• tetris11
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’m not getting it. Creepy how?

    • magnetosphere@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Creepy in the sense that keeping the room intact was a monument to pain, and handling that pain in an incredibly unhealthy way. It’s just too sad.

      If they just moved on and cleaned the room out, it would be fine. I’m not talking about ghosts or any crap like that.

              • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                In this specific case, it actually seems fine to me. Like the other poster said, what are they supposed to do, turn their dead son’s room into a home theater? I’m sure that won’t put a damper on movie night. /s

                As it is, it serves as a much more immersive version of a photograph. I don’t see the harm.

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            It’s not, but if a sudden change in acceptability happens do to a continuous change in scale, I feel very comfortable asking why.

            • NauticalNoodle
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              It’s an awkward situation for sure. I’m trying to imagine what could be done with the room if they cleaned it out. All I can think is that they could never convert it into a room that they would want to spend time in, and the only alternative seems to be storage which almost seems disrespectful to the memory.

              • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                Yeah. I mostly just thought this was a sweet memorial. It doesn’t necessarily mean they’re in denial or anything, they just want to keep a piece of him there like most grieving people do.

        • Alice@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          To me personally, it’s a difference in the function of a room versus photos. Photos were always intended to capture memories, whereas a room was meant to be used and lived in. The idea of keeping the room as it was, permanently, feels like stagnation to me. I worry once it stopped being a comforting space, I still couldn’t bring myself to do anything with it because it would reopen the wound, so I’d just ignore it and live around it, and the feeling of stagnation would grow heavier.

          But also everyone grieves differently, and I’ve never lost a child, so I can only guess how I’d grieve based on how I’ve grieved other relationships. It’s possible no one in that family feels the way I described. That’s just my best answer for why it sounds creepy to a bunch of us.

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Thank you. I’ve never lost a child either, and I’m not a therapist. This isn’t the first time I’ve heard of this happening, though, so I was surprised at the reaction.