this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2024
145 points (93.9% liked)

News

23200 readers
3111 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

"But Rachel also has another hobby, one that makes her a bit different from the other moms in her Texas suburb—not that she talks about it with them. Once a month or so, after she and her husband put the kids to bed, Rachel texts her in-laws—who live just down the street—to make sure they’re home and available in the event of an emergency.

"And then, Rachel takes a generous dose of magic mushrooms, or sometimes MDMA, and—there’s really no other way to say this— spends the next several hours tripping balls."

top 43 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world 7 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (5 children)

Why are people applauding this? Is this a good trend? Is everyone saying “Yes, it’s great that Americans are taking more drugs”.

I feel like the reaction should be neutral at best, and more likely strongly negative (because there is a child in the house).

(And yes, getting drunk on alcohol with a child in the house is just as bad.)

How is this a positive thing? I’m honestly struggling to understand. Is the assumption that increased psychedelic drug use will be more than offset by a decrease in alcohol use? Are people interpreting this article as a sign of less stigma around drug use, and they believe a lessened stigma will have social benefits?

Are people applauding this because they see it as the individual standing against society, and they applaud individualism? Are they applauding it because they see it as a form of greater consumer choice? Do they believe recreational drug use is beneficial to the individual?

I know this will attract a deluge of downvotes, but I’m also hoping someone answers.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 8 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

If only people spent any time actually investigating what was said and not defaulting to pearl clutching because of the propaganda they've been fed, we could live in a much better world.

We know people can use alcohol responsibly. And alcohol is the most debilitating, aggression causing and all around harmful substance. In some data, it loses out to hard core opiates, but in most aspects, alcohol is genuinely more risky.

Serotonergic substances, such as MDMA and mushrooms are less harmful than cannabis.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2019/06/25/what-is-the-most-dangerous-drug

Serotonergic substances have been shown to have extremely positive effect for mental health when used in a responsible and reasonable way, such as doing them once a month with good preparation. Usually most people trip perhaps once or a couple of times a year, but once a month isn't "too much". If it was weekly, then that would be a bit excessive. But remember that with drug abuse issues in terms of other substances, like alcohol, tobacco, meth, opiates, your would have to do them daily.

It's rather impossible to binge shrooms, lsd or ecstasy. They just stop working so fast. If alcohol built tolerance at the same speed, after a few drinks, you'd need double to feel the same, and after a sixpack, you'd hardly feel anything unless you started drinking straight up booze and even that wouldn't get you drunk.

As in, you could want to binge shrooms or lsd or mdma once you start, but even if you shove your face into it, 24 hours later you're just not going to be high. You might be rather confused if you've just stayed up binging, as it will have an effect, but it'll be more sleep deprivation at that point.

I wish I could relay all my experience and knowledge on the subject. I'm absolutely convinced you would agree. But I know how much of the drug war propaganda stands between that understanding and arguing against it. Took me years to accept we need to legalise all drugs after realising we have to legalise cannabis. And that was like 20 years ago. It's not to increase use. It's to prevent abuse and take the trade away from criminals. (Taxing the global drug trade would easily cover ending world hunger, for one.)

Here's a great organisation to have a peek at.

https://maps.org/

Multidisciplinary Association of Psychedelic Studies.

Founded in 1986, MAPS is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit research and educational organization that develops medical, legal, and cultural contexts for people to benefit from the careful uses of psychedelics and marijuana. MAPS previously sponsored the most advanced psychedelic-assisted therapy research in the world and continues to support psychedelic and marijuana research with a focus on the people and places most impacted by trauma.

Hope that answers some of your questions, although, I expect a lot of the viewpoints I have are straight up unacceptable to you for some reason or another.

[–] HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world -2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I said nothing about legality or illegality.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 2 points 58 minutes ago

I think I made a lot of other points besides the remark that we need to reform most drug laws.

[–] sazey@lemmy.world 9 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Why the pearl clutching over a child in the house? The person even goes as far as arranging possible cover from the in-laws. Even if they didn't, it is a child and not a ticking time bomb. Obvious idiots getting blind drunk or tripping balls into the next dimension aside, an experienced tripper in a safe environment (ie their home) would be able to handle themselves fine.

[–] HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world -3 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

Why don't they take the child to the in-laws? Waiting for an emergency is too late.

Even if they didn't, it is a child and not a ticking time bomb.

Children require and deserve a safe and predictable environment populated by responsible adults who can attend to their needs and adequately respond in an emergency.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 54 minutes ago

and adequately respond in an emergency.

And being an experienced tripper myself, I'm sure they're still capable of adequately responding to their children's needs. A basic recreational dose of MDMA or LSD would enhance my evening and I wouldn't be fit to drive a car, but compared to having several drinks, not really impaired. If there was a genuine emergency emergency, I'd still be able to function. Like I could drive a car, but like with when being drunk, I wouldn't unless it was the only option. Which in this case, it wouldn't be, seeing as if they needed to drive, the in-laws are there ready for that.

What sort of an emergency do you expect they would be too impaired to handle?

[–] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 1 points 58 minutes ago

Okay... I'll give it a go.

As we age, it's easy to lose touch with something sacred. Certains drugs, in certain settings can remind some people of that. For those people, it can be a way to fend off the embittering nature of the rest of the world. It can put them in touch with that sacredness, reawaken some sense of reverence and awe, and some are able to carry a bit of this back into that into the world.

I don't partake in drugs or even much alcohol. And I wouldn't let loose without some sort of backup plan for the safety of my child. But I'm all for people doing what it is that lets reconnect to the sacred.

Personally, I hope it softens our hyper individualism and capitalist values. Hope that gives you an alternative perspective.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Why are "some" people applauding this?

Lots of reasons. First and foremost mushrooms are pretty damn safe compared to doing cocaine, heroin, etc. Let's face it, people are going to do something. Don't play it is unnatural either when even animals in nature seek mind altering substances

They are not without risk though as some people with latent schizophrenia can be triggered. I would never suggest doing psychedelics unless you have done them before. Yes, I realize that is a paradox.

How can it be a positive thing?

It is a positive thing if they think it is. That is the whole point and if you don't think it is positive then don't do it. If you read the article it has candid statements from people who do it. That is the answer you are not looking for.

I am not sure I get what you are saying about getting drunk around children. I guess you have to be clearer. Is it okay to have just one drink with a child. What about two or three over the course of hours. What about getting blackout drunk. There is obviously a line somewhere there.

Also it is important to note that many of the mushroom infused products being sold are not even illegal. You can buy them at the store. Your whole point about stigma kind of goes out the window considering this.

Frankly, if you want to be critical this feels of marketing under the guise of a human interest story. If I sold mushroom infused products articles like this would definitely help my bottom line

Claiming you will be downvoted is really cringe btw. I don't typically down vote much but saying garbage like that sure does tempt me.

[–] HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world -1 points 1 hour ago

mushrooms are pretty damn safe compared to doing cocaine, heroin,

Are you saying you think increased mushroom use will lead to a decrease in cocaine and heroin use?

Or is "better than heroin" the standard by which we decide substances should be applauded and encouraged?

[–] saddlebag@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

This was at the top when I opened the thread and I’m glad I read it. Anyone who downvotes you is doing it because you are contradicting their biases. Your comment gave me something to think about.

I think the reason everyone is applauding this is because liberals/left-leaning have read enough literature to confirm the dangers of alcohol and other strongly addictive substances. Newer research shows the positive effects of psychedelics but they’re yet unproven as categorically better than other prescription medications.

When lemmings (who are mostly very left leaning and decently educated) see people doing things that can show the positive effects of psychedelics, they applaud it without much critical thought.

Comments like yours not being downvoted to oblivion and then hidden are the reason that Lemmy is still decent. For now

[–] noxy@yiffit.net 17 points 4 hours ago

Cool. Good for them. They got emergency arrangements if needed. How many people who drink alcohol can say that?

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 13 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Well yeah it’s a thing. It was a thing with our moms too. Our grandmas often preferred the ‘ludes unless they were hippies

[–] lousyd@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Not my mom. She told me she never did anything like that.

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Absolutely, she also never had sex.

[–] Good_morning@lemmynsfw.com 4 points 2 hours ago

Idk, this is OP's mom we're talking about here...

[–] Melody@lemmy.one 33 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (2 children)

Legitimately I question that this is even newsworthy.

It appears that these women are harming nobody and are partaking of the drug(s) safely and sensibly in a manner that ensures that no one is being significantly endangered. Yes the residual dangers exist and bad trips can happen to pretty much anyone. I don't feel as if they're even posing a danger to their children; if this is in fact being done in such a way that the kids are never being exposed to their parents while they're in an altered mental state due to hallucinogenic intoxication. If it isn't; yeah; I could see why a local branch of child services might pay them a visit. However, I'm not going to make that negative assumption.

I don't particularly commend the women, nor the news outlet, for coming out about this though; it is still very much technically illegal by current law. But, I also do agree that the stigma attached to drug use, even when done so responsibly, is in fact ridiculous and stupid in general. However, I don't see a better way of achieving what that does...so I couldn't suggest any better alternatives and I don't support going back to a previous era in Law where drugs that factually are provably dangerous, for some reason, are not regulated. Reasonable and Sensible Regulations on dangerous Drugs are REQUIRED; it's just that some people have a different definition of 'Reasonable and Sensible' which has to be ironed into a proper consensus for society.

[–] areyouevenreal@lemm.ee 1 points 23 minutes ago

Unfortunately some people have no idea women like this actually exist and need to be told that drug use is a part of normal suburban life. Though to be honest I am kind of against the idolisation of suburbs, they are really inefficient, but I digress. Articles like this help break down the stigma around this kind of drug. A stigma that makes little sense as well given their safety profile and effectiveness in treating some illnesses like treatment resistant depression, anxiety, and PTSD.

I don't particularly commend the women, nor the news outlet, for coming out about this though; it is still very much technically illegal by current law. But, I also do agree that the stigma attached to drug use, even when done so responsibly, is in fact ridiculous and stupid in general. However, I don't see a better way of achieving what that does...so I couldn't suggest any better alternatives and I don't support going back to a previous era in Law where drugs that factually are provably dangerous, for some reason, are not regulated. Reasonable and Sensible Regulations on dangerous Drugs are REQUIRED; it's just that some people have a different definition of 'Reasonable and Sensible' which has to be ironed into a proper consensus for society.

We should start with the most dangerous drug in our society: alcohol.

Oh wait the Americans tried that and it actually made things worse. Shocking.

Drug prohibition doesn't and has never worked. We also know neither voters nor politicians understand nor follow scientific consensus on drugs. Not popular consensus. Scientific consensus. Very different things unfortunately.

Look up any ranking of drug harms published by scientists. You might honestly be shocked. Things that people consider safe like alcohol normally end up being ranked much higher than other things commonly thought of as dangerous like nicotine or amphetamines. As much as smoking is bad there is way too much focus on it compared to alcohol and some other stuff. I know there are even some people that think of cocaine as being relatively normal and safe because of its overall popularity, yet if you actually look into it it's not healthy at all.

[–] MimicJar@lemmy.world 24 points 7 hours ago

Legitimately I question that this is even newsworthy.

But, I also do agree that the stigma attached to drug use, even when done so responsibly, is in fact ridiculous and stupid in general

I thought you answered your own question. This article helps remove the taboo.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 60 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Rachel should give me a call.

[–] DrSleepless@lemmy.world 9 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

I also volunteer to be Rachel’s trip buddy

[–] AI_toothbrush@lemmy.zip 15 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Lol this is kind of slang i like being used by news sites. I dont care if its unprofessional, tripping balls is just too good to not say. Def one of my favourite english slangs.

[–] aStonedSanta@lemm.ee 9 points 10 hours ago

lol reminds me as a kid. We’d always say. It’s hot as balls. One time someone asked me what that meant and I just kinda looked at em. Like well it’s hot. As. Yeah balls…? 😆

[–] doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 9 hours ago

Rachel sounds like a fun hang. Kinda like a reverse Karen.