Joe Budden and Ish argue over an ex. Who was right?

[Astroslik]

Pure cornball shyt on all sides here.

Never in life have I ever been around anyone who would say some shyt like "I'm not policing that box" when referring to their old work that wasn't turning right around and handing out citations for anyone getting too close like women are no parking zones.

Joe is fukking foul because he's playing bullshyt ass semantics to eurostep around pulling some fukk shyt. If you said you wouldn't entertain any of your friends' exes, having her over to smoke hookah isn't really the move. On top of that, him refusing to be forthcoming with details but still expecting to be thanked for not fukking ol' girl (despite it being something he said he was never going to do anyway) definitely says he's a fukking terrible friend.

Joe probably has only 2 real friends in his life. These aren’t his friends, they are associates.

 

[Braman]

So you’re using an argument of what Joe used to do ten years ago

Nah

In context Man Law is when a dude is done with a girl, the homies have to basically lose all contact

The only context that works is if a dude was friends with a girl before his homie started dating her, they’re publicly known to be good friends, or the ex/friend doesn’t give a fukk

If this were the other way around Joe would cut ties with ish on some petty shyt

If this were two girls, and one of those girls hung out with the other’s ex smoking hookah at a dudes crib, hair is getting pulled

I’m assuming this happened 10 years ago. Did they specify? Also budden was havin pool petite as recently as 2019

I’m also assum it it wasn’t a 1 on 1 thing. Again, did they specify? That really answers everything.

A blanket ‘no contact ’ is just silly. Childish. First of all I’m never IN ‘contact’ when they’re dating, and not when she becomes an ex either. But over the course of a relationship mutual acquaintances get made. By ‘contact’ we talkin show up at the same event or kick back. That’s perfectly fine as long as it’s a large group and no intent.

 

[verbalkint]

So assuming its a group setting seemingly mature adults are jazzy jeffing some female a (former)friend used to deal with? Clearly Joe is being a d1ck not clarifying but is that a man law obligation?

 

[Legal]

So assuming its a group setting seemingly mature adults are jazzy jeffing some female a (former)friend used to deal with? Clearly Joe is being a d1ck not clarifying but is that a man law obligation?

I would say so.

I'd say clarifying would be an obligation even in a plain old argument, let alone one about whether you snaked for friend or not. Assuming he actually didn't do anything foul, clarifying exactly what happened and how clears that out automatically. For me, him trying to play coy with the details is all I need to know that some shadiness was at minimum heavily considered or attempted, if not followed through on.

 

[verbalkint]

I would say so.

I'd say clarifying would be an obligation even in a plain old argument, let alone one about whether you snaked for friend or not. Assuming he actually didn't do anything foul, clarifying exactly what happened and how clears that out automatically. For me, him trying to play coy with the details is all I need to know that some shadiness was at minimum heavily considered or attempted, if not followed through on.

Lol I meant the jazzy jeff part not the clarifying part. I think we're all in agreement on that part.

 

[Braman]

So assuming its a group setting seemingly mature adults are jazzy jeffing some female a (former)friend used to deal with?

I would say so.

 

[Uchiha God]

Joe trying to gaslight his mans like he one of thems hoes from a developing country, he likes to smash

 

[010101]

SCUMMY*

 

[Silver Surfer]

Not sure why they didn't run the fade....

 

[Ahadi]

People can tell you all day what they won’t do, but wont know until the opportunity presents itself. Ish being mad over what Joe said is corny and yelling about it is cornier.

Is Joe right? No. But Ish shouldn’t still be angry. He should just know he can’t trust Joe to keep his word.

He’s more angry at the bro code violation than the bytch & the fact the he isn’t fighting to clear it up.

Been through the same shyt, it wasn’t so much the woman, I’ll get another. It’s more so, as a man with no ethics or principles. That’s an ass beating / blood debt.

 

[Ethnic Vagina Finder]

Not sure why they didn't run the fade....

Over a bytch neither one is smashing or has kids with?

 

[seemorecizzy]

Big fan of Budden's music but he seems like a handful as a friend lol

Dude in da pink wasn't wrong at all, he became angry when Joe kept cutting him off, changing da arguement, and essentially trolling him lol.

Bottom line, joe said he's uncomfortable talking to his friend's exes in any fashion. He lied, because he had girl over and they were smoking and vibing.

Only thing working in joe's favor is that apparently they weren't friends during this time period and were in da middle of a 6 year falling out. Even so, Joe is wrong

 

[Ethnic Vagina Finder]

Big fan of Budden's music but he seems like a handful as a friend lol

Dude in da pink wasn't wrong at all, he became angry when Joe kept cutting him off, changing da arguement, and essentially trolling him lol.

Bottom line, joe said he's uncomfortable talking to his friend's exes in any fashion. He lied, because he had girl over and they were smoking and vibing.

Only thing working in joe's favor is that apparently they weren't friends during this time period and were in da middle of a 6 year falling out. Even so, Joe is wrong

That doesn’t mean he wasn’t uncomfortable


Y’all are making too many assumptions and don’t even know what happened.

 

[Braman]

The biggest reason for this fukkery is the use of the word entertain. No one says “entertain”.

The words 95% of us would use in this context would be….‘’mess with’. We ALL know what it means. You don’t mess with your homies ex. No man in the history of Nggadom has had to clarify what ‘mess with’ means, hence we use it. It entails smashing , kissing, touching, dating, flirting. We all get it.

But when you use ‘entertain’ well now you got nggas

Case in point are you ‘messing with’ your homies ex if her and her girls are over with a large group at a kickback/party? No.

But are you “entertaining” your homies ex if her and her girls are over with a large group at a kickback/party? Well not in the spirit of the word, but technically yes, but that’s not what we mean, I mean …… And here we are

 

[Ahadi]

So you’re using an argument of what Joe used to do ten years ago

Nah

In context Man Law is when a dude is done with a girl, the homies have to basically lose all contact

The only context that works is if a dude was friends with a girl before his homie started dating her, they’re publicly known to be good friends, or the ex/friend doesn’t give a fukk

If this were the other way around Joe would cut ties with ish on some petty shyt

If this were two girls, and one of those girls hung out with the other’s ex smoking hookah at a dudes crib, hair is getting pulled

And if they were friends before, homies are suppose to take a back seat when she has a man.