Xonas Pitfall

It's pointless to contemplate whether there is a heaven or hell. Even if hell does exist, and the reason you start to act morally is out of fear of ending up there, that means you were never truly "pure and good" in the first place. So, regardless, your judgment would still lead to hell. I don't believe in God in the religious sense that if you're "a good boy", you'll be rewarded, and if you're bad, you'll be punished with eternal damnation. But even if I entertain that idea for a moment, it doesn't change the core truth: to be truly good, you have to act out of genuine goodness. You should do what's right because you believe it's the right thing to do, not because of some external reward or fear of punishment. Basically, you should act good even if the most corrupt people somehow end up in heaven. That's what being truly good for goodness' sake means, it’s choosing the right action even if you don’t get any heaven or happiness in return.

@Hojo Hmm... There are a lot of tricky things being said here, but I think the core idea is that as humans, or even just as "selves," we crave unconditional love. Unconditional love = permanent safety, and that’s deeply alluring to our sense of self-preservation, meaning, and our desire to feel important to someone or something in this world, regardless of gender. For example, I remember as a girl often fantasizing about finding a guy I could deeply love and make happy, fantasies of servitude, of giving everything to make someone feel cherished. This definitely played out in my relationships. I often found myself drawn to people who seemed either skeptical of true love or were dealing with sadness or depression. I felt a sense of fulfillment when I could impact their lives, making them feel supported, cared for, and unconditionally loved. I dreamed of embodying unconditional love for someone, and of being unconditionally loved in return. However, over time, I realized that the concept of “unconditional love” is flawed. We are, by nature, limited beings. We are not “God” in our human sense, so this ideal should never have been the goal. For example, we all have very specific conditions that need to be met to feel good. If I overheat your room to an uncomfortable temperature, you won’t feel happy or at peace. Similarly, just as happiness is conditional for us, so is our ability to love. To use shallow, stereotypical examples: many men might leave their wives if she just slightly tips the BMI scale into overweight, or if she gets too wrinkly or old for their taste. Many women might leave their partners if they’re shown more love or attention by someone more attractive, charming, or richer. So, this dynamic happens on both sides. When we talk about “unconditional love,” we’re often referring to a lesser form of conditionality: still conditional, just with fewer or different requirements. For example, a partner might not leave you the moment you seem weak or unappealing, or if you don’t have enough money. In return, you might not leave her just because she’s started being “naggy” or slightly disagreeable. Relationships with such fragile sensitivities would be considered shallow, whereas relationships where partners push through difficult times, like raising children, dealing with sickness, or standing the test of time, are viewed as having more depth and are considered closer to “unconditional” love. That’s typically the kind of standard we should aspire to. What I've realized in my own relationships is that we do, in fact, want specific things from our partners, which makes the relationship conditional. The more things we do for each other, the more we can feel assured of trust, love, and commitment, making it feel more “unconditional.” The more conditions we meet, the more unconditional it can feel. For example, in my past relationships, when a guy started ignoring me, preferring other people's company, speaking cruelly to me, or being negligent about things I was passionate about, I realized I could not remain "unconditional" in my love for him. It would hurt me too deeply. So, I started understanding more and more about what I needed from them, and what I had to be like to even expect that kind of treatment. It's an important question to ask: What exactly do I want from my partner? And am I the kind of person my partner would want to be with? To be “someone worth dying for” is no small ask. Some people expect perfection, God instead of Ego, an angel instead of a succubus. But what does it really mean for you to have someone whom you'd die for? What do they have to do, act like, be like? It's really important to get into specifics here so you can become aware of your own "conditions" and recognize that you're not truly unconditional either. The more we demonize the other side, the more our ego gets distracted from taking responsibility. We start to imagine ourselves as angels, failing to recognize our own limits. I fear this is also a general "Self/Ego" thing. I share this sentiment myself: "What... there's something out there that can show me unconditional love and help me love myself too? How beautiful!" That’s why God represents the highest form of beauty, and why the ego finds it so appealing. This is just one form of Love. For example, studies show that husbands are significantly more likely to leave their wives when the wife becomes seriously ill, compared to the reverse situation. One study found that when a woman is terminally ill, her male partner is about 624% more likely to separate from her. This disparity is often linked to traditional gender roles, where wives frequently take on the caregiving role, and a wife’s severe illness may disrupt the couple’s established dynamic. I think, in general, society conditions men into certain forms of expressing love, and less so into others. For example, a man might be more willing to fight, protect, or destroy for someone he loves, especially for something he perceives as "beautiful, innocent, pure, and worth protecting." However, if that thing no longer seems the same to him, perhaps it becomes less beautiful, or he judges the person’s character as less perfect than he expected or wanted, then that’s where his love may stop. If expressing love requires taking on a more feminine role, such as caring for a sick partner, that’s often where his expression of love may also falter. On the other hand, women are often societally conditioned to surrender themselves to the needs of their partner, family, or career, especially when it comes to children. From a young age, many women are taught that selflessness is a virtue, that their role is to nurture, care, and put others first. They are less frequently encouraged to take on roles that are seen as domineering, aggressive, or confrontational, which are typically reserved for men in many cultures. As a result, when a woman's expression of love is expected to manifest primarily in nurturing, emotional support, and caregiving, it can sometimes limit her capacity to express love in ways that go beyond these traditionally feminine roles. This means that when the situation requires a more aggressive form of protection or fighting for what she loves, such as in a difficult or life-threatening situation, her expression of love may be more limited. I hope you get my point: men and women each have their ways of showing care, and also ways where their care may be weaker, either due to societal conditioning, gender roles, or biology. Nonetheless, just blabbering... 😅 I really hope I don’t come off as confrontational or dismissive of your experiences. What you described above sounds terrible, and I’m sorry you’ve been treated that way. However, I do feel that what you're describing is more indicative of the broader corruption of the human mind and ego, rather than something strictly gender-specific. Gender issues, as I mentioned in my previous post, often stem from the over-idealization of the "perfect other" and the over-idealization of ourselves as good partners. We don’t always address our own issues with boundaries, how we act or behave, and who we end up choosing in our minds versus the reality of those choices and the person at hand. That’s when the cycle of disappointment sets in, and then we tend to project those frustrations onto an entire gender, which only exacerbates the issue.

@Hojo What do you mean here?

It seems to me that both men and women grew up with some form of idealized fantasy about perfect love. We were sold on it through movies, shows, unconscious archetypes, and projections. As children, we also saw the world through rose-colored glasses, innocent, unaware of survival instincts and ego, so those early imaginings became very dear to us. Adding a spiritual angle, if we believe we’re all expressions of God (or Love), then it’s natural to dream to that extent. I guess this applies to most things in life: dream jobs, the impact we hope to have on the world, our beliefs about human nature, friendships, even our own talents and capabilities. Over time, we’re slowly confronted by limitations. I suppose I started wondering how, even though we all have our own “distorted fantasies” that eventually get challenged, the nature of those fantasies often seems fundamentally different between men and women. That made me curious about how each side sees the other, how those expectations play out in real life. For example, someone might expect a confident, protective, gentlemanly “Prince Charming” but end up with an emotionally unavailable, lust-driven cheater. Or, conversely, expect a loving, nurturing, kind “angel” and instead meet an attention-seeking, manipulative succubus. (Of course, that’s heavily stereotyped on both sides.) We hope for God and end up facing the Ego, and the cycle continues...

Definitely, that person sounds incredibly cruel, reckless, and inconsiderate. It's not how a person who loves you would ever treat you.

@Hojo I'd love for you to expand on this more if you're comfortable with it. If it's too much or triggering, feel free to let me know, and I’ll back off. I can just be very curious, so I tend to ask a lot of questions... But I'd really like to understand how the fantasy is played out and seen. What traits do you typically associate with it? Do you have a particular image in your mind, like someone in a white dress, maybe blonde with blue eyes, or a nurturing, empathetic personality? Warm, waiting for you at home? I’d love to see it from your perspective, as fleshed out as possible.

@Hojo I see... I'm really sorry you had to go through that. Hugs. It’s definitely not as black and white (they are demons, they are angels); it’s really about people being toxic on both sides of the spectrum. But I get that the discussion here isn't the most productive. If I may ask, what do you think is initially thought of women? I am trying to understand the idealistic fantasies that men/society can often put onto women. By the way, I am not saying this in a negative light; I was just always curious about "archetypal" ideals on both ends, so I thought I could ask you from your POV. Hence, why I asked about fairies, angels, etc.

Hey! Do you mind me asking more about this? What do you think is the ideal male fantasy? How do you think men often view women? What kind of archetypes can they fall into? Sirens, angels, fairies, etc?

I love this so much! Bless Leo! ❤️ Happy Halloween! 🎃