Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

781

...because you just get mad, so she kind of tricked me, I said a few things, nothing major, and sure enough she got mad, got up from the table and stormed off. Now she's not speaking to me.

Usually it goes like this. "Sandy Hook was a hoax." "Oh my gosh how can you say that, we are talking about CHILDREN here, my GOSH."

When I try to explain that she's kind of doing backwards logic, and that all she has is an emotion based argument, it gets worse.

I say, well if it was indeed children, then yes it was children.

But if NOT, then children aren't really the point.

Tired of you conspiracy people on Poal and Voat getting me in trouble.

...because you just get mad, so she kind of tricked me, I said a few things, nothing major, and sure enough she got mad, got up from the table and stormed off. Now she's not speaking to me. Usually it goes like this. "Sandy Hook was a hoax." "Oh my gosh how can you say that, we are talking about CHILDREN here, my GOSH." When I try to explain that she's kind of doing backwards logic, and that all she has is an emotion based argument, it gets worse. I say, well if it was indeed children, then yes it was children. But if NOT, then children aren't really the point. Tired of you conspiracy people on Poal and Voat getting me in trouble.

(post is archived)

[–] [deleted] • 16 pts

Ha ha ha! You keep failing her shit test. She's playing you and winning every time.

[–] • 3 pts

I think you're right. But for women to be so allegedly dumb, they can be pretty conniving.

[–] [deleted] • 9 pts

That's how they survive, like little children, by using manipulation. You really need to learn how women "think" and act. She really doesn't give a flying fuck about Sandy Hook but already knows your views and uses it to get an easy win off you anytime she wants. The jews have politicized mental illness and women and totally control western society using them as tools.

[–] • 4 pts

I think I do understand them, intuitively.

She's better than most but yes, very childlike (knowing that, I actually mess with her as well).

Good observation, and true, child like manipulation.

Appreciate the exhortation.

[–] • 0 pt

My mom and stepdad frequently had heated arguments over stupid trivial things like this - it doesn't affect us in anyway so why make a big deal about it or even bring it up years later.

[–] • 5 pts

It’s not about the facts it’s about the power that comes from manipulation.

[–] • 1 pt

She already has an idea of what she wants to hear. Your job is to figure it out by listening, then saying it back. It really is that simple.

[–] • 11 pts

Woman as children need to be sheltered from harsh realties. Hence why they must never share power withmen

[–] • 9 pts

This isn't about Sandy Hook, it's about how you two discuss disagreements over facts. As partners, it's unacceptable to escalate discussion of facts to emotional appeals in a (likely unintentional) attempt to sidestep a lack of reason and evidence on one or both party's side. E.g. if you disagree with her, it's unacceptable for you to call her names or screech autistically at her. As it's also unacceptable for her to make emotional appeals such as "think of the children" to try to sidestep the need to provide reason and evidence.

Just to reiterate, this is not about Sandy Hook. I know little about it and have no idea which of you is correct about the facts of that event, and it really doesn't matter. What does matter is that you both agree that disputes of fact must be settled via arguments (i.e. premise, evidence, conclusion) not destructive conversational escalation.

[–] • 0 pt

Good advice, thanks. You're right.

[–] • 1 pt

Also, is it really necessary to have the same views on every single thing? Part of why you have a partner is for differing views. I can understand why people would believe something like that. Barring solid evidence, it's all a murky world where the only honest position to hold is that you don't really know, and these various possibilities each have evidence behind them. It also doesn't really matter for day-to-day decisions.

[–] • 1 pt

Yes, nailed it. Some of these guys commenting might not have ever been married.

[–] • 7 pts

We have never been shown the live children.

According to whichever filthy lying news media you choose to believe, there was either 450 or 600 children at school that day.

Where are they? Why don't we hear from their 900 - 1200 parents?

[–] • 7 pts

Yeah, pretty amazing. People don't even want to know what happened, pretty damn sad.

[–] • 6 pts

As has been said, you are failing a shit test.

If you have a point, you have every reason to explain your perspective without succumbing to a woman's temper tantrum. If she is emotional about a subject and can't handle a discussion about it, that's fine; most women are like that about some things, and there's no reason not to be polite with them.

But if she brings it up, has no better argument than an emotional appeal, and throws a tantrum when you disagree... that's not a time for you to be "in trouble". You flat out need to tell her that she can cry about it or discuss it like an adult, but you won't tolerate tantrums aimed at you when she does this.

[–] • 0 pt

I got you.

Have you ever been married?

[–] • 0 pt

Been married about the same length of time as grammar_rabbi, and he's completely correct. Basically, you talk to them like a school-teacher reprimanding a shit-disturbing little girl. Not being intentionally mean, just stern and with unwavering confidence.

[–] • 1 pt

Yes, I get it, they are simply completely different creatures than men.

[–] • 6 pts

Just don't back down....There are NO dead kids at Sandy Hoax. That is why you don't cry or care like she does, you only do it for "real" victims

[–] • 5 pts

She needs to grow a pair and she needs to sleep on the couch a few nights to think about what she has done.

[–] • 3 pts

If it was real why would they not land a life flight helo right in the school yard to take a load of kids to a hospital? Who was the man in the woods? Why do they shut down every serious inquiry?

[–] • 0 pt

That was one of the main 'tells' for me, the sheer calmness of the whole scene.

I was watching live on NBC as they reported.

I was thinking, damn, where is the chaos, the screaming, the parents, the choppers, the noise, the ambulances.

Yet, you know how it is, I sat there explaining everything away in my mind like everybody else.

The guy in the woods, that was one of the craziest things. I saw him saying to people, as they walked him by the cameras, "I didn't do it, I didn't do it."

[–] • 1 pt

The simple explanation: the bigger the lie, the faster they work to tie it off, and halt all objective examination. Show this to your wife. Think sandy hook and Vegas.

[–] • 0 pt

Exactly.

Show it to my wife?

Lol a person has to be willing to look, instead of kneejerk getting angry.

"I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you."

[+] [deleted] • 2 pts
[–] • 2 pts

Spend a month desensitizing her with abortion comedy and dead baby jokes from all the jew commics on the TV and then she should be fine talking about dead kids.

Load more (19 replies)