Older Roommates Pressure Broke 18-Year-Old To Fund Their Dream Decor While She Happily Lives In ‘Concrete Box’

An 18-year-old finally lands her first real apartment, only to face two older roommates – 23 and 33 – who demand she funds their full-blown Pinterest makeover for the bare common areas. One lone couch sits in the echoing living room; they want fairy lights, rugs, and throw pillows, split three ways because “that’s fair.”

She shrugs: “Decorate all you want, just nothing permanent” and refuses to pay a cent for knick-knacks she never asked for and doesn’t like. Cue the meltdown: guilt trips, dirty looks, and the 33-year-old loudly telling guests the place looks depressing “because the teenager won’t contribute.” Now the concrete-box lover is the villain for daring to keep her money and her minimalism.

An 18-year-old refuses to pay for roommates’ decor, triggers fight over blank walls never asked for.

Meeting the roommates from hell (or at least the roommates from Etsy) can feel like stepping onto the set of a low-budget sitcom.

On one side we have two grown women who apparently arrived with zero furniture or decor of their own, and on the other a freshman who’s perfectly happy with blank walls and functional furniture.

The clash isn’t really about throw blankets, it’s about wildly different priorities and a sneaky sense of entitlement.

From the roommates’ perspective, an empty living room is embarrassing, especially when guests notice. They see the common areas as “shared,” so naturally everyone should chip in for the upgrade.

From OP’s perspective, she didn’t create the emptiness (previous tenants took everything), she doesn’t enjoy decor, and forcing her to pay for something that brings her zero joy feels unfair.

Both sides have a point, but only one side is trying to make the youngest, least financially independent person subsidize their aesthetic.

This situation shines a light on a surprisingly common roommate headache: who pays for “vibes”? A 2023 Apartment List survey found that 38% of renters have argued with roommates over shared household expenses, with decor and furniture upgrades being a top trigger. The older roommates’ passive-aggressive blame game also hints at an age-power dynamic that’s uncomfortable to watch.

Financial planner Anna Sergunina advises on roommate finances: “That way, in the future, if something comes up, you’ll have a document you can refer to.”

That quote fits this story perfectly. The roommates assumed “we all benefit, we all pay,” but never asked whether OP actually values the benefit. Negotiation never happened, guilt-tripping did.

Neutral advice? Put it in writing. A simple roommate agreement stating “common-area upgrades are optional and paid only by interested parties” prevents this exact meltdown.

If the older two want the space Instagram-ready, they can fund it themselves and take the items when they leave, no messy fights over who owns a $12 fake plant.

OP could even offer a tiny compromise (like splitting a cheap rug) to keep the peace, but she’s under zero obligation. Your home should reflect the people who care enough to pay for it, not guilt the ones who don’t.

Here’s how people reacted to the post:

Some people say NTA because the older roommates are unfairly pressuring an 18-year-old to pay for non-essential decor they want.

Some people say NTA and point out practical problems with splitting decor costs, especially ownership when someone moves out.

Some people say NTA because decor is a personal want, not a shared necessity, and OP gains no real benefit from it.

At the end of the day, nobody is entitled to your money just because they want prettier walls, especially not when you’re 18, working part-time, and perfectly content with your “jail cell chic” aesthetic. The roommates can buy their own macramé and stop throwing shade.

Would you have caved and chipped in $50 to avoid the drama, or held the line like OP? How do you handle roommates who want luxury on a shared budget? Drop your verdict below!