...is that the brother was not simply upset with the situation - i.e. his sister and his roommate having sex in his apartment. It went deeper than that. He indicated to her that he did not want her to befriend him. He didn't just ask her not to have sex with him, or not to flirt with him. He told her not to even be his friend. His over the top overreaction to the incident also indicates as much - he was not merely annoyed by it, he was personally hurt. It sounds like, if she had left the next day, he would still be feeling the pain of what had happened, and letting her know in whatever way he could how miserable he was.

This kind of behavior is not indicative of the practical concerns about not rocking the boat in cramped living quarters that people around here have brought up in brothers defense. It indicates a sense of entitlement on the brothers part that is inappropriate. Plainly and simply, he was trying to use her "promise" to control her social life, and to dictate to her who she could and couldn't connect with. The level of upset on his part after she broke her "promise" indicates a continued attempt on his part to manipulate her into bending to his will on this.

I don't care how many promises she made to him under his roof while sleeping rent free on his couch. This kind of behavior on his part is beyond inappropriate, and crosses well into the realm of personally invasive. A boundary was crossed by him, and needs to be re-established by her. An apology from her is not going to make that possible.

"As I said before, booty is fleeting but family is forever. It's not about control of her body. It's about the compromises, boundaries, and respect that make families functional."

HE is the one who is putting a strain on family bonds by his insistence that he gets to decide, in at least this instance, who she can and can't make a connection with. HE is the one who is not letting this go, and thus, not allowing this rift in the fabric of family to heal. If you really have such a high regard for the bond of family, why is your judgment all directed solely at her, and not at him for his part in this? Where are his compromises? What about respecting her boundaries?

I disagree with you that the brother's request was simply about behavior. That would have been the case if he had asked her not to have sex with him, or not to flirt with him. But he asked her not to befriend him. That is a request that goes beyond mere behavior, and into the realm of personal freedom. Who we choose to make connections with is one of those fundamental choices that gets to the heart of who we are. The brother's over the top behavior after the incident, and his refusal to simply let it go, reinforces the notion that he wasn't just concerned with her behavior, but had something deeper and broader and more personally invasive in mind.

Also, how can you say that the letter writer seems to have no remorse? Her letter is dripping with remorse. She said she cried every day. She said she was "deeply sorry" for having hurt someone she loved. She says things like this again and again and again throughout the letter. As I have previously stated, I don't think the letter writer owes her brother any kind of an apology, as it was he who violated a personal boundary here, and she who needs to re-establish that boundary. She has shown plenty of remorse here. Now its time for him to show a little remorse for his role in this rift.

"Words can't describe what I went through after this. It wasn't even arguing, it was him feeling disgust toward me and insulting me in the worst possible way."

Does that sound like someone who was just reasonably irked that his sister was not spending as much time with him as he would have liked? Don't you think, if brother really was just upset about the level of attention she was giving him, he would have simply said something to that effect, instead of resorting to insult and disgust? Also, if it really was just a matter of him not getting the attention he felt he deserved, why did (a) he specifically ask her not to befriend the roommate, and (b) the insults begin so abruptly after the sex happened?

Everything in this letter indicates that the brother's issue was not with WHAT she was doing, but with WHO she was doing. And therein lies the problem. The brother has a reasonable right to be concerned with what she was doing - or not doing - in his apartment. If he was upset that she was having sex in his place, that is understandable. However, the letter makes it clear that it wasn't just the sex. It was, specifically, sex with the roommate - and not "the roommate" in the generic: specifically, THAT roommate - that he objected to. And that's a claim that he doesn't have the right to make over her.

And yes, the letter writer is expressing legitimate remorse. She is expressing the kind of formless remorse that exists before you have a name for your sorrow. The kind of remorse that you feel when you know that you have hurt someone you love, but don't exactly understand why. When you desperately want to go back and undo whatever it is that you did that caused such offense, but at the same time have legitimately no idea where that raw nerve is that you somehow touched. As I previously said, she appears to be showing a whole lot more remorse for this whole situation than he is, and she shouldn't issue any more apologies until he starts reciprocating.