Mechanics of an Argument - Gaming World Forums

Mechanics of an Argument (Read 4312 times)

Print

goldenratio

#41 May 27, 2008, 11:18:17 pm

now das fresh
Group: Member
Joined: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 4550

I dont even understand what you mean by "DIVORCE IS IMPOSSIBLE" because (and i dont know any real numbers) a huge percentage of marriages in the US end in divorce so you are pretty much talking complete bullshit out of your horse's ass for a mouth.

yes coulombs are "germaine", did you learn that word at talk like a dick school?

Logged

Grunthor

#42 May 27, 2008, 11:21:48 pm

Firbolg Warrior
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Dec 9, 2002
Posts: 1201

Quote from: Bondo

Possible approach:

Me: I wouldn't mind getting a 360.
Wife: You're not getting a 360.
Me: What? Why not?
Wife: Because I said so.
Me: Nevermind. Forget I mentioned it.

I would recommend against this approach. By cutting off the conversation you'll just create tension between the two of you. Trust me I've tried it before (which may be part of the reason I'm divorced).

Gaming World Mini City: Population, Industry, Transportation, Security Current rank 3950.
Click a different link each day.

Logged

Blitzen

#43 May 27, 2008, 11:41:22 pm

some sort of land-cow
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 935

My ex-girlfriend had mastered the art of passive agression.

In your case, if you want these issues resolved, you may have to escalate the situation. If you know your relationship is secure enough to withstand an XBOX argument, call her out on being passive agressive. Ask her why she won't tell you what she's thinking, and make sure you mention that if she doesn't want you to do something that you want to do, you're not going to resent her for it. I don't think a woman in an argument in so intent on winning as feeling secure with a resolution. Of course, the most secure resolution is that you cave and she wins, but if you are calm and take an air of compassion and understanding, and coax her to reveal what's really on her mind, you can resolve the disagreement in another way.

Of course, if she's an impossible bitch be prepared for things to get muddy but keep your wits about you and keep it from sinking into some kind of a verbal shitsling at all costs, is my advice.

outerspacepotatoman

Logged

headphonics

#44 May 27, 2008, 11:45:20 pm

sea of vodka
Group: Member
Joined: Dec 24, 2003
Posts: 6432

Yeah, I can't believe no one's suggested that yet, but maybe we all felt it was sort of a foregone conclusion. Why don't you, instead of arguing about all the silly shit like Xboxes and whatever else, just have a discussion about THIS, what you're talking about with us? About how she argues (or refuses to argue, or whatever) and acts irrational and dismisses and controls and all that. I think discussing your issues in the open would be a lot more constructive than asking a bunch of nerds how to get an Xbox behind your wife's back!

Logged

goldenratio

#45 May 27, 2008, 11:46:44 pm

now das fresh
Group: Member
Joined: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 4550

"honey isn't it amazing this was just laying on the street!"

yes coulombs are "germaine", did you learn that word at talk like a dick school?

Logged

datamanc3r

#46 May 28, 2008, 12:21:49 am

The Irrepressible
Group: Member
Joined: Nov 24, 2004
Posts: 938

Have you been fully direct with her? It would be the easiest course of action. First off, you present why you want this thing. Your friends have it, you won't need to go out with your friends, you'd stay home more often, you're tired after work and you want to relax, etc. You need to push these points before you actually argue, otherwise you might not get them in before the actual argument. The argument generally runs as follows...

<EDIT> PARAPHRASE, OBVIOUSLY </EDIT>

Quote

"I really want this thing. What's wrong with it? How is it different from the $300 video card you allowed me to buy before?"

--> She gives a dismissing, non-reply that doesn't address the topic at hand

"I really don't want this thing to be an object of tension between us, and it would be a really silly thing to argue over...so I really want to know your side of the argument before I go out and buy this thing. I'm really willing to listen to it." <<This is where the line by line generally degenerates into an OMG-WE-HAVEN'T BEEN-TALKING-FOR-2-WEEKS argument, but if you're lucky...>>

--> Another failure to reply

"Well, uhm. Okay. So, I'm guessing you're okay with it?"

--> (Usually thi "No. You're not having an XBOX."

"Why not?"

--> *shrugs*

-- If the conversation does reach this point, you might have a problem --
"So...you're choosing not to back up your side of the argument?" (Basically, the mentality behind this point is that by not backing up her points with evidence, she drops those points, and therefore your resolution still stands. This is basic speech/debate tactic).

--> Her mentality at this point is that you ought to value what she says over what you want. If she doesn't confront you, dismisses you again, or anything of that sort, then you are very correct in saying the following (Good god as nicely as possible)...

"Well if you're not going to give me constructive criticism I'ma go out and buy it."

At this point she might actually make a rebuttal. But if not, and she resents you for this, you can use this as fuel for a LACK-OF-COMMUNICATION argument (which you will then have in approximately 2 weeks).

EDIT:
Mind you, this Xbox dialog can be transferred to other arguments.

EDITEDIT:
My girlfriend is hating on me for typing this.

EDITEDITEDIT:
But if she really does try to make a case against your argument, do listen to it. Don't act in the same manner as your wife does.

EDITEDITEDITEDIT:
And don't reward her with the idea that she has won through this passive argumentation. If anything, if she makes a realyl good and valid point, you ought to reward her by NOT getting the xbox at all, and doing as she says. That way, you condition her to make more sound arguments, which bolsters communication in the future.

EDITX5:
My girlfriend pats me on the back.

Last Edit: May 28, 2008, 12:29:22 am by Juris

"I would be totally embarassed to write this, even as a fakepost. it's not funny except in how you seem to think it's good. look at all the redundancies, for fuck's sake. "insipid semantics, despicable mediocrity" ugh gross gross. I want to take a shower every time I read your prose." -Steel

Logged

mkkmypet

#47 May 28, 2008, 12:31:14 am

Fuzzball of Doom!!!11one
Group: Premium Member
Joined: May 5, 2003
Posts: 1204

i agree with Grunthor about your "new approach". obviously, you will have arguments, and many may be irrational (your fault or hers, it doesn't matter). you should just remember to stay calm, and give responses that don't sound defiant or sassy, because you don't want to create bad feelings between you and her over something like an xbox 360. i'm no professional not am i experienced, but it would seem like you should just be like "listen, i respect your wants, but i want you to understand my wants too. i simply want to understand why it is you don't want me to have an xbox 360, and i do not want to cause an argument." and if a discussion isn't getting anywhere, try to end it on a positive note.
it sounds like you have a pretty healthy marriage. remember that there should be respect on both ends of it, though. you shouldn't just give in to everything she says. don't necessarily ARGUE with it, but calmly mention that you want her to respect you as much as you respect her. and for now, keep in mind that being pregnant is NOT FUN (we've all heard about it from mamamack), so try to be especially tolerant right now, since you don't want to create more problems for her while she's already dealing with a pregnancy. best of luck to you and your growing family, by the way

semper games.

Logged

goldenratio

#48 May 28, 2008, 12:33:03 am

now das fresh
Group: Member
Joined: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 4550

mkk dropping 13 year old pearls of wisdom

yes coulombs are "germaine", did you learn that word at talk like a dick school?

Logged

Marmot

#49 May 28, 2008, 02:51:16 am

i can sell you my body
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 1243

Quote

Anyway, you didn't even explain how divorce really related to what people were saying. No one in the topic was even talking about divorce not being an option, or acting as if marriage needs to be this huge, romantic endeavor; we were saying that the point is KIND OF a unification of your lives so not wanting to share your funds or whatever comes off as pretty self-serving and immature, two qualities that probably play large roles in ruining most relationship. You're saying that there are other reasons to marry, and there are, but none of the things you said preclude going into it with a commitment to the relationship and the assumption that it's going to last (this doesn't mean you shouldn't take precautions, though). So no, it doesn't have anything to do with it at all because the things we are talking about aren't exclusive to judeo-christian tradition in the least.

why marriage needs to mean "having one fund"? you are coming off as a patronizing jackass because plenty of people are married with separate funds (including my parents), and there "marriage" is of no less quality. there is no such thing as a unified definition of marriage. you remind me of the jokerboys that say "HMMMMM WELL MARRYAGE IS THE UNION BETWEEN MAN AND WOMAN AND GAYS CAN PISS OFF" because they are also closeminided and think they are better becaue they comply more to the orthodox definition of marriage.

Quote

You always come into topics relating to this stuff with the same tiresome ideas and statements, and it's not even as if they're wrong or misinformed or anything, it's just it's you are very one-note in the way you do things. It's like you're just looking for a chance to rail against capitalism/religion/whatever else you hate.

ok smartpants, i wrote a 5 word not very serious post about how i would have separate funds to avoid similar shit, and then you camewith your sarcastic reply thinkin "heh...........iam better because ill give all my heart encased in a golden box to my fiance". i cannot understand how this is "railing against capitalism(religion/whatever"

furthermore i almost never post long serious replies anymore, and the fact that you said "HEH YOURE ONENOTED" and then said that even if "i may be right" proves the fact that you are just being an asshole, and can't reply to my statements and instead just dismiss them as "theyre onienoted because i dont like em but cant counter them"

ugh

-

Logged

headphonics

#50 May 28, 2008, 03:19:17 am

sea of vodka
Group: Member
Joined: Dec 24, 2003
Posts: 6432

Quote

why marriage needs to mean "having one fund"? you are coming off as a patronizing jackass because plenty of people are married with separate funds (including my parents), and there "marriage" is of no less quality. there is no such thing as a unified definition of marriage. you remind me of the jokerboys that say "HMMMMM WELL MARRYAGE IS THE UNION BETWEEN MAN AND WOMAN AND GAYS CAN PISS OFF" because they are also closeminided and think they are better becaue they comply more to the orthodox definition of marriage.

nah dawg i think it is less because HEH MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY and more because the idea of marriage sort of intrinsically entails a certain amount of commitment and love and it's odd to have those two things and then, inexplicably, completely separate funds like your lives aren't monetarily tied up in one another's, when they very clearly are and having separate funds doesn't change this. you keep calling me a HUGE DICK or whatever but tbh i'm not even being that big an asshole about this at all. you're really overreacting here and you should probably try not to be so offended just because HEY MY PARENTS DO THIS!!!!

Quote

ok smartpants, i wrote a 5 word not very serious post about how i would have separate funds to avoid similar shit, and then you camewith your sarcastic reply thinkin "heh...........iam better because ill give all my heart encased in a golden box to my fiance". i cannot understand how this is "railing against capitalism(religion/whatever"

ahahaha i actually laughed at this, but the difference is you just came in and posted something that was dumb and sort of oddly uncomprehending because if you don't want to handle the stress of SHARING FUNDS then guess what there's probably a lot of other stuff that's going to come up in marriage you're not going to like!!! i mean i made a half-joking reply because it was kind of a bad post but it wasn't really about romance and............oh no........... i used sarcasm, and you replied with some totally irrelevant insult to catholics for no justifiable reason whatsoever beyond your rabid need to just chime in with whatever shit you believe in i guess??? you're like doktormartini in that respect, and it's not even like i'm the only one who's noted this aspect of your personality!

but yeah no i don't really disagree in a general sense with your opinions on the CATHOLIC CHURCH just like i don't disagree with the 15 year old preachy fuck of an atheist who won't shut up about his beliefs, but that's not why i dislike him either! as it happens though i do disagree with you about this topic because while most couples argue more about money than anything else, it's pretty naive to think that you're equipped for marriage and all the disagreements and arguments that're guaranteed to come with it if you seriously cannot handle pooled funds. and also i don't really think it's fair to say i'm just calling you one-note because i disagree with your arguments but can't form a proper rebuttal because your previous posts have been almost entirely about divorce and judeo-christian tradition and just a bunch of irrelevant bullshit that has nothing to do with the topic and as such doesn't really merit a proper reply! there's not really a whole lot to actually counter, man.

so yea bring dat shit

Logged

Marmot

#51 May 28, 2008, 03:52:33 am

i can sell you my body
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 1243

Quote

nah dawg i think it is less because HEH MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY and more because the idea of marriage sort of intrinsically entails a certain amount of commitment and love and it's odd to have those two things and then, inexplicably, completely separate funds like your lives aren't monetarily tied up in one another's, when they very clearly are and having separate funds doesn't change this. you keep calling me a HUGE DICK or whatever but tbh i'm not even being that big an asshole about this at all. you're really overreacting here and you should probably try not to be so offended just because HEY MY PARENTS DO THIS!!!!

the idea of marriage doesn't "intrinsically" mean anything. it can be from a political and judicial move to some fliuffy platonic ideal of love. come on you are less dense than this!

i dont think you are a "huge dick", however you did throw an underhanded jab iimplying that me and everybody eslse who has a more practical view of marriage is "immature" and "irresponsable", just because it doesn't fit your conservative bullshit of what means to be married. I do feel the need to reply that accusation.

Quote

aahahaha i actually laughed at this, but the difference is you just came in and posted something that was dumb and sort of oddly uncomprehending because if you don't want to handle the stress of SHARING FUNDS then guess what there's probably a lot of other stuff that's going to come up in marriage you're not going to like!!!

its not even the stress of "SHARING FUNDS", but yeah i don't see whats wrong with thinking that its better to not handle unnecesarry stress! If a woman was being overpossessive and iirrational and doesn't gives me my space (the topic started said this isnt the case though) i don't see why i wouldnt divorce!!

Quote

i mean i made a half-joking reply because it was kind of a bad post but it wasn't really about romance and............oh no........... i used sarcasm, and you replied with some totally irrelevant insult to catholics for no justifiable reason whatsoever beyond your rabid need to just chime in with whatever shit you believe in i guess??? you're like doktormartini in that respect, and it's not even like i'm the only one who's noted this aspect of your personality!

Quote

form a proper rebuttal because your previous posts have been almost entirely about divorce and judeo-christian tradition and just a bunch of irrelevant bullshit that has nothing to do with the topic and as such doesn't really merit a proper reply! there's not really a whole lot to actually counter, man

i already explained why it has everything to do with it. its not my problem that you cannot get the reference i made. besides it was just an underhanded. off-tangent reply to something equally underhanded.

The fact is that you implied i was WRONG ABOUT MARRIAGE and then i replied that your definition of marriage simply come from a particular current and that there where many other people that agree with my take on marriage!

Quote

but yeah no i don't really disagree in a general sense with your opinions on the CATHOLIC CHURCH just like i don't disagree with the 15 year old preachy fuck of an atheist who won't shut up about his beliefs, but that's not why i dislike him either! as it happens though i do disagree with you about this topic because while most couples argue more about money than anything else, it's pretty naive to think that you're equipped for marriage and all the disagreements and arguments that're guaranteed to come with it if you seriously cannot handle pooled funds. and also i don't really think it's fair to say i'm just calling you one-note because i disagree with your arguments but can't .

actually, i almost never do political posts, so yeah maybe when i was a stupid 16 year old but the last few years i barely make serious. long winded posts. and if i make them, i make them in places where it is warranted. maybe you feel they are preachy because they are little bit different and unorthodox and extreme, but its not like there are more than 5 posts from me in the Politics forum!

-

Logged

headphonics

#52 May 28, 2008, 04:04:38 am

sea of vodka
Group: Member
Joined: Dec 24, 2003
Posts: 6432

alright this is a little less fun now but!

Quote

i dont think you are a "huge dick", however you did throw an underhanded jab iimplying that me and everybody eslse who has a more practical view of marriage is "immature" and "irresponsable", just because it doesn't fit your conservative bullshit of what means to be married. I do feel the need to reply that accusation.

to clarify i never meant that you're immature or whatever else because you don't do marriage my way. i just think that the notion of having completely individual funds that you keep entirely separate comes off as a little uh, yeah, selfish, which by extension i would consider somewhat immature. i mean, what if one party has a better job, does he just have more money to himself? how do you account that women earn substantially less than men? does she just have to DEAL with that? because part of the benefit of marriage is that women in particular have it rough as single workers! it's not really about not fitting my traditional view on marriage so much as the motivations and feelings behind deciding not to share.

this is why i am saying what you said was irrelevant; because i'm not really talking about TRADITION that much at all and as such i don't feel you should continue acting like i (or anyone else here, really) am. if i implied you were wrong about marriage it wasn't because of some sort of conservative beliefs, it was because i think you have some misconceptions about relationships. it's not really fair to bring JUDEO-CHRISTIAN TRADITION into a topic and pin that shit on me when the crux of what i am saying has nothing to do with tradition and more to do with just uh, personal interaction and relationships in general i guess.

Logged

DrFunk

#53 May 28, 2008, 04:41:33 am

n00b
Group: Member
Joined: Aug 3, 2003
Posts: 17

I think the saying that all couples argue as a basic law of nature is pretty bold, if not TOO bold. The basic laws of nature in my opinion extend to only that of basic instinctual decisions such as whether or not to steal, kill or abandon to survive and support oneself. The way that each individual interacts with society is a very large way in which these natural instincts are modified or rather, contained. In a society where killing others will only lead to more killing, then the eventually the existence of no one leads the general populous to NOT murder.

I feel like the arguement that fighting in relationships is normal is, and possibly true because of what society has defined as acceptable. In most of the free world we are allowed to think and feel what we want, (besides the damn communists) which then leads to self expression. If we didn't have these right, as defined by society, we would not "voice our opinions" or fight with our spouses.

The other conflict of whether or not marriage is moral is yet another story, which will always be defined by the society of which each debater lives. I live in America where it has becomes pretty socially acceptable to get a divorce. Whatever, do what you want, but maybe in Rome where Catholicism is very rampant, getting a divorce can be a whole different ordeal. Its all subjective really.

Logged

Marmot

#54 May 28, 2008, 05:43:08 am

i can sell you my body
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 1243

Quote

i mean, what if one party has a better job, does he just have more money to himself? how do you account that women earn substantially less than men? does she just have to DEAL with that? because part of the benefit of marriage is that women in particular have it rough as single workers! it's not really about not fitting my traditional view on marriage so much as the motivations and feelings behind deciding not to share.

its not selfish. i mean, they can still share shit but its just a way of safeguarding against getting fucked up. In a healthy relatioship i suppose that if someone makes substantially more than the other he or she is expected to pay for more shit.

-

Logged

Mr. Actionist

#55 May 28, 2008, 08:59:58 am

Genericism is the phoenix of originality.
Group: Member
Joined: Apr 18, 2008
Posts: 190

This is how everyone should argue.

http://www.rinkworks.com/persuasive/

Upon arriving the attending doctor could find no abnormal physical symptoms other than extremely dilated pupils. After spending several hours terrified that his body had been possessed by a demon, that his next door neighbor was a witch, and that his furniture was threatening him, Dr. Hofmann feared he had become completely insane.

Logged

Rowain

#56 May 28, 2008, 11:20:15 am

100% not arab
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Dec 2, 2002
Posts: 1739

I think the problem is, she's a Nintendo fangirl and these people are irrational and naive by nature.

WHY SO SERIOUS HAHAHAHHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAA

Logged

Frisky SKeleton

#57 May 28, 2008, 11:37:54 am

aye ess dee eff el cay jay ache
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Jun 24, 2005
Posts: 5149

Quote from: headphonics on May 27, 2008, 09:42:35 pm

except that's not the point at all since her not wanting him to get the 360 isn't the even remotely the problem or the subject of the topic

climbtree why do you make posts like this??

because making awesome posts is what i'm good at????

i try to keep my posts really succinct but this is what i mean:

in the examples he gave he's arguing to 1) buy a 360, 2) drink beer, 3) consider public school as an option and 4) own M rated games

argument for 1:
-a 360 isn't necessary but wanted [because] there are some awesome games for it

argument for 2:
-...

argument for 3:
- if the child feels it would rather join a public school than that should be an option available to it

argument for 4:
- it's not an issue that we weren't raised with these games, or the children comming into contact with these games since they're in the house, because i'm old enough to play them. besides, an M game is better than an R movie, which you have.

and from these his wife ceded on the last 2. if someone walked up to me on the street and said "YOU SHOULD BUY A 360 IT'S GOT AWESOME GAMES" i think i would give them the silent treatment too. the topic is "why won't my wife argue back" and i think the fact that his 'arguments' are like this is remotely related to the problem and the topic!

I USE Q'S INSTEQD OF Q'S

Logged

headphonics

#58 May 28, 2008, 03:02:41 pm

sea of vodka
Group: Member
Joined: Dec 24, 2003
Posts: 6432

nah man i think the established problem is that his wife seems to just irrationally dismiss things he wants without any compelling opinion, whether they're good ideas or not. we already figured out why she won't argue back (because there's no real reasonable way to counter what he's saying), it's just sort of about finding a way around how she argues and controls the relationship, which imo would be to bring it up and ask her to stop doing it. orrrr he could go behind her back and do shit and not care if she gets mad but i don't think that's a very good idea. either way i think you're off the mark!

Logged

Bondo

#59 May 28, 2008, 07:14:20 pm

Mosth Fearshomist Pirate Eversh.
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Nov 27, 2001
Posts: 242

Theres a lot of good (and bad) advice here.

Beer:
While I didn't see any reason why my right to drink beer should be infringed, I made a decision not to, and I don't regret it. I do not miss beer, and see no reason to dig the subject back up again.

Public School:
Resolved through motherly intervention.

Own M Rated games:
Resolved through time and perseverance.

XBox:
Still in the air, but I think it can also be resolved through time and perseverance. I just have to save up, and when I actually have the funds, and we're in the store, and I'm clutching the X-Box in my hands, cash in hand. Like the 300 dollar video card, things will work out.

As for the way we argue, I think I'm just going to have to learn how NOT to argue. Actions speak louder than words, and if I cannot resolve anything through rational discussion, then I will resolve things through example, when the moment of decision approaches and an actual decision is unavoidable. For example, I think if I had asked to purchase a video card earlier, rather than when I actually had it in my hands, she would have flat-out said no, and would have given no reasons.

I do not want to go behind her back on anything. It just seems like a very bad idea.

Logged

Frisky SKeleton

#60 May 28, 2008, 08:00:34 pm

aye ess dee eff el cay jay ache
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Jun 24, 2005
Posts: 5149

try presenting it as "you reckon we should get a 360?"

you already said she likes the we heh heh

I USE Q'S INSTEQD OF Q'S

Logged