Irresistible Force vs. Immovable Object

Continuing with my emerging interest in philosophy, this will make you think!

The classic Irresistible Force Paradox is formulated as follows:

What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?

Common responses to this paradox resort to logic and semantics-

• Logic: if such a thing as an irresistible force exists, then no object is immovable, and vice versa. It is logically impossible to have these two entities (a force that cannot be resisted and an object that cannot be moved by any force) in the same universe.

• Semantics: if there is such a thing as an irresistible force, then the phrase immovable object is meaningless in that context, and vice versa, and the issue amounts to the same thing as asking, e.g., for a triangle that has four sides.

This paradox is a form of the omnipotence paradox, but that paradox is most often discussed in the context of God's omnipotence i.e. can God create a stone so heavy that He cannot lift it?

The only immovable object I've come across is a woman scorned. I've always seen myself as the irresistible force, so who wins? In the short term, I do, but in the long term, she does (always!).