird it was with the sister he just didn't want to speculate more and make anyone mad when he said "She did all this work and effort to forgive him but, then banished him from her funeral, and charged her sister with enforcing it when he wouldn't do the same... so.. did she really?" then refused to elaborate cause obviously she's dead and that's kinda messed up But the unsaid thing here is what OP put int he comments. She was NASTY to this man as a boy and the parents took her side every time, He was gaslite his entire life as having done ALL The wrong and she did nothing their entire childhood. So of COURSE she could "Oh, I did so much to forgive myself and him" like no shit, the family never even blamed you, it was all him the whole time they were kids, So wow what a hero you were. Forgiving yourself and DEMANDING he do the same back or you BANISHED him from the event and turned your funeral into a family division event. Whole story is fucked, and all these Redditors in here are creeps.
Gonna have to disagree with you. If the sister never sought forgiveness, then I would forgive you. But she extended an olive branch, multiple times, and her brother denied all of them. Bridges can only be built from both sides. The way I see it, him being denied from the funeral is just the consequences of *his* actions, and just consequences at that. Nobody is entitled to attend a funeral. Especially if the dead person's wish is to not have you there. A dead child can for example exclude their abusive parents from their service, and the parents have to accept that.
@@obiesenpai3869 Can we not bring abuse into this? Obviously THAT'S the exception here, but nothing in the post indicates either of them "abused" the other. If anything, the sister seemed the aggressor. The sister apologized multiple times. Sought forgiveness. The brother was not ready to forgive her. If she were sincere in her apologies and reconciliation, she would accept his rejection. Apologizing is about admitting fault and taking responsibility. This last lashing out is shirking responsibility and putting it on the victim. This only further hurts the brother and strains the OP's relationship with THEIR brother and their entire family. The sister is dead. Excluding the brother does not maker her feel better, she does not feel anything. It's just a vehicle for pain.
@@escriel I think abuse is important to consider here, since it seems implied that both parties have emotionally abused one another. You don't go to therapy to try and learn how to forgive someone if you weren't wronged by them in some way shape or form. I stand by my opinion that the brother got what he deserved. Consequences for his actions.
Save you the time on the first one: Danny admits to being a pushover, and Jordan admits to lacking creativity. You can follow a last wish but if the wish is an asshole decision then you are the one doing it the other person is dead. You can tell the brother he isn’t welcome at the funeral but proceed to do nothing to stop him. Wish followed and brother not slighted
Save you time on the second one: The councel clearly doesn’t know how easy it is to cancel a card. Jordan thinks it’s acceptable for an adult to not understand how to not spend money. It isn’t unreasonable to expect an adult to act like one. He does plenty to make sure she is taken care of (the microwaveable meals). If it were a daughter that does spends the money it wouldn’t even be argued.
I think he also forgot to mention that part of being the asshole in that situation is that you're ruining the peace and dignity of that funeral for every other person there by making a scene and disrupting the whole event, in your pursuit of fulfilling that final wish for your OWN closure. I Think they generally covered all the bases, I side more with him by 60% tho. I think as an adult, you should shoulder that guilt and do the right thing for the family and the rest of the people and let him get his closure and leave. If he makes trouble, then you put him in his place and throw him out. I'm sure everyone would help you man handle him out on his ass if he did, not tell you "just let him in" like they did when she was trying to keep him out at the door, doing nothing but asking to come in.
When I die, Joseph is not allowed at my funeral. Not for any particular reason, but that denial will be reverse psychology for his showing up
in regards to the first story, the fact that they went on a spiel about the litigious pedantry of redditors only for joseph to immediately flip to talking about how the last requests of the dead dont matter cus theyre not alive to see them being disrespected gave me a special kind of whiplash
How is that a flip
@@wideassairvents
because joseph is straight up implying it wouldnt matter what you did in the wake of being told someones request for their own funeral because theyre dead, really cant get more pedantic than that like yeah no shit they wouldnt know that's literally why you would be such a fuckin immeasurable asshole for saying "fuck that" the second they peaced out.
Joseph will go off about how much he hates redditors and they are stupid then tackle an idea with the most redditor mindset possible
Joseph consistently tries to "optimize" morality in a way that leaves me unsurprised when he says dying wishes don't matter. It's all about maximizing the gains, baby! Follow the correct line. Sure you respect the dead person, but think about how you can "improve" things with the living!
53:00 is the hardest ive disagreed with them. They are saying that HER ADDICTION is HIS FAULT for not curing it with a talk. She was pulling money out KNOWING she couldnt afford to do so: why? she cant help herself because she has a problem. Why is it his responsibility alone to fix it?
Real talk I appreciated that all three posts were very geared to have really introspective thought-provoking conversations. There were not a lot of jokes and I hope it continues as an occasional thing in between the hilarious episodes.
why does the brother need closure for a person he doesn't even have a relationship with anymore? why is the only path of closure to go to a funeral you weren't invited for? if you had a conscience, wouldn't going to a funeral uninvited make you feel worse?
I like how it has gotten to the point that they just use the term "bottle night" as just a part of their vernacular. They use it without it being a reference back to the story, but rather just as part of what they're talking about.
we take those 🍾
#1 - There is another sort of final wish. A will. Think of how this story would change if the Sister had been rich and left the guy out of her will, only for him to show up at the reading and demanded he be given some of the money.
Edit: Also, the brother is being the AH for forcing this on the living sister. He is putting OP in a position of breaking her word to the dead sister. He didn't give OP a call and ask if he could come. He just showed up uninvited and unannounced.
Edit2: You are not entitled to anything of someone else. Just being family does not give you some magical automatic right to another person.
#2 - She spent more than my monthly rent on takeout. I spent, like, a tenth of that on all of my food last month. And that isn't the cheapest junk either. I just recently had some health things come up and had to completely change my diet for the healthier.
However, in this specific situation and not the cutting off thing, OP is the AH. He did not communicate to even tell her the card was being canceled. Yes, she was the AH for spending so much on delivery. She is wrong for that. HE is wrong for not even bothering to tell her the card was going to be canceled.
Edit: It is not like he cut her off from all food. The fridge and freezer are full of food. However, he should have told her about it and for that specifically he is TA. COMMUNICATE! TALK! YOU'RE MARRIED!
Edit on the Update: Yep, guy's the AH. However, even if she is an addict, she went too far. Though just as equally, he should have done something before it got to this point.
#3 - On one hand, you get celebrations for doing things. On the other hand, yep, people not doing as well don't like being told that. Sometimes though, you have to. However, it seems they are doing things that could be celebrated. She's learning to drive. When she has learned how to drive, celebrate that! However, just as equally, they can't be a professional internet browser. Well, I guess they could? That is basically some of the Streamers out there.
Edit: The OP should have asked her what she wants to celebrate. What has she done that she thinks should be celebrated. Maybe she isn't just browsing the internet. Maybe she is writing stories, drawing, or something of the sort. The more invisible things. If she thinks she should be celebrated, find out what she thinks that celebration should be about.
Edit: If I was forced to do something at that age and then my parents tried to celebrate me doing it? I would have loathed that. Like, please, you made do! What is there to celebrate. Might as well celebrate the fact I breath because my body forces me to do it.
For the first story, as much as I agree that the living should get closure, Jordan and Joseph need to realize that attending the funeral is not the only form of closure. While John can't attend the funeral and can't get any of his sister's ashes, John is still able to see the ashes at a later date and get his closure. It'll require more effort, cause John will have to get permission from a person who holds the ashes. But that is the bed he made for himself.
There's more than one way of doing things, and you need to acknowledge when your own actions, or even values, have prevented you from certain ways of doing things.
That's exactly what this story came down to me.
I agree with a lot of the points they made in the video, especially the part that it's hard to make any decision without knowing what exactly happened between those siblings. Yes, completely denying the brother from getting any form of closure probably wouldn't be correct. Maybe it really was something that he simply couldn't face earlier. Maybe he even wanted to visit this funeral out of regret for not making up with her earlier (like a "you don't realize what you had until you lost it" kind of thing)
But ultimately, there are ways for the brother to get said closure that wouldn't involve splitting the family up further than it already seems to be.
Also on Story 2, it is financial abuse on both sides.
Having a joint bank account comes with responsibilities and if you are living paycheck to paycheck single income, Im sorry, it is reckless, unfair and abuse towards your significant other to waste money like in this case. This goes both ways. If it isnt severe, you can set boundaries on allowance money for BOTH SIDES but having a 1K take-out bill is crazy.
"What if the joker were orange and blue" You're just describing Dennis Macfield
The first story makes me think of that one A Softer World comic (167) that goes
"Mom is buried out in these woods."
"She wanted her ashes spread at sea."
"But it's like she always said."
"No."
The funeral question seems fairly simple to me. When you cut ties with someone, you need understand that you are FULLY cutting that tie. Right or wrong, that's what you've done. Any work to repair that connection must come mutually and i'm not sure that anyone owes you that.
If someone hurts me, then I peace out, and want to reconnect later, I need to accept that they may not want that like I do.
A dying wish isn't some special request, because it's made BY the living. If this were a bride making a request for her wedding to keep someone out, would they be obligated to allow someone into their space? No. Funerals are for the living, but they are ABOUT the deceased. It's the second-last vestige of an entitlement to space that most of us will have before our grave, and that entitlement doesn't end just because I died.
Nobody sounds like an asshole here, just normal hurt people.
According to the comments on the first one the Sister and Brother were pitted against each other by their parents with the sister coming out on top much more often. I'm not sure if that would change my opinion, but it's a helpful addition I think.
Absolutely 0 of the redditors under this comment would allow any amount of nuance or information about the situation, change the fact that they think that guy should be murdered for daring to show up to his own sisters funeral.
My thing on the first one, it doesnt matter what the surrounding situation is, if my sister on her deathbed said not to allow someone to the funeral, id die before they're allowed in
Same here. And if the dying wish was anything unreasonable or would cause harm, then I just wouldn’t do it. Telling someone to sit out a funeral isn’t harm.
Right! And Joe's point about maybe she was an abusive monster in life stands, regarding it not being the brother's job to reconcile. But when she was on her deathbed, that no contact policy is out the window. That person is on their way out, at that point you either say goodbye or you have severed your ties completely.
He gad zero right to go to the funeral after that.
@postcaesar4564 but it is an important moment for a lot of people though. It's where you can remember that person that was close to you with others, appreciating what they've done, who they were and what they meant to you.
For a lot of people it's just that one moment they could get that close with other people to remember that person, it's not just something you clock in and then clock out for.
Personally I'd say to the brother that the sister didn't want him to come, but he's free to attend the funeral if he feels it's something he needs.
@@IronpeckerI wish we had more context on *why* she was willing to reconcile several times but he was not. The situation is very different depending on what happened there imo
Jordan not understanding how addiction works is wild
No you see if he had just communicated a little harder then she would've snapped right out of it!
Suburban upper middle class white guy doesn't understand addiction????????
As someone who is no contact with a close family member - you guys are writing the brother too many cheques. This is a case of conflating boundary setting with trying to unilaterally dictate the terms of a relationship. Why is he entitled to come for closure that he denied the sister? We also have no idea what he was planning when he came either; it could have been exactly this drama for all we know.
TLDR you are entitled to cut out family but you can't then complain about them revoking a privilege from you
Hearing them dunk on Joker this week makes me really hope they come back to this next week to dunk on it again after Terrifier 3 made 9 times it's box office in like a day
Comic fans had their fun already, now it's real kinophiles' turn
in the first one, part of my opinion on it is that john didnt give the sister closure when she was dying so why should he get closure when she couldnt
True
Yeah Joseph was in creative reading mode when he postulated that the sister did some horrible unspeakable things that warrants the brother’s decision to only show up AFTER she’s died.
(I mean it’s totally possible but the dead sister would’ve had to have been EVIL to the brother to warrant his stay at the funeral)
In the case of the first story, I want to point some things that many (including the councel) didn't point out that I feel should have been adressed regardless of lack of info:
1) The poster is also related to these two but is so impartial. Joseph keeps saying "I can picture many horrible things someone can do to another that would separate them", but how does the third sibling fit into this? Poster doesn't mention having issues with the brother (the whole post was made cause she had doubts kicking him out), and I personally wouldn't communicate with a abusive sibling. This doesn't discredit Joseph's theory, but how could dead sister have a irreperable relationship with brother, great relation with poster, but poster and brother don't have issue?
2. As someone who's been in a funeral where I knew there were people there that hated and were hated by the dead family member, it sucks griefing while there is someone in the room there to enjoy the family reunion. It's "my baby shower in your wedding" levels of selfishness.
3. I personally think of myself as very reasonable, and in my opinion, if the last time I had talked to someone, I had successfully burned down any hope of a bridge with them, and was told not to go to their funeral, I would not have gone to their funeral alongside the people who actually got along with them. Him going to the funeral, and caused this whole family drama has compromised the poster, his other sister. Is his selfishness and wish to resolve his emotion that important he can trample over the feeling of his other two siblings? I would say he's an asshole for showing up.
Idk maybe it's just me
I think you’re onto something. If the poster just let the brother and perhaps some other family members know about how the dying wish then it might’ve helped the brother process his grief. But instead OP waited for the worst timing to tell the brother.
Hearing these guys fully acknowledge that Scenario 2 is about a woman taking her addiction out on her husband and abusing their finances to sate it and then hearing Jordan still fucking day "this wouldn't have happened if you just talked to her dude" was next level whiplash, they all just dug their heels in on the Yes The Asshole even after it was revealed she was trying to STEAL HIS MONEY FOR TAKEOUT. Insanity.
He really said "If the genders were reversed, I'd have the same opinion". If the roles were reversed, he would've called the guy a bum for not working and leeching of his wive before telling everyone to use the kill button when voting
Nah, I'm with the card-cutting husband. If you got over $1000 in takeout, that's an addiction. And before you talk to an addict about their addiction, you have to cut off their access to said addiction (in this case the credit card). That's not being an asshole, that's doing what you are supposed to do given the context.
Edit: Hey look I predicted them talking about her food addiction. And they are downplaying it because the OP has Redditidis. Also, "none of this would have happened if he had talked to her" sorry peeps, that's not how addiction works. Try talking to an alcoholic about their drinking problem and you will quickly understand why that doesn't work.
🔥
Peeps really feels like he could Talk no Jutsu most of these situations like Naruto lmao
With regards to Story 2 its astounding to me how quickly yall can just invent a books worth of pretend scenarios or motivations and then extrapolate from the pretend scenario you construct to get angry at someone.
If that guy's wife is that much of a food addict, escelates that much, and goes into that level of theatrics, I highly doubt one session of "hey babe you really gotta cool it on the spending a grand on delivery" is going to hack it. Even if he was completely silent as the behavior got worse, and their solution was to cut them off without warning, which it doesnt sound like they did despite your framing of it that way, if you were hemorrhaging that level of money for any reason youre damn right to cancel that card and drain that account. If you lost a grand in a week out of nowhere youd think you got hacked or someone swiped your info until you looked back over the transactions.
Its not great to cold turkey that level of addiction but having delt with both my own food addiction and other's more normal addictions it isnt something you just frank and open dialog your way through there has to be some level of actionable accountability, such as getting cut off from your means of doing the irresponsible shit
W
If you notice in like a lot of these posts they read they never try to assume that the people involved have tried to communicate, and, even when the post states they've clearly tried to communicate, they argue that they should have communicated harder.
In regards to the second post I understand blocking the account as an emergency response, but he should have tried to have a talk with her, or at least made his stance clear. By not telling her anything he probably just made the situation more confusing for her, and she ended up taking loans and such.
Oh boy, a new Will. I sure hope none of these Tardigrade level intellects warp entire stories around some strange and made up scenario they created!
My favorite creative writing podcast❤
No, under absolutely no circumstances does he get to deny his dying sister peace and then immediately puppeteer her memory for a false peace of his own, least of all at the funeral people who chose to be in her life are using to grieve.
a dying wish beyond "cause signifigant physical harm to a person" is almost entirely unignorable to me, i dont care how much of an asshole i am being to the person who it affects, i would feel signifgantly worse ignoring the wish than following through with it, so id say NTA
There’s an episode of the midnight gospel that goes into depth on how Americans push away from the death on a cultural level which differs from most other cultures that view a funeral as send off rather than viewing it as the cessation of all vital functions. And hearing Joseph’s stance on the first post had me like “well of course he’d say this”. Simply put, dying wishes hold cultural weight and those who don’t subscribe to those traditions aren’t burdened by it
How would you weigh a wish that "causes mental harm" to someone when you say that? Like, if a loved one has a dying wish that basically amounts to needlessly fucking with someone, would you do it?
So you'd cause a huge scene at a funeral, disrupting it and ruining everyone else's peace and attempts at quite, dignified, closure for your personal closure and the vague, spiritual concept of a dead persons final wish? That's pathetic. Grow up. You're an adult. Shoulder the guilt so everyone else can have their closure too like a fucking grown ass adult and get over yourself.
@@ashikjaman1940Most of the time dying wishes are just “Don’t let X go to my funeral” or “Spread my ashes here”. They’re not as malicious as “needlessly fucking with someone”. If excluding someone from a funeral or a couple at a beach being weirded out by seeing ashes spread, then that’s just something small they have the rest of their lives to deal process. Also dying wishes that are out of reason like “egg my ex’s Car” are just ignored.
@@postcaesar4564 so, what exactly separates the examples you gave that are okay from instances that aren't?
I have to agree with the sister on the first one and personally, it's an easy decision for me. While I understand the idea that the brother is sorta being disrespected here, we need to remember the dead sister knew she was dying, tried one last time to reach out, and got crickets.
It's one thing if she was healthy and suddenly died, but she was dying, he knew she was dying, she also had to go to therapy over what they went through, and he still didn't at least see her off. I understand wanting closure, but he also really disrespected her (based on this lack of context about their pasts) by not at least seeing her the one time. And then he goes to the funeral when she's finally had enough? I'm sorry, but I think the living sister was in the right, because the brother had multiple chances to try and get closure and just wouldn't take it.
When you put it like that it feels almost spiteful for the brother to show up to get the last word in- so to speak.
In the words of the Wisemen, James & Maso from the Weekly Planet - "Joker 2: Folly a doo-doo"
John is being extremely selfish trying to get closure when it is literally no longer an option for the sister. You made your bed dude, you gotta lie in it now. If anyone here is a true jerk, it might've been the dying sister tbh. Asking your sibling to fuck over your other sibling(whom she presumably has a stable relationship with), is kinda not cool. Put it in writing or something idk but don't saddle the innocent 3rd party with this
No. We all make our beds and some people need help getting out of it. He fucked up, this is his chance for atonement. The pain of never actually atoning to the sister's face is penance enough. This was just one last cruel act that should've never happened. OP let their sibling hurt because a hurt dead woman said to.
@@escriel so he's entitled to it? Wrong. His sister will NEVER get that chance because she's DEAD. He has to live with that.
@@Kirinmon She apologized. If it was an earnest apology, his response wouldn't have mattered since an apology is about taking accountability. Her getting so upset at the lack of forgiveness shows it might not have been an earnest apology and was seeking absolution for her sins from a person who wasn't ready to absolve them. She apologized for her actions. He will never be able to. OP has only hurt him more now.
@@escriel just because she was sorry about how they were to each other in their youth doesn't mean she can't be upset at him again. They are adults now. He chose no contact. She accepted that. He tried to change it AFTER she's dead. You don't get to do that. You don't get to rob the other person of their agency and decide for them EVER, especially not after they passed. Regardless of it all, it was HER funeral, HER wishes. The fact she even had the foresight to make this request also says a lot about her brother. She knew he would pull this crap.
@Kirinmon You're injecting a lot in here, bud. Just look at what this has caused. It's fractured the family and further hurt their brother. Just so OP can feel good that they respected their sister's selfish wish. Glad the sister can be comfortable at her funeral. Oh wait, she's dead. Doesn't feel anything.
My biggest annoyance with the second one is that they say the guy should confront her about it and potentially get a divorce then in the update he confronts her and gets a divorce then they get mad at him for it??? just insane takes on the second one
My addition to the third one though would be to see if the daughter feels she’s doing anything worth celebrating cause I wonder if the parents idea of what’s worth celebrating is just currently unreachable for the daughter but isn’t for the son. Like for me going through school I would often fail tests or only just pass so when I would put a lot of work in and get higher than a passing grade, it wasn’t an amazing academic accomplishment but it was a lot for me and while it stuff like that was never acknowledged by teachers cause I’m not top of the class my mum would and we’d celebrate, and eventually I got better at school and performed better but if the daughter is in a similar situation to me then potentially that’s the way to go
Damn that last one triggered me because I had something kinda similar happen when I was around their same age except I was on extra curriculars and getting accolades but I didn’t blow up about it after the fact. 15 years later I kinda wish I did
please use the thumbnail image for the video, it looks much much better
Not only did Jordan not know that joker 2 was a musical. But if you look at most of the reviews none of the people on the indestry seemed to know either. Everyones been acting like its some huge suprise deapite it being one of the first things they announced
So reading between the lines on the first one. I feel like the OP just didn't approve of John's stance.
Like they said in the episode John is well within his rights not to forgive the sister. Grief and trauma are complex and he is allowed to process that on his own schedule. And I can even understand the dead sister feeling a bit vengeful on her deathbed. Knowing you're gonna die without ever closing that chapter of your life has gotta suck.
But if I were to put myself in OP's shoes, beyond the principle of respecting the sister's last wishes I think I would be in my own feelings about it. If I were stuck between 2 siblings, and I was still close enough to the sister that she would trust me with ehr dying wishes, I'm probably also close enough to see and understand the struggles she went through to improve herself. I can see the perspective of "Hey she tried her hardest to reconcile in life, this funeral is for the people who cared about her go away".
Does that make OP kinda an asshole? Maybe but I think if they were close to the sister, wanted to respect her final wishes, and probably has their own opinions about how John chose to handle things that they're kinda justified in being the villain and denying him closure.
Just assuming John didn't care about her is insane. He obviously cared about her, he showed up to the funeral. If OP was close to the sister, they should've recognized this wasn't them, this last decision went against all those years of therapy and healing, just to hurt John, BOTH their brother, one last time. It's understandable that OP chose to respect her wishes, but that doesn't change the pain it caused.
@@escriel I don't think this dying wish does go against all those years of therapy or is just to hurt him. They did wrong by each other in the past, and she tried to make amends as best she could.
Then he chose to inflict new hurt on her in her final days by refusing to see her. He has the right to do that, but the dying sister is completely right to say that if that's what he wants, he doesn't get to undo it as soon as she's dead. He made that decision, and she was just stuck with it.
And if he did care about her? It would be a lot more "obvious" if he showed up while she was still alive.
I cannot get past story 1.
So since dying wishes dont matter since the person is dead, Jospeh is fine with deadnaming trans people after death if that makes the family "more comfortable"?
The brother should have taken the chance when it was actually offered to him, if he didn't want anything to do with her in life, why does he "deserve" to be at the funeral?
For the first one Joseph is putting the brother as the main character of life. In Joseph's view the brother was clean and perfect and the dead sister was literally hitler. Remember the sister didn't just reach out once she reached out multiple times. If what she did was really unforgivable then why is the brother suddenly shifting gears once the sister is dead? If what she did was really the egregious and he wanted closure he could've done it after the funeral. The fact that he went there despite knowing they're not invited them making a scene just shows how petty and selfish he is.
I think it did show a little here but Joseph is soon atheist brained. Like his view most likely stems from him thinking that this is the only life, there's no afterlife so there's really no need to respect the dead because they're fucking dead who gives a shit right? If he wasn't so funny i prolly would've blocked him in every platform lmao
Do you understand that grief is a complex emotion and that you don't just feel it for the people you love? If a person was close to you, either for good or bad reasons, it'll shock you mentally when they die and you'll have to process it.
Also it's reasonable that someone doesn't believe in an afterlife, personally I don't either, it's just a way of viewing life and the world and either I find respectable.
Imo even taking care of the wishes of the deceased is more something that someone has to do for their own sake, because they accepted that responsibility not really because it'll impact the dead person in the next life.
Also prioritizing the peace of the living beyond the wishes of the dead doesn't mean that a person doesn't care for the deceased, just that if you have to choose you'll do it one way instead of another, not just saying "fuck you if you're dead I'll disrespect you to no tomorrow".
I think the issue at play in the third story, and why I think the parent is the asshole in that situation, comes down to how their perspective was presented to the kid. Instead of saying straight up: "well, you don't do anything worth celebrating," instead they should've turned the question back on them and asked "Okay, what do you feel that you've done that we didn't properly celebrate?" It communicates the same basic idea, but it helps the kid to figure it out on their own terms and is more constructive than just telling them to "do more." Because maybe the kid does have hobbies or interests that the parents just aren't as interested in as they are, or don't fully understand. Or, if the post when taken at face value is really all that there is, it helps the kid realize "Oh shit, I don't do anything. Maybe if I want these things, I should do something." It allows them to define their own motivation as opposed to just reinforcing the idea that they need to chase after their parents' approval.
Your suggestion might have worked better, but I don't think this was so mishandled by the parent that it rises to being the asshole.
@@spectralphantom380 Eh, agree to disagree. They upset their child with the way they addressed it, and there was a better way to do it, so I think that’s sufficient criteria for a “the asshole” determination.
This comment has a great reminder that posts are made from one person's perspective. And as they've stated on the Councel before, it's very common for posts to be massaged by the OP in certain ways. I definitely do want to know more about the "stays indoors all the time" but "has no hobbies". It really feels like the Mom just doesn't care about anything her daughter enjoys and does not acknowledge anything she does as worthwhile when there could actually be something. Which might explain the outburst even more.
if the girl felt loved by her parents and they actually cared about her feelings maybe she would be excited to go do stuff or maybe they'd actually find out why she wasnt. a teen isnt gonna just watch tv all day and act depressed for no reason. If she's been forced to do activities she didnt want to do her whole life she's probably not gonna just go and do them on her own once they stop forcing her because that would just be like admitting the parents were right in forcing her. Also theyre her parents they should celebrate her for just existing, she's not doing anything bad and it kinda sucks to instil into a child that they have to have outstanding achievements to get love and attention from parents
23:27 if someone trusted me enough to give me a dying wish like that, I couldn’t break it.
Not knowing what they’ve done to each other makes it hard though.
I have to say I disagree with Jordan that Movies are all bad nowadays.
For example I watched "The Substance" last week and was blown away how much I liked it.
I agree that horror is an pretty niche genre but there are good and original movies you just have to find them.
I'd be willing to bet the guy on number 2 must have told his wife she was ordering way too much before he cut her off.
Besides, there's also the detail of the wife apparently never taking out the trash or buying groceries. If she's unable to microwave food, then it's not a wife the guy's keeping at home, it's a kid. And kids shouldn't have a say in the running of the finances. It's not owning her, it's taking proper measures.
Edit: Also giving extended details would have given the wife an opportunity to swipe the savings since this is a joint account. I would definitely have been mindful of that and not warned her that it was going to be the move once I'd settled on it.
Damn. 3 bad movies that I just listed off in one year means “movies suck nowadays”
Yeah agree, sure blockbusters sucks ass but can't really say movies suck these days in the same year fucking Challengers, Love Lies Bleeding and Monkey Man came out
@@LoneKaiser W
In the first one, John's in the wrong 100%.
He wouldn't give the sister closure on her deathbed, but expects to just be allowed in for his own closure?
He can go f himself.
Even IF he changed his mind afterwards, that's too late.
Also, he can get closure on his own. He can honor her memory on her own. He does not NEED to go to the one place that the sister specifically asked to NOT go. He can visit her grave, he can do his own night with some family, etc. The "Right to say goodbye" goes out the window in this situation
You're literally just angry You didn't even listen to anything anyone said in the discussion, lmao.
Calm the fuck down and stop being an outraged Infant child when adults are talking.
What about the closure of everyone else at the entire funeral? Who had theirs disrupted and disputed by the giant altercation caused by two people's fight and selfishness about their own closure being supreme?
Not a drop of maturity in you or anyone with your positions minds.
Why don't you calm down and let the adult talk, kiddo. Nothing you said here has any value or meaning to the actual conversation or question at hand.
You clearly just got so fuming, foaming, seething mad listening to these smart, thoughtful, men talk. That your tiny little boy brain boiled over and you came down here to vomit up your flattening, vapid, pointless, driven so you could feel better about yourself and move on without having to think. Ya gotta work on your self soothing.
48:23 while i generally agee with the guys on this, its not "her money". Its his money in which he is providing for her. Thats a weird fuckin way of looking at this. You dont have the responsibility to provide for anyone's addiction, even if its your wife.
The lesson here is to not become financially dependent on another person, assuming you want to spend money as freely as you please.
OK so on the first story, people need to understand he went no contact with the sister. On her death bed she wants to talk and he says no. IMO, that forfeits the right for the closure at the funeral. You can hang outside. You can visit the tombstone. You can pray or whatever. But this other sibling who clearly has a good relationship with this girl got one very simple request from her. Its the simplest death wish ever.
To follow this up. Lets shift the perspective. Lets say the one who dies is still the girl, and the second party is her mom. They had a massive falling out. Go no contact for 20 years. The daughter reaches out to her mom on her death bed and wants to fix things. The mom says no. The girl says she doesnt want that woman at her funeral. Do you let the mom in when she shows up uninvited?
I cane to the same position as Joseph on the first story but for an entirely different reason, there are clearly members of the family that feel the brother should be there and are likely to draw comfort from his presence in s difficult time
The first story seems almost childishly spiteful in a way I can't quite comprehend, not on the part of the poster, but the dead sister. These siblings very clearly had a lot of personal issues between them that we'll never know, but in the context of the post where he refuses to try and make up after she reaches out, so she responds by doubling down and on her deathbed saying "don't let him come to the funeral" as if she expected this guy who obviously wants nothing to do with her to show up. It just seems outlandish, and spiteful in such a bizarre way. He cut ties, and presumably you've not spoken nor seen each other in quite some time, why are you still so focused on him.
Also like you'll be dead, as long as the brother acts appropriately at the funeral what would be the harm?
As the family members have said "the funerals are for the living", was she afraid that by him being there maybe he'd remind people that she wasn't that good of a person? Especially seeing how many family members didn't mind the brother being there, I can't help but feel like the dead sister just wanted to get back at her brother one last time
God i wish joker 2 was good so bad
Peeps panda express order gave me a heart attack just listening to it
For number 2 I feel like you're the bread winner you're allowed to cancel the card after +1k on fast food but you should've communicated this before $500 was spent (long before this was figured out to be an addiction)
On the last one: why not celebrate little milestones like getting her driver's licence e.g.? Idk i feel like the daughter's reaction was predictable
This is what bugged me the most about op in the last one, like how can you say your daughter doesn't do anything worth celebrating when she is learning to drive, learning how to maintain a car etc. Even if its a smaller/different celebration than the brother it can go a long way to making your daughter feel loved.
34:23 Live audio of Danny ruining Peeps's finances and intestines
Gotta do the people's joker into joker 2 double feature
why is my twitter and reddit brainrot discussion podcast so cerebral this week
Man that first one is so thought provoking. Honestly, it's not the sisters job, but the way she describes the story she never talks to the brother either, and she fails to provide anything resembling support or perspective from him. I think at any point she could have attempted to mediate this divide, to maybe understand the brother more to have enough empathy to allow him to grieve the sister he ultimately clearly loved (because he showed up) but couldn't accept. Where our story ends is this sad, grim reality where the narrator is the asshole because she's describing her own frickin family in 3rd person omniscient like some kind of aloof arbitrator of justice. I can't even say I wouldn't do the same thing in this situation if my sibling asked something similar, but I damn sure would have tried to have a more nuanced understanding of my own family's interpersonal conflicts.
Yeah, this comment hits the most for me. She felt so firmly she had to carry out her sisters will but speaks of her entire family as if she exits outside of it and has for the extent of this entire life long falling out. I guess there was some info in the thread about how the parents turned the kids on each other in the household, and took this dead sisters side when she would go in on the exiled brother. Making this even more insane.
Also making the psychos in this thread calling him a PoS or whatever, even MORE the type of kneejerk, black and white, no nuance, worthless, Reddit Trash the boys read for filth in the clip. TRIPLE so since it sounds like those guilty parents and family were split on just letting him in. Joseph once again just right to question the absolutism and Redditors SEETHING to hear a different opinion ALLOWED To exist.
@@polishpipebomb you are all over these comments seething over people having opinions
@@spectralphantom380 I'm not the one who went and found your comments on other threads to scold you about your posts, Lmao.
Who's seething, here?
For story 1 i think the guy gaves up his rights to attend the funeral when she asked to met with him on her death bed and he said no. You were given the opportunity to make amends while she was alive and i think its very selfish to try and give yourself closer after denying hers.
For story 1, this is not a dying wish. we're enacting a blood feud. And I don't think you are compelled to carry out a blood feud.
In the absence of knowing how and to what extent they were cruel to each other, it's hard to come down either way. In the same vein, I kind of take the view that Joseph put forward: did she really grow as much from therapy as is reported? To take such a spiteful action, splitting the two remaining siblings down the middle, when John found her actions so egregious that he couldn't bear to reconcile with her on her deathbed.
I don't know. I hope I never personally hate someone that much.
So this last scenario is the EXACT thing I live with everyday. In high school I started marching band and did well academically. My sister holds a lot of resentment towards me, including the fact that I got to way more opportunities growing up. However, there was plenty of time for her to develop her own hobbies, she started high school when I went to college. Though I will admit, her being dyslexic did hold her back in some ways, and covid ruined her senior year, I'm not sure what my parents could have helped her do more. There was so little she ever showed interest in that I wonder if counselor or a therapist could have even made a difference. To some extent kids have to forge their own identity, a parent can help, but only so much.
First one was a really great discussion. Still not sure where i stand on it, but the Councel had great points all around
2nd one... well, ill just say that i really enjoyed Jordan saying "I'd feel the same way if the genders were flipped, trust me" and then 5 minutes later "i really hate when men do this... i mean when people do this"
you guys make me so mad that I'm gonna watch joker 2
Regardless of the rights of the deceased vs rights of the living bit on the first question, I really disagree with the idea of the rest of the family's opinion mattering at all on what path one should take. Either you think john's wishes matter more bc he's not yet dead, or you think dead girl's wishes matter more bc it's her funeral. If there was abuse here, even mutual, I wouldn't want other people in my family to get to weigh in on whether the abuse was severe enough that I should or should not be allowed to exclude someone from my funeral for that reason. Ignore me bc I'm gone or believe me when I decide who gets to still counts as MY family.
2nd story is crazy i'm pretty sure this the greed they talked about in the bible
16:55 I think Jordan is a little bit too quick to assume that it's not a vindictive closure. I totally get the sister's perspective of not wanting him to be at the funeral, because if he was unwilling to make amends even with his dying sister, what is stopping him from humiliating her even at his sister's funeral?
How is it not YOU people's automatic and "too quick" assumption that he IS there for a vindictive closure?
This man GHOSTED her HIS ENTIRE LIFE. What POSSIBLE evidence is there he's there to suddenly cause some huge scene and "humiliate" her?!! what the fuck are you even talking about?!? Is this comment section on heroin?! Did the people form this reddit thread show up here?
@@polishpipebomb why are you citing "This man GHOSTED her HIS ENTIRE LIFE" as evidence he went there in good faith?
@@spectralphantom380 That's my point, It's not evidence. Just like this guys implication that his not making up with her before death but showing up anyway is in anyway a sign or implication of some nefarious plan to "Humiliate" her.
It's just made up, fictional. Nothing OP said in the OG post, even if you go read it, even comes close to implying anything of the sort. People are just basically making up scary things he MIGHT have done to justify their feelings.
@@polishpipebomb Take a chillpill. If he didn't even want to speak to her on her deathbead because of bad blood between them, it's perfectly reasonable to assume that this bad blood didn't magically disappear after her death.
I agree with MBT on the first story. If I was in this situation, I’d likely ignore a dying wish if I felt it conflicted with my personal beliefs on how things should be done. The brother being alive has a greater right to his wish that the sister who is dead, in my mind
In the first story I don't think there is anything to do with right or wrong. Fulfilling someone's death wish is entirely up to the individual. If they don't want to or think it's important they aren't in the wrong to do so and vice versa. So I don't even understand why this is a question when it's entirely up to the person that's fulfilling/not fulfilling someone's death wish.
1. Correct
2. Correct
3. Correct
Bottle Night mentioned: 9 episodes (two on patreon)
KILLS: 7 (two on Patreon - Kill Button merch when?)
see ya next time :)
As someone who grew up around multiple cultures who honor dying wishes, it was grueling to sit through Joseph’s take on the first one, cuz it’s like?? Yes? You honor the dying wish if it’s within reason and in the first post’s scenario the living sibling has the rest of their life to find closure and can afford to miss out on this one day. I think the way joseph put dying wishes as “Genie Wishes” is a bad faith take to have because if a dying wish was something unreasonable then it just wouldn’t happen. I think OP in the first post should’ve let others know about the dying wish instead of waiting for the last possible moment to let someone know they’re not invited.
It’s not that hard.
I think the problem with how you're going about this is that "unreasonable" is subjective. Like, you're saying it's not a big deal that the sibling misses the funeral because they have their entire life to move on but that's because you don't view being at the funeral as a big deal in the grand scheme of things.
If, for example, the brother is from a culture that really puts an emphasis on the funeral as their absolute last chance to see them and they view that there's not going to be another moment that matters when it comes to reconciliation, then the rest of their life doesn't matter.
Personally I disagreed with Joseph too but with the limited context we're given this isn't the kind of scenario where any answer is definitively correct.
If the dying wish involves hurting another person, physically, mentally, or emotionally, the wish isn't worthy of respect. This was a last act of selfishness by the sister, an undoing of everything she worked on in therapy. This doesn't help her at all, it just leads to more pain and hatred. I don't fault the OP for not recognizing this and "being the bigger person", but their sibling died and their other sibling is in a lot of pain. A person should never be denied the chance to grieve a loved one with their family.
@@escrielhe's not being denied that, because she isn't a loved one. You don't get to explicitly refuse to see someone on their deathbed and call them a loved one a week later.
@@spectralphantom380 yes you do. life is very complicated. he made a mistake, he should be given the chance to apologize same as she was given. He didn't forgive her and now she's hurting him more.
@@escrielHe can't apologize. She's dead now.
I'm disappointed that the councel didn't even mention the most important part of the first post: the sister specifically mentioned the brother not attending her funeral... AND not getting any of her ashes.
Bro Joseph has been on a streak of dog ass opinions lately lmao
brother in first scenario has no right to show up to the funeral imo
denied the sister her closure in life but he wants his closure in her death? gtfo
at that point why does the brother even care? the sister was ostensibly a stranger in his life to the point he would not visit her in death but is like "ohi have to show up at the funeral of this person who is basically a stranger?"
You guys are really reading into the second one and making up a lot of stuff that might not be happening. It's not an "own" I could easily understand that act being done as stopping the constant drain on their finances because they can't afford it.
I could see your side if after cancelling the card and moving the money out of the account, he at that point told his partner.
I can support the financial steps taken even if he should've communicated better earlier. But there is no excuse for giving your partner no warning that they now have no access to money.
I like how because the post didn't say "We had a long conversation where we both outlined how we feel and it went like this" they assume the married man with control of the money who takes out the garbage had literally never talked to his wife about her fast food bills steadily growing by literal hundreds of dollars, and instead just noticed it one day and said "Erm, nope! no more money for you beach!! Reddit's gonna love this one!"
@@spectralphantom380 I would say that it is ok in this case because the wife is using the money to feed an addiction.
Before you address someone having an addiction, you have to remove their access to said addiction. Especially if they are using your money to get it. Then you have the conversation.
You don't talk to an alcoholic while they have easy access to alcohol for example.
The guy does have a big case of Redditidis, but he certainly was not in the wrong, and in fact did exactly what he needed to do (especially considering the fact that the wife was using his own money to feed her addiction).
@@obiesenpai3869 I already said this but I will clarify again. I understand not warning them before you move the money so they cannot stop you. It is unforgivable that AFTER THAT, she found out that she had no access to money by trying to use money. You absolutely must inform someone that their money has been taken away once it's been done. It was relatively fine in this case but there are a lot of ways for things to go very badly if someone goes somewhere under the misapprehension that the card(s) they're carrying means they have money if they need it.
Again no subtitles. This is not good :{
________________________________________
OH the subtitles came Wonderful. This is now Great :}
Sad we didn’t get a 30 minute section where Joseph talks non stop about Megalopolis and how great it is, just for the bit
Ayy yo
53:18 bro would rather get a divorce than speak to his wife properly once 😂
can you all just go see Transformers One instead
please god
While I can’t agree with Joseph’s take on the first story I can understand why people would allow someone who is alive to get that closure regardless of a dying wish
To be honest the idea of a Harley Quinn musical actually sounds really fun
But it isn't a Harley Quinn musical.
It is a Joker musical with Harley Queen supposedly on a supporting role
I'm gonna be contrarian that says dying wishes mean absolutely nothing. By all means, make whatever promises you must to give a dying person peace, that's only a good thing. But once they're dead, renegging on the promise is a victimless crime. Life belongs to the living. All that the first poster achieved was straining family relations, for no reason.
Serious question, how old are you?
you have got to conceptualize some type of morality beyond "Well theyre not here anymore so no one can be mad at me"
@@gamekid537 Why? Do you believe in ghosts?
@@gamekid537 It's a very simple moral system, you prioritize who's still here compared to who isn't here anymore.
At least for me it doesn't mean to completely ignore EVERYTHING that a dying person wishes for, but if it's between the wishes of a dead person and the peace/wellbeing of the living I'll prioritize the living.
And even then I'm conscious that when I'm realizing the wish of someone who's dead it's more for my own closure than anything else, I don't really believe in an afterlife so I don't think that anything I do will have an effect on the dead person or anything.
The one thing I care the most about a dead person is their memory, remembering them and making sure that nobody spreads lies about who they were.
I think it's a perfectly valid belief system
@@Ironpecker thats pretty valid, and what i said doesn't really apply to you since you actually think about the wishes of that dead person. Im not claiming that that person even exists anymore after they died, but i am saying that how they felt and what they wanted in that moment matters, the things they ask of you shouldn't be thrown out the window the moment they die. If they ask you to take care of their plants or something after they die you should at least try to make it work and not throw your hands up because theyre dead and you aren't obligated anymore. It is the LAST THING they asked of you, its probably kind of important to them even if you see it as ridiculous.
And as for the actual post, i dont think the poster is in the wrong, the guy had no way of knowing that him refusing his sister however shitty she was would get him barred from the funeral but thats just how the cookie crumbled. The dead person at least has a right to say who can be at their funeral. That said the guy isn't really an asshole either, hes obviously still going through shit about the sister, and sure the other sister could help or reach out, but its hard scenario to be inside of.
I very much unironically liked a Joker 2 very much! I think the large majority of people who didn't like the movie were actually the people who thought "whoah joker is so awesome when he killed those guys" and are upset about how Fleck faces the consequences of his actions and spoilers, doesn't want to be the joker anymore. I might be a little bit of a contrarian but, I thought the reckoning with his actions and his past was super super interesting.
Bait used to be believable
I went into the movie expecting to hate it and to see the worst slob ever, but the movie is surprisingly fine. Idk if people just lost the ability to take a movie for what's it worth, but a lot of the criticism I hear can be boiled down to: "well, it's not what I expected" at best and at worst "why joker not comic book evil man? 😡". It's totally fine to not like the movie for whichever reasons, I certainly didn't like *every* aspect of it, but the hate is definitely overblown and a meme in of itself.
Same thing with Megalopolis (Which also: not the best movie ever made, but definitely not nearly as bad as people made it up to be). It just feels like lots of people don't see movies as an art form anymore, but as a type of product that has to fulfill rigid expectations in order to feel "satisfying" or whatever. Movies cannot be experimental, self-expressionistic/indulgent or plainly weird anymore.
Anyone defending this either says "It's not what *you* expected" or "It's different". No, it sucks because nothing happens. The idea, I assume, was to re examine if Arthur really wanted to be the Joker considering the events of the first one. I gained 0 insight for most of the movie except when the little person goes into testimony.
The second story feels like something parents like to do where they take all autonomy away from their kid for some wrongdoing. So obviously this will be the way you react to a partner because you’ve never had a healthy relationship with someone you live with.
1st one is potentially the asshole. If what the guy did was super egregious and not just petty, then yeah, I get it. When somebody dies, they don’t get a vote anymore. That person is dead. They’ll never know who was at their funeral. The living will continue with whatever feelings they had after the funeral. To a degree, I think dying wishes are okay, it’s okay to put a thought out there for something you’d like after you die, but there’s no decision they get to make a final judgement on, it ain’t a birthday party or a wedding.
She had a vote when she was alive, and this was how she used it. He had a vote when she was alive too, and he used it to not have any connection with her.
The framing on the first story is so strange. The OP is talking about their older brother like he's just some guy. He's their brother too. It sounded like the sister was a very mean person and this was their last act of selfishness. In their last moments, they reverted back to a nastier version of themselves and the OP indulged in that. To deny your own brother from having any kind of closure or mourning for THEIR sibling, while understandable, is never acceptable. I understand the OP just lost a sibling at the time, but their other sibling was in pain as well. To just block them off from an event like this so callously.
yeah, that whole story is insane and Joseph sniffed how weird it was with the sister he just didn't want to speculate more and make anyone mad when he said "She did all this work and effort to forgive him but, then banished him from her funeral, and charged her sister with enforcing it when he wouldn't do the same... so.. did she really?" then refused to elaborate cause obviously she's dead and that's kinda messed up
But the unsaid thing here is what OP put int he comments. She was NASTY to this man as a boy and the parents took her side every time, He was gaslite his entire life as having done ALL The wrong and she did nothing their entire childhood. So of COURSE she could "Oh, I did so much to forgive myself and him" like no shit, the family never even blamed you, it was all him the whole time they were kids, So wow what a hero you were. Forgiving yourself and DEMANDING he do the same back or you BANISHED him from the event and turned your funeral into a family division event.
Whole story is fucked, and all these Redditors in here are creeps.
Gonna have to disagree with you. If the sister never sought forgiveness, then I would forgive you. But she extended an olive branch, multiple times, and her brother denied all of them.
Bridges can only be built from both sides. The way I see it, him being denied from the funeral is just the consequences of *his* actions, and just consequences at that.
Nobody is entitled to attend a funeral. Especially if the dead person's wish is to not have you there. A dead child can for example exclude their abusive parents from their service, and the parents have to accept that.
@@obiesenpai3869 Can we not bring abuse into this? Obviously THAT'S the exception here, but nothing in the post indicates either of them "abused" the other. If anything, the sister seemed the aggressor.
The sister apologized multiple times. Sought forgiveness. The brother was not ready to forgive her. If she were sincere in her apologies and reconciliation, she would accept his rejection. Apologizing is about admitting fault and taking responsibility. This last lashing out is shirking responsibility and putting it on the victim. This only further hurts the brother and strains the OP's relationship with THEIR brother and their entire family.
The sister is dead. Excluding the brother does not maker her feel better, she does not feel anything. It's just a vehicle for pain.
@@escriel I think abuse is important to consider here, since it seems implied that both parties have emotionally abused one another. You don't go to therapy to try and learn how to forgive someone if you weren't wronged by them in some way shape or form.
I stand by my opinion that the brother got what he deserved. Consequences for his actions.
Save you the time on the first one: Danny admits to being a pushover, and Jordan admits to lacking creativity.
You can follow a last wish but if the wish is an asshole decision then you are the one doing it the other person is dead. You can tell the brother he isn’t welcome at the funeral but proceed to do nothing to stop him. Wish followed and brother not slighted
Save you time on the second one: The councel clearly doesn’t know how easy it is to cancel a card. Jordan thinks it’s acceptable for an adult to not understand how to not spend money. It isn’t unreasonable to expect an adult to act like one. He does plenty to make sure she is taken care of (the microwaveable meals). If it were a daughter that does spends the money it wouldn’t even be argued.
it's almost crazy how wrong they were this whole episode, i don't think they've ever been 0/3 before
A lot of people in the comments saying that communication doesn’t do shit
Damn…
Sorry Joseph is correct in the first one, full stop
Sorry, the problem is more nuanced than that, so peeps and luke are also right, full stop.
@@deadcastor9680CORRECT!!!☝️☝️
I think he also forgot to mention that part of being the asshole in that situation is that you're ruining the peace and dignity of that funeral for every other person there by making a scene and disrupting the whole event, in your pursuit of fulfilling that final wish for your OWN closure. I Think they generally covered all the bases, I side more with him by 60% tho.
I think as an adult, you should shoulder that guilt and do the right thing for the family and the rest of the people and let him get his closure and leave. If he makes trouble, then you put him in his place and throw him out. I'm sure everyone would help you man handle him out on his ass if he did, not tell you "just let him in" like they did when she was trying to keep him out at the door, doing nothing but asking to come in.
Wrong