Thank you for explaining.

Why be married if it means denying yourself things you are ethically entitled to ("Do your will when it harms no other" )?  Beautiful experiences that make life shine... that someone who "loves" you is denying you.

True love is letting someone do what makes them happy, as long as it's not hurting others.  She is not being harmed by his smoking DMT.  It isn't bad for you.  Spiritually, it's enriching.  It isn't physically addictive.  It doesn't make you beat your family or waste your money.  It doesn't make you passive aggressive towards your family for being denied simple pleasures.  MANY families are full of underflows of resentment.  I'd rather he smoked DMT in secret every now and then, than his relationship become poisoned by his dissatisfaction.

This doesn't mean you own each other.  You don't have the right to everything inside another person's mind.  To every small pleasure.  Owning someone is slavery, not partnership.  There's nothing worse than being in a relationship with an overbearing partner, for example.  The best relationships are relaxed one, where there is trust in each other so no need to know every little detail.

Not necessarily so severe!  I agree that it's not great for him to be hiding this when he does it every night.  What is sad is that he feels he has to... if she would really not understand, then the fault is as much his wife's as it is his.

It's only disrespectful by YOUR view of what's 'right'.  How do you know you're right?  Again, my point of why should you be compelled to have your mind and every action possessed by another?  Would Jesus be fussed if he found out Mary Magdalene had been smoking DMT on the sly?  She finds it spiritually enlightening, but is worried that Jesus might be against 'magic'.  But Jesus is a dude, so in this case she's worrying unduly, and Jesus'll forgive her, he wonders why she thought she had to hide it, but he realises why and he understands.  He'd probably smile and ask her to load him up.  I've only started using Jesus as an example because most people on here are from Christian backgrounds so I figured they'd relate to him.

Why is there separation?  This separation is just as likely if Art begins to feel REPRESSED by his wife, unable to do something harmless that he enjoys- DMT.

I was in a relationship with a girl who tried to control me, I could feel it, I began resenting it, I finally started being myself and we broke up.  She wouldn't let me be myself.  Like many people, she was manipulative- trying to shape those she 'loved' into her view of what they should be.  Instead of loving them for who they are.  Read the last story in Salinger's 'Nine Stories' and you'll find a wonderful passage on that subject.  She wouldn't let me blossom into the person I am now.  And despite what you think about me (caused by my HONESTY with you, how ironic!), I have shaped my life around my strict personal ethics.  I have made 'sacrifices'... I could be rich by now... but they were never really sacrifices, I was never martyring myself for show, I was doing what made me happy.  If martyring yourself to others really does make you happy, do it, you're free to, but don't expect praise or gratitude from others just for doing your thing, that would be arrogant to presume that's what you deserve from them.

I am not a drug user.  Neither is SWIM.  No more than someone drinking a cup of coffee or having a pint of beer.  I'm surprised to hear that propogandic term DRUGS used here.  And I suspect you're deliberately using it to instill the 'evil' undertones of it to strengthen your argument.  DMT is not a 'drug' to SWIM and I suspect a lot of people here.  It is a sacrament to the spiritual, and a tool to others.

If he would sneak off every night and drink a pint of beer, because his wife was a teetotaler, would you be so hard on him?  Or if they were vegetarians and he would sneak out for a bacon sandwich (many men do this, at least the ones who are pressured into vegetarianism by their girlfriends do).  DMT is not addictive.  But he felt he was getting obsessed with it, so he stopped.  What other 'drug' would LET you stop so easily?  Those who sneak out for cigarettes every night don't quit so easily.

We don't know enough about the situation to say.  He thinks it's the right thing, and I don't see much harm in him pursuing that course for now, so I'm all for it and wish him all the best.

So the problem with what you just said is actually that his wife is perceived as intolerant.  She may well be justified in being cautious if he used to be a wife-beating crackhead, but we don't know their history and can only work with what we know.

If I was in this situation, I would engineer that her and I watched a really good documentary about ayawaska by 'accident'.  Then I would say, hey, isn't that great how this stuff cures addicts?  Etc.  Then ask if she would be okay with him trying it to cure him of his addictive personality an other porblems.  Lead her gently into the mindset that THIS IS NOT DRUGS, but something positive.  You could call this 'deceptive', maybe it is, but it's better than him coming clean and their marriage collapsing.  He is entitled to that which makes him happy without harming others.  Maybe it's only the fact that he feels forced into secrecy that is harming his relationship with his wife.  Who knows?  We don't, we're not there.

I guess if he entered this marriage with a 'contractual' agreement to not smoke DMT ever again, then she is entitled.  But if he enjoys this in his life, maybe he could try to soften her then renegotiate terms, so they can both be happy.

No, I said people who want cake should say so, then share it.  Be honest, not play stupid politeness games.  I thought you were all for honesty?!  OR is dishonesty ok when it's for pointless politeness?  (As opposed to meaningful politeness)

I would only really do this to someone who was being pious.  Yes, I do believe pious types should have their mask psychologically unveiled for their own good, and if actually presenting you with the opportunity to do so, I'll accept it.

If it's someone who isn't pious- ie not using the game for manipulation, maybe they just don't feel they deserve it- then I'll accept, but laugh and say "haha you want it really, don't you?  Here, have it, I don't actually want it, I was just messing with you because you were martyring yourself.  Don't be a martyr, you deserve it".

And if it's someone who is wanting me to have it, and I want it, I'll take it, and we're both happy.

As for people thinking I'm a jerk, I don't want them hanging around with me anyway... well that's another reason to be yourself- who wants to be friends with someone who doesn't like the real you?  In life, there will ALWAYS be people who don't like you, and nothing you could do could change that.  Even Jesus had his fair share of enemies!  I'm not comparing myself here, I'm just saying no-one escapes being disliked.

I don't take advantage of anyone.  I never have in my entire life.  And I am actually known to be a polite person.  There are two types of politeness- genuine, practical, and manipulative.

Genuine politeness is a joy.

Practical politeness helps society run smoother.

Manipulative politeness is when there's something between the lines- "I'm asking if you want to come along with us, but actually I don't want you to and I want you to say no, so I'll ask you but make you uncomfortable in some other way and hopefully that'll put you off".  Read some Tolstoy, those awful old aristocrats were the masters at this.  They spent their entire lives reading between the lines, thrying to decipher through all the DISHONEST GAMES.

I'd say there wasn't any passivity there, the critique was pretty active... it was all out in the open.  That was me completely unmasked, showing ALL my thoughts of the moment.  OF THE MOMENT, yes I guess I exagerrated about my level of cake-acceptance.  I was accepting every side of my personality- embracing my shadow, so it doesn't fester inside me and DOESN'T leak out as passive aggression, or resentment... the things that can smash relationships more effectively than inconsequential secrets.

I was being provocative, but that was to get the point across (and 10g of catuaba was turning me into a lion! :lol: )

I'm not offended, I was expecting people to disagree.  I enjoy controversial discussion, we need to question taboos.  I just didn't expect one line of insults and prejudice (the 'only child' dig is harsh on a lot of people, I was surprised by that).  I actually thought you were referring to the bit about infidelity (which I'm personally not into, but I can imagine arguments to justify such actions... that's a big can of very interesting worms).