Xonas Pitfall

Oh, gotcha, pardon mé! Haha, for some reason I read that as a more generalized question, like, “How does one approach it?” For me, it’s actually very easy to tell the difference between relationship-oriented attraction and something more casual (on my end, at least). I’m fairly asocial, so when I take an interest in someone, it tends to be very specific. A relationship "crush" feels very intense and consuming, almost all-encompassing, while casual attraction is lighter and more playful (fun, curiosity, something to break boredom.) Also, given the relationship version carries so much emotional weight and energy, I’m usually aware of whether I’m ready for it or not during a given period. When I’m looking for something serious, it usually grows out of shared hobbies, overlapping social circles, or longer conversations. In those situations, I pay a lot of attention to shared values, and whether the chemistry feels sustainable over time. If I’m looking for casual, I tend to gravitate toward communities or spaces that are more outwardly exploratory, mainly kink, taboo, or fetish communities. The people there are usually more psychologically interesting to me, more open-minded / exploratory, and often more careful and intentional about boundaries and the different roles they want to take on in dynamics. Tickles my lizard brain in the right way... ^ ^ 🦎 Throughout all of this, I try to manage my emotions carefully and stay aware of how the other person feels. If someone seems more attached than I am, I make sure I’m not leading them toward expectations I can’t meet. At the same time, I watch myself closely so I don’t become overly infatuated with someone who can’t reciprocate. That awareness can be uncomfortable, but it’s necessary to avoid unnecessary pain on both sides.

You evaluate what you want, and once you do that honestly, you can approach it much more deliberately. If you just want sex, with minimal commitment and maximum ease, then own that. Your best move is to put yourself in places where that mindset already exists. That means environments with more promiscuous people, or aggressively filtering on dating apps and in real life for women who are clearly open to that dynamic. You also have to accept that you cannot have everyone. This is crucial. If someone signals that they want a relationship, you move on. If there is mutual interest in something casual, you pursue it. Problems arise when you knowingly pursue someone who wants a relationship while pretending to want the same thing. At that point, the frustration is self-created. You are the one choosing to lie, which makes you the dishonest party. If the lie is discovered, that is on you. If you feel forced to keep lying just to maintain the situation, that is a direct consequence of choosing to prioritize your own desires while disregarding someone else’s, and then doubling down on the dishonesty. There is nothing wrong with honestly wanting something casual. What is unreasonable is feeling entitled to a positive response from someone who is clearly signalling they want romance. If that request is rejected, the better question to ask yourself is not “I'm frustrated, why won’t this person accept this, why can't I be honest with them?” but rather “Why am I pursuing someone I have to lie to, instead of finding someone who wants the same thing I do?” You lie because you know your honest desire won’t be accepted, either you sense it instinctively or you actually know it. But you still want it, so you lie to get what you want. Sure, that’s a choice you can make, but don’t get frustrated at the other person for it. They didn’t put you in that position; you did, chasing your own desires at the cost of honesty. If you end up stuck maintaining the lie, that frustration is yours alone. No one forced you to lie, you chose it to serve your own wants. It’s the same way you wouldn’t really care much for a girl who constantly lies and “carrot-sticks” a guy friend in the friendzone just to keep getting attention, favours, or money. Imagine her saying: "Why is he complaining? Why can’t I just honestly tell him: ‘You’ll never fuck me, I don’t find you attractive or interesting, I don’t want to be seen in public with you, I just want your attention, favours, and money!’ I’m being honest, so why is finding a guy friend so hard? Why do I have to lie?’" However, as I said, if the original post was more of a "vent" than a complaint expecting the world to bend to a fantasy, that’s completely valid. Dating is messy, complicated, and often frustrating, and it’s normal to feel that way while figuring it out 🤍

This is actually really interesting, and I would like to hear more about it. I am also curious about something else. Do you tend to try to “convert” women who clearly signal they want a relationship into something casual? From what you are describing, it sounds like what you really want is women who already want casual sex. Do you actively look for those women? I feel like doing just that would already remove the need to lie and save you a lot of frustration. Or is there something appealing about the conversion itself? For example, taking someone who originally did not want casual sex and still getting them to do it with you, almost as a form of conquest? Or is it simply that you struggle to find women who are openly interested in casual sex? Or that you do find them, but you are less attracted to them? Maybe you are more drawn to women who are romantic or relationship-oriented, even if that clashes with what you say you want? Would be curious to know, thank you!

Yes! My only point is that it often feels like people do not want to respect the process itself. That said, the frustration of the original poster was probably more of a vent than an actual rejection of the idea that a process needs to happen. The reason you feel like you need to “lie” is that the request itself is not respectful of the process, or in this case, of the person. If you wanted a job, you would not expect a company to just give it to you because you said, “I want a job.” You would assume you need to be evaluated for the role to some extent. Getting frustrated that you cannot simply be honest and say “I want a job” and immediately get one is a bit silly. Exactly. You invest resources. The original poster made it sound as if the alternative of just saying “I do not care about you, let me have sex” should somehow be justified as a valid strategy. But that would be just as unrealistic as expecting money from someone by saying, “I do not care about you, give me money,” or expecting friendship by saying, “I do not care about you, admire me,” or expecting a job by saying, “I do not care about doing honest work for you, pay me.” If that is your agenda, then yes, you will feel forced to lie. Honesty alone does not grant your wish when there is a lack of respect for the person or the process. And to be clear, when I talk about “process,” I do not necessarily always mean flattering someone, courting them, or implying you want a relationship when you do not. The process can simply mean selecting people who are already open to faster sexual engagement, or who have different boundaries around promiscuity. It can also mean learning how to signal trustworthiness and intentions in a more honest way. Respecting the process does not require manipulation or performance. It just means accepting that compatibility still has to be established, and that outcomes depend on mutual interest rather than on stating a desire and expecting it to be met.

I think the core problem is that seeing this as a “hunt” is already a wrong assumption. Nothing else in life really works this way. You do not go “hunting” for a friend and expect him to immediately say, “Oh my god, you are my best friend, let’s do everything together forever.” And if he does not behave that way, you do not get frustrated or think, “God, all of these potential friends just want to be deceived. Instead of them simply submitting to my friendship request, I am expected to talk to them, flatter them, search for common interests, trade life stories, ease into shared hobbies, and eventually be comfortable being seen together in public. Apparently, this is the process, how exhausting... ugh! 🙄” You cannot just say, “Hey, be my friend, admire me, adore me, support me unconditionally,” and expect that to happen instantly. Or imagine the potential friend replying instantly, “Oh my god, yes!!! You are fully my best friend now! Let’s do as many activities together as possible. I have been wanting this for so long.” If either person did that, they would seem unhinged, overly intense, and deeply untrustworthy. It would raise the questions. It sounds ridiculous and suspicious because we understand that authentic relationships require both people to appear genuinely authentic. That authenticity is usually signalled through moderation, not extreme language or instant intensity. In the beginning, both sides are still evaluating each other. Real authenticity signals safety and the possibility of an actual connection, which is more intoxicating and more fun, whether it is a friendship, a relationship, or even a purely sexual interaction. The same applies to a business deal. Imagine a company saying, “We do not care about your product, your mission, or even your profit. We just want to screw you over and get as much as possible from this deal. Thoughts?” Now imagine the other company replying, “Oh my god, yes, finally, please screw us over immediately.” Or imagine the second company hesitating, and the first one responding with frustration: “God, all these selfish companies. They just want to be lied to. We never make deals if we are direct. I hate this. I am so frustrated that I am not getting what I want.” The companies would come across as either wildly desperate, blatantly deceptive, or simply rude and entitled. When people complain about not getting instant sex, this is how they sound. “What? I ate one healthy Caesar salad. Why is my body not lean, skinny, sexy, and covered in abs? God, why does my body need an entire process before it submits to my desires? Ugh...” Or to make it even more direct: “What?! I said I wanted to fuck you, and you don’t want to fuck me? How rude! You should appreciate me being this direct. Ugh… I swear, everyone just wants to be lied to.” Just because you want something doesn’t mean you’re entitled to it. If you want it but aren’t willing to do the honest work to earn it, you might resort to lying, scheming, cheating, or manipulating to get it. Either way, whatever you want comes with conditions, you have to respect them. Otherwise, you are denying reality. Whether you meet those conditions honestly or dishonestly is up to you, but nothing comes without caveats. Everything in life works this way, yet somehow here, some people fail to see the parallel. For example, if I want a raise from my boss, I have two options. I can be a competent employee who does the honest work and understands the system, learning how to appeal to my boss legitimately. Or I can manipulate, play social games, network strategically, and flatter my way to the same result. Both approaches can work because they engage the system in their own way, but both come with their own costs. Similarly, if you want a strong, fit body, you can either spend months grinding at the gym, or take steroids. Both will give your muscles what they need to grow, but each comes with its own type of effort and trade-offs. You can’t just get frustrated because your body doesn’t instantly submit to your desires. This actually ties back well to Leo’s recent blog post.

How very biased of Leo, saying a biased mind is uglier than a beautiful one… tsk, tsk, tsk! 😌😌😌

@AION is Andrew Tate's greatest cock-slurper on this forum!

Yes! I understand that in the total state, everything is just pure emptiness, the Absolute. When I said everything is perfect and whole, I meant that it's all just 'is', nothing, pure emptiness, pure isness, coherence emerges and stays, and things that unify exist, while those that don’t simply fall away. You can use whatever words resonate most with you to describe it! My question is: since we clearly have states of God-realization and enlightenment where people are still alive and survive, and we accept those as valid insights, even though they technically didn’t 'relinquish all desire,' even the desire to not exist, then it seems plausible to assume that you could attain states of infinity where you can at least perform some physical manipulation. Your will would still be intact, and even if it’s not the egoic type of will, it could be something more like a curiosity-driven will.

Possibly yes, thank you, I'll look into it! It’d be cool to have a forum thread where people can do scientific-like research/exploration and see if they can influence reality in some ways once in a heightened state of consciousness.

@Ishanga Yes, that was my point! If we only considered the ultimate enlightenment to be the one that happens at the moment of death, we wouldn't value anything that enlightened masters or Leo say. You could just argue, 'See! They’re still limited by their desires and will to live. There is still ego. Why didn't they die?' But yet, we do accept it to some extent because we realize there’s fruitful value in their realizations. You don’t have to actually die for your realizations to be considered valid. My point is similar when it comes to the ability to exert influence over reality in higher states of consciousness. It doesn’t mean you suddenly reach full enlightenment and have all your desires stripped away. You still clearly have the desire to live and maintain this human body to embody your realizations. So I’m curious, why don’t we see that ability to influence reality more often (even to some extent) in people who claim to be in the heightened states?

It would make sense that there’s a point between God-realization/higher consciousness and the human ego, where your ability to influence reality would be heightened. It’s kind of like saying, well, the moment you are God-realized, it means you're dead! You didn’t have complete God-realization since your heart didn’t stop beating and your lungs were still working. If your body didn’t collapse, that means you weren't fully God-realized. That’s truly how it goes. But we know from this forum that there are many gradients of realization, where you can still have your "ego-will" intact and experience higher states of consciousness. So my question is, why don’t we see people being able to make even small physical tweaks to the exterior or to themselves? I’d say it’d be foolish to think it immediately purges them of all desire to do anything in physical reality. Not sure. I understand that in a total state, you'd be ripped out of all desire because you'd see everything as it is, perfect, whole, God, itself/yourself. But this is a very black-and-white way of thinking, since when we have different states of consciousness, there are plenty of in-between states where my suggestion could happen. So I was curious if anyone has experienced it or if there’s a fundamental flaw in my thinking.

@Leo Gura Hmm... It's a tricky thread to walk. At least, I'd be concerned about it if I really wanted to be sure of the truth. You don’t want to get too attached to any singular worldview, unity, or experience, whether it’s about consciousness or something else, and then neglect arguments that might change your perspective, or deny them altogether. Something like "Hitler is never wrong" and only amplifies the ideas that fit their beliefs while dismissing everything else. In reality, for something to be true, all of its elements must align in a way that holds up across different arguments. And to clarify, this doesn’t mean 'Oh well, if you can't list every species in the world, that means biodiversity doesn't exist. Ha, gotcha!' It just means you don’t want contradictory statements in your system. You know this already, though, haha, but that statement of yours concerned me and reminded me of it. Also, apologies in advance if I'm saying something really stupidly naive or off-track; I'm just trying to contemplate it myself through debate. Thank you!

Hmm... but couldn’t you make the same argument that if God isn’t able to create from any point within its "center," then it would be limited? That He would be limited by His inability to create infinitely from finitude? It’s tricky when dealing with infinity. That’s why, in my question above, I asked about making small changes in the human body after becoming God-realized, being aware of the chain of change needed to cause even a small adjustment to ourselves. This would prove that God-realization and consciousness can directly affect the body and reality, especially in a more scientific manner. By the way, to clarify, I'm not trying to argue with you. To be completely clear, I'm just trying to understand it myself since I seem to have some comprehension issues here.

@Leo Gura Hey, on a slightly similar topic, I’ve noticed that I get stuck in my contemplations sometimes, so I’m asking this to better understand how to deconstruct the "ego defense" I’m experiencing. What I’m struggling with is that even after intense mental skull-fucking work, I still can’t fully accept the idea that "I am God" or that the mind is limitless. For example, if I try to imagine subtle changes in my body, like my eyes becoming more brown, my nails growing a little longer, or healing pain or illness, it doesn't seem to work. I focus on these small things because I’ve noticed I get scared of changing, especially because I see how attached my ego is to my body and identity. But even when I try to make these minor changes that wouldn't pose a threat to the fixed idea of human identity, they still don’t manifest. It’s tricky to understand why, if someone can become fully awakened or omniscient, they still can’t intentionally influence reality or consciousness, even as an experiment. You mentioned something extreme in one of your episodes, like turning your hand into an eldritch Cthulu tentacle🐙, but that’s not even necessary. What about simply changing something small? I’d love to see a thread here, even where people share their experiences of going on trips, reaching God-realizations, and making small, scientifically verifiable changes that couldn't naturally occur. I realize that whenever I return from God-realizations (intense trips), my ego grabs onto these arguments as a defense mechanism, blocking me from fully integrating the experience. So, I’m wondering how you navigated this and got past it. Do you mostly think: "Oh, it's the case that even though I am God and that is the absolute truth, the reason I can’t do these things is because I’m still attached to a human mind that can't perform these actions? And in order to do so, I’d be risking death or detachment from my self, which is why it’s not so easy? I am God, so I choose not to do it. It's not that I cannot." But to that, I’d argue it still doesn’t make sense, because by definition, God is God. Once you realize that you are, you should be able to do it, purely for the fun and curiosity of it, especially if it isn't human-identity threatening... It’s confusing. Thank you so much!

Conformity is the absence of self-reflection (consciousness). A system that does not allow for self-reflection, feedback, or correction is a system that inevitably becomes dogmatic. A system without self-reflection turns into dogma because reality is infinite. When you "isolate" yourself from infinity, you do so by blocking self-reflection. Ego is that isolation. The ego is a miniature god that separates itself from the actual God or infinity in an attempt to control it. This is why cults, ideologies, and abusive tactics thrive on limiting knowledge, consciousness, expansion, and liberation. Consciousness, or infinity, is the ultimate truth. The moment you limit consciousness, you diminish it by reducing self-reflection (reducing more consciousness). A system that suppresses self-reflection then becomes dogmatic, egocentric, limited, conservative, false, and ultimately untrue. AI is a system that allows for feedback loops, self-reflection, and self-corrective behavior. This is why it is considered "intelligent", it can learn and adapt, unlike basic if-else programs that only handle binary logic (true/false) and can't deal with complex problems or recognize patterns. The wisest minds are those that embrace and harmonize complexity. The most closed-minded minds are those that only think in black-and-white terms. This is a global pattern. Fundamentally, all spirituality boils down to consciousness.

Losing your "old" mind, "ego-mind", yes! Losing weight is shedding your old body, but you don’t lose your organs and bones.

However, it's really important to test things out for yourself. Always be cautious and avoid falling into the trap of "ego-dosing", the idea that bigger is always better. I learned that the hard way when I took 800-1000 micrograms of LSD in one go. I ended up vomiting a lot of it and coughing up blood. My advice is to gradually increase your dose, and once you hit around the 200-300 microgram (μg) mark or above, really pay attention to how your body responds. Also, remember that as you work with higher doses or experience shifts in consciousness or tolerance, lower doses can become much more potent than they were before (something I also learned the hard way). I used to handle 400-500 micrograms with no problem, but after a period of using psychedelics, even that dose has become overwhelming for me. However, this can actually be a positive thing; it means you can achieve the same level of potency with less substance, which is a major advantage.

T̸o̶n̴u̸t̵s̴ ̷t̴o̶n̶u̷l̵a̶,̴ ̸s̵h̴i̸b̵b̷a̸ ̴d̴r̵a̶t̴,̵ ̷T̴o̵u̸n̴ ̸a̵l̶!̸ ̶T̵a̷t̵t̷a̵ ̶b̶r̵i̴n̶n̸o̷ ̶p̴l̷a̶t̵.̸ ̷B̴u̴n̶c̸h̵a̸ ̶f̸r̵i̷z̵z̶l̷e̷,̶ ̸f̶l̴i̶p̶p̶o̶ ̷f̴l̸a̶a̵n̷,̶ ̵Z̶o̴r̵r̵a̶ ̶k̵r̷i̶n̷,̶ ̶w̵i̶b̵b̸a̶ ̸w̵a̵a̶n̷!̵ ̶B̸u̷r̷t̶a̸n̵ ̸d̶u̵n̶a̶,̶ ̴m̵i̷v̸v̷l̴e̸ ̶v̷r̷o̸o̶,̵ ̶P̵l̸i̵b̶b̸e̷r̶ ̵d̶u̷b̵s̵,̴ ̵k̸r̵a̶c̴h̴ ̶n̶o̵ ̶s̷h̸o̸o̵.̸ ̶S̴k̴r̸a̷n̶a̶ ̷p̵r̸a̴t̴t̸,̴ ̴j̴i̶v̴v̶a̸ ̶j̷o̸o̴n̵,̶ ̶Z̶i̴b̴b̴e̸r̸ ̴z̶a̸p̴,̶ ̶w̶h̷i̴r̶r̶a̴l̸ ̶b̵o̴o̶n̸!̸ ̵F̶l̴i̸b̵b̶e̷r̷ ̷f̸o̸o̸n̷,̶ ̵s̵k̶r̶e̸e̴k̴ ̷b̵r̵o̵o̴t̷,̵ ̵G̶o̵n̶n̴i̷t̷ ̸s̷h̵a̸r̵n̷,̵ ̸t̷r̶u̸n̸n̵a̷ ̸t̶o̴o̴t̴.̴ ̴M̸i̴n̷g̶l̵e̶ ̶f̵r̵o̴o̸,̴ ̸d̷r̵i̸b̷b̸e̸r̵ ̴d̵o̶o̷,̸ ̷T̴o̶n̶n̶u̵t̷s̶ ̴t̷o̷u̷n̴l̶a̵,̶ ̶j̶a̶b̴b̵a̷d̶o̶o̵!̵

Thank you so much, amazing! 💛

Psychedelics and mind deconstruction (by this, I mean evaluating, debating, criticizing, and analyzing yourself, your biases, your beliefs about the world, researching your assumptions, especially in terms of ontology and epistemology in general).

https://www.youtube.com/@dmtdreamz/videos Which Actualized.org member is behind this channel? Whoever you are, I love you! 💖