Xonas Pitfall

You can do what you want, but you can't want what you want. What an amazing quote. Thank you so much!

Women do like "nice" guys. The issue is that many self-proclaimed nice guys see themselves that way because there’s not much more to them - or at least, they haven’t done the work to discover what makes them interesting, what they bring to friendships and relationships, or done enough self-improvement. They also fail to showcase their value clearly to the world. So, they believe "niceness" is an inherently good quality that can make up for their other shortcomings. Comparing themselves to "bad boys," "Chads," or "arrogant fuckboys," they build an identity around "I’m so kind, this proves girls don’t value niceness." They start blaming women for their suffering and loneliness. What they don’t realize is they wouldn’t like themselves either if they were women. Plus, they often chase very specific girls - and not for the "nicest" reasons. A lot of these "nice guys" may also cheat, potentially even more than the "fuckboys," because they don’t feel confident in their ability to get girls. So, if the opportunity for more sex comes up, they take it, believing they "deserve" it or that the world owes them. They also often fall into the "Simp" trope: as soon as the girl they were so "kind" to rejects them, they turn bitter, calling her all sorts of slurs. This just reveals they were never genuinely nice - only covertly manipulative. Think about it: if a girl were fundamentally "nice" and "sweet" but not at all attractive to you, would you still be with her? What if the conversations you had with her didn’t interest or stimulate you? What if she had an attitude you didn’t like, or your personalities didn’t mesh? What if she spent her time sitting in her room, eating junk food, watching TikToks, with no job or ambition, yet was still "polite"? Guys reject "nice" girls all the time, or cheat on them for someone hotter or more interesting. Look at the "hot/crazy matrix" meme - it shows that the hotter the girl, the more you’ll tolerate her not being "nice." The same applies here. After a while, women realize this truth. They start thinking, "If I can’t trust any guy not to cheat on me, or if they’re just being fake nice to sleep with me, then I might as well go for the guy who’s most appealing - whether it’s because of his personality, looks, or career status. At least if the relationship fails, I got something out of it and will regret it less." I think that’s how a lot of this happens - a guy (or girl) is "nice," but they don’t work on improving themselves or the relationship. Then, their partner is swept away by someone who seems more confident, and they perceive that as arrogance. They label the partner delusional or foolish for choosing the other person over them. In response, they cling to their "niceness", making it an identity and believing they deserve appreciation just for being "polite." Again, I don’t think men or women dislike nice people. The problem is with those who get lazy and complacent - who don’t do much in general or after entering a relationship, but expect to be loved just because they "don’t disturb the peace" or are simply "okay." Niceness should really be the bare minimum if you want to engage in a close, intimate relationship. If a guy is nice and a valuable partner, fucking perfect. That’s a woman’s "ideal" - not an arrogant, selfish narcissist who happens to be hot but treats her poorly or degrades her, as so-called "nice guys" seem to think. Think about it in terms of a workplace analogy: just because someone is a good worker, or even "good enough" and doing their job as expected, doesn’t mean they’ll advance or be highly appreciated. That’s already the bare minimum, what’s expected. Those who typically rise higher are the ambitious ones, the ones who take initiative, who find ways to leverage situations, and put in extra effort, either in their work or in how they present themselves. Simply being "a good worker" or "nice" won’t get you far on its own.

Yes! He says it is one of the best channels on YouTube in terms of free value. Who knows, he might be here, lurking too . . . 😊❗(●ˇ∀ˇ●)

What did you find works the best for you?

Seems pretty amazing!

Oh my God! Let me try 😊 "10 spiraling in space!", "56, almost a bridge between worlds!", "89 is practically colliding with infinity," "74 breaking into pieces," "53 shifting sideways, dancing like shadows," "6 looping endlessly, but backwards," "25 and 44 are merging like they’re about to become something else," "18 cracking, crumbling, vanishing," "102 leaping over everything!" "150 folding into a toroidal singularity!" "404 oscillating in quantum discord!" "72 is unspooling into hyperdimensional resonance patterns!" "555 is exploding in antimatter streams!" "1000? It’s not a number, it’s a hypercyclic flux of negentropic void!" "Look, 248 is weaving through gravitic entropy, aligning with dark matter flows!" TRANSCEND THE NUMBER! These are no longer mere numerals but quanta in a multidimensional lattice, a fractalized exomatrix of probabilistic harmonics! Why constrain the infinite polydimensional reverberations of the numerical omniverse?

Gentle sadness, warmth, and pain that feels comforting and familiar, violin, ballet, the Nutcracker, clockwork-like aesthetic, haunted dolls, entrapment, and freedom, caring, letting loose, giving all of yourself away with nothing in return, desperately seeking love, ravens, crows, sparrows, losing a sense of home, childhood, nostalgia, longing to come back, losing identity, losing childlike happiness, brokenly trying to reclaim it, recognizing the child in everyone, fragments of persona, an eerie sense of lost love, something missing, putting back pieces of the self, emptiness, a broken doll, shelled like a vessel, shattered innocence, yearning for wholeness, fragile hope, isolation, keys to locked hearts, loneliness intertwined with memories, delicate yearning, melancholy woven with nostalgia, helpless surrender, echoes of past selves, and endless searching.

Hiroko Shiina's art is characterized by surreal, intricate compositions against black velvet backgrounds, exploring themes of eros, fatal romance, and the transience of life through symbolic imagery like skulls, fetuses, and flowers. Drawing from Vanitas and Memento Mori traditions, as well as influences from Japanese prints and Kusozu paintings, her work emphasizes meticulous detail and a ghostly, melancholic atmosphere. Her unique technique, reminiscent of Byzantine mosaics and Aubrey Beardsley's Symbolist style, uses subdued colors, coffee stains, and flowing hair motifs to evoke fluidity and transformation. Shiina's art invites viewers to contemplate life's fleeting beauty and the complexities of human emotion, offering a deeply personal, introspective experience that transcends the grotesque to liberate the spirit.

Aspects of uniqueness and distinctiveness help as well. There’s a certain air of nostalgia for a place I’ve never been to, yet it feels familiar like I should remember it. To be honest, that’s often how many of my trips feel, or heightened states of consciousness. It evokes a warm, comforting familiarity, even though it feels like something I’ve forgotten.

Hmmm... I've noticed that I seem to enjoy themes like magic, magicians, dolls, puppets, the interplay between puppeteers and masquerades. I'm also drawn to tragedy, romance, psychedelic visuals, overly detailed designs, and "Alice in Wonderland"-style delirium. I love quirky, circus-like jester performances, dark and twisted elements, spirals, gothic aesthetics, mysterious fantasy, emotional intensity, surreal dreamscapes, haunting beauty, theatrical whimsy, grotesque visuals, masked figures, and hidden identities. There's a certain allure in the blending of melancholic beauty, This artist captures it really well!

💫❔🕳୭ is a Spiral! 9 ୭ = 9 = ❔ 🕳💫

Narcissist vs. Codependent (or Independent) Avoidant vs. Anxious NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder) vs. BPD (Borderline Personality Disorder) Masculine vs. Feminine Dominant vs. Submissive Self vs. Other God vs. Love Individuality vs. Collectivism Control vs. Freedom Logic vs. Emotion Order vs. Chaos Stability vs. Change Power vs. Vulnerability Independence vs. Dependence Assertive vs. Receptive Mind vs. Heart Strength vs. Sensitivity Light vs. Shadow Conformity vs. Rebellion Ego vs. Altruism Autonomy vs. Relationality Expansion vs. Containment Fear vs. Desire Harmony vs. Conflict Creation vs. Destruction Discipline vs. Spontaneity Structured vs. Fluid Intellect vs. Intuition Presence vs. Absence I am the World vs. One with the World Self vs. No Self

The key difference between the narcissistic and borderline ego lies in how they cope with the illusion of self, both exhibiting their own form of psychosis. The borderline's ego is characterized by a lack of firm boundaries, making it fluid and malleable, constantly seeking to merge with external entities, people, and experiences. This desire for connection stems from an inherent fear of abandonment and a fragile sense of self. In its extreme, the borderline ego may experience moments of feeling at one with the universe or even with what they perceive as 'God.' This sensation can be deeply spiritual or overwhelming, as the borderline attempts to dissolve the separations between themselves and others, yearning for a profound unity that fills their internal emptiness. The struggle for identity can lead them to latch onto people, experiences, or ideals that provide a temporary sense of wholeness, but this fusion is often fleeting and unstable. Self Seeking the Other. No Self. Inherent Lack of Love for the Self. In contrast, the narcissistic ego operates on an entirely different mechanism. Where the borderline craves union, the narcissist seeks to control. The narcissistic ego is fortified by a rigid sense of superiority, constantly needing validation and admiration to maintain its inflated self-image. Instead of merging with others, the narcissist tries to break others down, molding them into reflections of himself. This process of "consuming" others is driven by the need to turn them into extensions of his own identity, reshaping their thoughts, actions, and even their sense of self to align with his vision. To the narcissist, others exist as tools or mirrors, reflecting back what he wants to see, reinforcing his sense of being the center of the universe—a distorted image of 'God.' Self Seeking the Self. Ego Self. Inherent Lack of Love for the Other. While the borderline ego seeks transcendence through connection, the narcissistic ego seeks to dominate and recreate others in his own image. Both are, in their own ways, grappling with the illusion of self and struggling to find a stable identity. Yet their approaches are starkly opposite: one expands outward, seeking to engulf everything in its path, while the other contracts inward, pulling everything toward itself to build an empire of mirrors. What happens when BPD & NPD meet? This dynamic can be likened to the pairing of "Avoidant" and "Anxious" attachment styles, where both individuals are drawn together, feeding into each other's traumas and worldviews. While the narcissist seeks admiration and strives to mold others into versions that serve his own narrative, the borderline naturally attempts to become the perfect partner for her 'favorite person.' She doesn’t need the narcissist's manipulations because she instinctively adapts to his desires. Initially, this creates an intense attraction, with palpable chemistry between them. The borderline tries to expand her sense of self so much that she can consume the narcissist by becoming him, while the narcissist works to diminish her sense of self, shaping her into his ideal image. Although this is a simplified overview, it illustrates the core tendencies. However, this relationship is often toxic. The narcissist neglects the other's needs, while the borderline loses sight of her own, creating a destructive imbalance. Unless both individuals are self-aware and willing to work through their issues, such relationships tend to end abruptly, explosively, and painfully. This, of course, can happen in any relationship where essential needs are ignored.

What is Identity? Fundamentally, it might be plausible to say all of us originate from a state of indefinite potential, at least in terms of consciousness. Over time, as we interact with the world, we begin to develop biases—either for survival or because certain things resonate with our natural talents, essence, or being. This process is somewhat similar to how AI learns about its environment, starting from pure noise or chaos and gradually refining itself through binary splits. Each new decision further defines its path, creating a gradient of choices that shape what it will do, choose, and ultimately become. With AI, it's relatively straightforward to track its goals since it's focused on mimicking and predicting based on data. However, for humans and our identities, it’s much less clear what initially drives us—what sparks that first desire, split, or motivation that makes us lean in one direction and not another. What is our original bias? It seems unique for each person, as we all carry a distinct "fingerprint" within our personas. That's why exploring the fundamental splits in consciousness is so intriguing, as understanding these primal choices may shed light on why we develop in the ways we do. Many people reflect on how they’ve changed over time, often evolving from one feeling or desire to another, shaping their sense of self in ways that become unrecognizable to their past. What was once important may influence who they are now, but it often no longer holds the same meaning or relevance. This is why I find it so fascinating when I see consistency in people that remains unchanged for years, even from childhood. It feels so fundamental, almost like a "core" essence, and I can’t help but wonder how that is formed. What shapes something so enduring? Is it possible for someone to change so completely that nothing of their earliest self is recognizable anymore?

I find these extreme cases of ego psychosis and fragmentation deeply fascinating. I’ve heard that most of us fall somewhere on a spectrum between Narcissistic and Codependent tendencies and that many relationships can be understood through this simple polarity. You can imagine it as a spectrum: on the far left, you have someone who is entirely self-centered and self-serving, while on the far right, there’s a complete people-pleaser, someone who acts like a doormat. Most of us land somewhere in between, and we often seek out partners who balance us out. The further we are from the center, the further our partner will tend to be on the opposite side (not always).

1. Quantum Entanglement: In quantum physics, entangled particles remain connected so that the state of one instantly influences the state of the other, no matter how far apart they are. Reality unfolds in a synchronized way, where things are interconnected across space and time. The particles’ states must be perfectly in sync, or else the entanglement breaks. 2. The Principle of Superposition: Particles can exist in multiple states at once (superposition), but once they are observed, they "collapse" into a single state. Reality appears only when it is synchronized with the observer. Without the observer, the particle exists in all possible states. 3. Harmonic Oscillators: Harmonic oscillators (like a pendulum or a mass on a spring) rely on synchronization with external forces to create predictable motion. If there’s no reference point, like the gravitational pull on a pendulum, the movement would not be observable. Movement requires synchronization with a reference point to even appear. 4. Symmetry Breaking in the Universe: The early universe is believed to have been highly symmetrical, but as it cooled and expanded, symmetry breaking occurred, leading to the formation of matter and the laws of physics as we know them. Reality "unfolds" from an initial state of balance (symmetry) into countless forms and dualities, each governed by different physical forces. 5. The Holographic Principle: This concept suggests that all the information about a volume of space can be thought of as encoded on its boundary. In a sense, the three-dimensional reality we experience may just be a projection of two-dimensional information. Reality could be a reflection of itself, unfolding from a simpler or more fundamental state into what we observe as the physical world. 6. Resonance in Physics: Resonance occurs when a system vibrates at a specific frequency, amplifying the effect of certain forces. For example, when you push a swing in rhythm with its natural frequency, it goes higher. In this way, resonance is an example of how synchronization with external factors can magnify effects or bring something into being.

It seems impossible for reality not to split into infinite dualities. This isn't a decision made by some higher power; it's simply a consequence of having no limitations. Where there is duality, there are infinite dualities, each containing yet more dualities, endlessly. A duality is Reality reflecting upon itself, creating movement. If reality were only observing itself without reflection, there would be no experience. Experience requires movement or vibration. Vibration, in turn, needs a reference. Without a reference point, there can be no movement. This means movement isn't truly real in an absolute sense; it only happens in relation to an observer. Movement and vibration must be synchronized with the observer, or else no movement appears at all. Each relative movement or vibration depends on another, and this chain continues infinitely. In this way, everything is merely an appearance, and it only appears because of synchronization. Anything that isn't synchronized can't appear. Reality, therefore, unfolds infinitely, always reflecting itself. Since infinity has no end, this reflection happens endlessly. If reality is reflecting itself now, it's doing so forever. There is no control or intention behind it, and there is no will at the highest level. Will only exists within form—your will, multiplied infinitely. But ultimately, reality itself has no will, because, in infinity, one thing is indistinguishable from another. Your authority is very limited. It's infinitely limited by the existence of infinite other perspectives. You are absolute in the sense that you are existence itself, but as a form, you're always relative to other forms. Without something external, experience is impossible. You're not creating reality; reality is creating itself by reflecting infinitely, without control—only possibility. What is possible simply is. "Possible" means being in harmony with infinite forms. Nothing can move even a millimeter away from this. So, God is quite powerless—completely powerless because it can't not exist or be limited. At the same time, it has infinite power in terms of creating infinite forms or reflections, but no power over what appears. You can't fly or walk on water. It's impossible because everything must be perfectly synchronized. In this sense, God is just a natural phenomenon. Beautiful . . . ❤ Thank you so much @Breakingthewall

Don't spank "us" hard with a Keisaku, Daddy @Water by the River "We" will behave Good and Ego-less. 🙈💖 "We" promise!

@Breakingthewall Unless you are...? What do you think? Fulfilles the paradox?