• Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).

Goodbye Psychedelic Community

Essentialization is perhaps one of the most common mistakes we humans make. For centuries it was argued that non-whites and especially blacks were inferior in terms of IQ or their degree of being "civilized" and "well cultured", and these arguments were always backed up by some empirical observations. Today many of us understand how flawed those arguments were... I think the same can be said of any other argument which tries to explain things in essentialist terms, by invoking the "innate nature" in a straightforward manner. How much of the gendered division of labor, or gender itself, can be attributed to the "etched in stone" nature, and how much of it is a product of our social structures? It would be wise to consider the very contingent elements which produce the observational data, on which these essentialist arguments rely. And observational data on its own can mean just about anything. Hence we need a sound theory, to be able to make meaningful inferences from the data.

A side note... I think it would do us all a lot of good to stay away from the "social internet" as much as possible. It is a chaotic mess! and to discern the reasonable voices from all the cacophony has become nearly impossible. Not to mention that most of these spaces rely on and are fueled by the content which is most likely to elicit reactions. What the reactionary internet presents us are mere caricatures of ideas and arguments which can actually be quite sound and reasonable, when explored in depth. But we are drowned in "content" and are unable to filter out something reasonable from the heaps of trash... its better to read lengthy papers and books than short edgy tweets!
 
Being knowledgeable doesn’t make people compassionate - or enthusiastic - per se?

Moreover, allowing yourself to be affected is hardly an … intellectual pursuit. Wouldn’t want us to make it a basic requirement.
I think knowledge is blind without the affect. Without our emotional intuitions, our knowledge would lead us to no wisdom. Intellect and Affect have to accompany each other. In fact, it would be false to consider them as necessarily disparate.
 
Feeling confident and feeling they belong isn’t a barrier placed but that most accept. All the stories I’ve heard of female ceos they all made their own path rather than meeting quotas of equality.
It is a barrier placed. If you keep getting shunned in some way, you give up after a time. If your physical safety (like sexual assault) is something that concerns you, then it also deters you.

Here in Brazil we’ve recently adapted affirmative action like positions that don’t make sense like judges that are not white can answer 50% correct vs 80% correct of white counter parts for the same role. Politics women have also been placed into this quota game and most just enter as tokens and rather than actually run they spend their funds on other candidates.
Yeah, another sticky one isn't it. We want to increase equality and equity by increasing diversity in all sectors (so that under-priviledged and marginalized individuals can have some way to rise up, rather than be stuck in a cycle), but because people from marginalized groups aren't "indoctrinated" in the same way as the dominant demographic, they often aren't as educated in the same way. And thus, answer 50% right while their white counterparts answer 80% right. It's sticky.

And yeah, it does know one any good to use people objects for an agenda without honoring it. It's optics, it's fake, it addresses and alleviates nothing.

As for slavery and women voting I don’t have enough information on the topic but considering the time period and significance each placed in history slavery was cheap manual labor force that virtually all countries used throughout history.
Because we can't test another way it could've gone down, this isn't very valid. It's happenstance. If we could allow history to replay on different terms up to this point and then compare the outcomes this may hold some weight. However, because it was significant doesn't mean that it couldn't have gone another way and that progress wouldn't have been made up to this same point in time without people enslaving each other.

Right and wrong didn’t play a role more ethical or not. With the logic of right or wrong no nation would have progressed in any regard since someone else’s rights are always infringed on. Be it taking the land of the natives or exploitive labor of children/uneducated/debt ridden.
I have to disagree, there were certainly moral and ethical considerations made, this is why slavery reflects the age of class systems in our human history. You couldn't just enslave anyone, and it was "right" according to one rationale or another to enslave whomever one did.
When Europeans enslaved black Africans, they were justified by virtue of their conclusions drawn from their observations of living differently that they were savage, no better than animals, and were ripe for the picking, taking, and trading, and laboring. When resources to the new world ran scarce, you kicked off black Africans, not any white person, regardless of their relation to you.

And those are ways of taking advantage of people for one's own good. I don't see how any of it is "necessary."

Many argue today that we still have slavery with extra steps but I think we are going a bit side track.
This is actually said on an episode of Rick and Morty (S2 E6) :LOL:

With women voting besides backwards thinking like they had with black men having low intelligence because of brain volume or something I assume it has something to do with the right to own land or just as a means of control or wanting to be superior? Idk
Check out the psuedoscience of phrenology.


But going back to masculine and feminine someone stated “ Kat Harrison that they'd say she is Terrance McKenna's ex wife” as of it devalues her? His name holds more recognition and authority. If it were the opposite the same would be done. Stating her relationship to him would only increase the authority of what she mentions. Maybe this is also a cultural/language issue for me but I don’t see the issue and had zero idea who she was. Usually when you go to a talk you go to hear from someone with perceived authority on the topic. I wouldn’t go to hear a talk about DMT from someone I just met that no one knows but if they presented as partner /cofounder or whatever of someone known as a head figure it would change what they say.
I think this is with regard to how often it seems to need to be highlighted instead of her being a stand-alone figure. Terence had to make it on his own, he wasn't called the next so and so, etc. I think that she shouldn't have to stand on his proverbial shoulders to be heard, despite his name carrying more weight. If she's in the spotlight, then she's likely been vetted by someone (depending on the program or feature). At the same time, I see the angle that you're seeing it from as well.

Men not needing to be violent doesn’t make the fact that majority of violent crimes will continue being committed by men.
I think for certain things, where there is a biological imperative to consider (in this case, a man's general strength vs a woman's) that certain roles will be maintained, but that not all roles that society projects need remain.

I think in less privileged locations and situations this topics we discuss are irrelevant and the norm will remain. The roles of men not being the provider and forcing that onto women with or without them wanting it hasn’t helped and in Latin and black communities it has hurt man.
I disagree. This is why there are more women's rights movements the world over in the past 20 years.

And I'm a man. A black man. I broke out of the traditional molds that are what cause the men you speak of to be so hurt by a woman being the breadwinner. I can only say that this involves a state of mind, and nothing else. We have to be ready to change our expectations. Sorry if that sounded harsh.

Also, I'm not trying to be knitpicky, if I am, I just wanted to address you fully, and I also took some adderall today.

One love
 
I think knowledge is blind without the affect. Without our emotional intuitions, our knowledge would lead us to no wisdom. Intellect and Affect have to accompany each other. In fact, it would be false to consider them as necessarily disparate.
I'd even argue that the use of logic and reason is predicated in emotion and feeling.

One love
 
Essentialization is perhaps one of the most common mistakes we humans make. For centuries it was argued that non-whites and especially blacks were inferior in terms of IQ or their degree of being "civilized" and "well cultured", and these arguments were always backed up by some empirical observations. Today many of us understand how flawed those arguments were... I think the same can be said of any other argument which tries to explain things in essentialist terms, by invoking the "innate nature" in a straightforward manner. How much of the gendered division of labor, or gender itself, can be attributed to the "etched in stone" nature, and how much of it is a product of our social structures? It would be wise to consider the very contingent elements which produce the observational data, on which these essentialist arguments rely. And observational data on its own can mean just about anything. Hence we need a sound theory, to be able to make meaningful inferences from the data.

A side note... I think it would do us all a lot of good to stay away from the "social internet" as much as possible. It is a chaotic mess! and to discern the reasonable voices from all the cacophony has become nearly impossible. Not to mention that most of these spaces rely on and are fueled by the content which is most likely to elicit reactions. What the reactionary internet presents us are mere caricatures of ideas and arguments which can actually be quite sound and reasonable, when explored in depth. But we are drowned in "content" and are unable to filter out something reasonable from the heaps of trash... its better to read lengthy papers and books than short edgy tweets!
I like to be the 10th man in topics and think that social media plays an important role of showing human nature and how easily we are manipulated and influenced by content. Not falling into the trap of social media is important but without seeing the allure and feeling its draw its hard to not notice behavior some think they don't have. Without social media most would remain in solitude and never find their 'group' like psychonauts or any other community that is fridge/unpopular.

I rarely post other than fact content but having a debate on conflicting viewpoints helps develop better understandings of others even if you don't agree. I personally am against pushes for censorship and punishment when it comes to 'questionable content'.

Pure knowledge without emotions would lead to immoral choices and unethical practices in pursuit of said knowledge.

I think the term 'gender' has been politicized a lot. Just because I am a man doesn't mean I can't have 'female energy/behavior' but overall I all always be predisposed to male behavior from a biological perspective. We tend to think in during a trip/ego death we are no sex or whatever but that is during a peak experience and even then all those experiences are influenced by our life experiences. Because I don't need to conform to being a man/woman doesn't change the fact that we all have a mind/body connection and one cannot exist without the other. Consciousness or whatever you want to call it.

Guys I can be wrong and have no issues with that. These are just my opinions. In the end what others think or do is of zero importance to me and I have no issues with people thinking or acting in ways contrary to my beliefs.
 
Another side note (apologies if that's too many side notes)... There's actually a lot of left wing critique of the affirmative action and other similar maneuvers. Many see it as simply a way to avoid addressing the structural problems, by implying that the mere representation is enough to address the deep seated inequalities. There's also a good deal of critique of representational politics which questions whether the "representational democracy" can even be considered democracy at all. But the louder voices are more visible, and they are... Quite stupid! They argue against essentialization of gender and end up doing the exact same thing. The worst is that this caricature of "left wing politics" as seen on the mainstream and social media, is increasingly seen as "THE left wing".
 
Mmmm, ‘understanding’.

How does understanding and underwhelming correlate, I wonder?

Being knowledgeable doesn’t make people compassionate - or enthusiastic - per se?

Moreover, allowing yourself to be affected is hardly an … intellectual pursuit. Wouldn’t want us to make it a basic requirement.
[Apols for the slow reply, too many scintillating intellects here today!] Those two examples would have more of a connection if the back-formation "overstand" existed in common usage in the way that "underwhelm" has emerged. It's perhaps more interesting to compare the etymology of "understand" versus its near-simile of "comprehend", latter of the two having far more of a co-operative essence in contrast to the possibly heirarchical subtext of the former. And yet, the deference implied by "understand" can perform a healthy social function too.

Knowledge and understanding/comprehension are two (or three!) separate things. One might rightly regard memorisation of a list of facts or trivia as knowledge, but this does not necessarily imply any level of understanding (speaking from experience here :oops: ) [This next bit is the bit where I deftly tack back to the topic of flakiness in the psychedelic community by being unabe to do so in any convincing kind of way, so let's just pretend that bit was successful ;) ] Er…

And don't get me started on issues of class and privilege. I'd struggle to adhere to a number of our rules, for one thing. It's as though the roots of the problem are a level beyond systemic - meta-systemic?
 
I’d like a ‘system’ to keep referencing a whole. No need to go meta on the thing! 😉

‘Systemic inequality’ does sound more like a philosophy than an object of scientific research to me though. Depends what question we’re asking maybe.

Systems theory would do well to acknowledge its own biases, for sure!
 
Race will always play a role but we think mainly of Europeans enslaving black africans but all of asia and middle east also had this practice and not only with blacks. Race is a weird issue here in Brasil compared to the states. Despite a majority being considered 'mixed' and around 10-20% black and white race places a large issue. Racism is a crime here resulting in prison sentence yet the issues are still similar to in the states despite what some tourists see or think. Slavery wasn't for the benefit of the enslaved obviously but rather the nation or 'owners'. Here we still have the remnants of slavery with entire communities of 'escaped slaves' descendants still living in suboptimal conditions similar to poorer regions of the south in the states like new orleans and such. Historiclly all great empires had some form of slavery even the smaller empires in africa not just counting egypt had slaves and those are the ones that progressed the most in comparison to smaller tribes/peoples that had smaller scale or only class systems. Civilizations with the same time progression around the world didn't progress in the same manner/speed and we could argue possible reason but I'll accept we can't really know. We wouldn't have advanced in sciences without human experimentations as rapidly... (can't know so not valid?)

With the barrier (glass ceiling) placed sure it may be 'harder' for you to enter a certain field but why not just make your own path? I've read in the past a few posts on the lack of black representation or lgbt in the psychedelic community as if forced inclusion would help anything. Everyone already has the same opportunities (rarely is blatant discrimination seen in western world with only a few cases being proven rather than percieved) Forced participation when something was outright banned like black children going to white school and many other examples where you had to force and protect is one thing but now a days we don't have these barriers.

"And I'm a man. A black man. I broke out of the traditional molds that are what cause the men you speak of to be so hurt by a woman being the breadwinner. I can only say that this involves a state of mind, and nothing else. We have to be ready to change our expectations. Sorry if that sounded harsh."

The expectations on women should be different? Black women based on "studies/research" in the states are the most underprivileged yet many have some have made it to the top. They didn't get handouts and quotas for the most part being pioneers. Sure it may be harder but the tops of any field isn't a handout and many spend their entire lifetimes on objectives to just fail. I didn't mentioned being hurt by woman being the breadwinner but forced to be a single mother not by choice rather than being present in raising the children. Here in Brasil this is as much an issue as it is in the states with poor black women being the most affected keeping in the cycle of poverty. I'm proud of my mother and all the sacrifice she had to endure to raise me. It may seem I'm misogynistic with some of my choices of opinions shared but like I mentioned I'm not against any choices others make since it never affects me. These are just observations I've seen countless times. @Voidmatrix just because we are the excepetion doesn't mean make it the norm or possible for most. I'm not against breaking norms but I've not seen any benefits to breaking the nuclear family. Maybe to a fault I generalize and outliner statistics don't change the majority.

I don't get feeling hurt and prefer anyone share their opinions since helps me think differently and I can be 'behind' in my thinking but like I mentioned everything is based on my lived experience and observations. I'm not a woman I cannot speak for them not can I speak for men nor any race or group but myself.

Cycling back to gender a transgender man posted a video at how lonely it was as a man vs when he was a women. Saying how the emotional coldness of solidarity of being a man and not getting any attention or 'help' was jarring and never realized it as a woman. I may be wrong and am interested in different examples but the 'inherent gender' roles like I mentioned are not the social roles/expectations but the deeper behaviors we each have natural tendencies towards. I'm fairly sure these are backed by psychology unless this is an outdated analysis.

Again my comments are not on being pro or anti anything just speaking on the topic of how I see gender role which I have sidetracked a lot from psychedelic community.
 
Conclusion

The real world demands tangible contributions, like supporting small businesses, non-profits, and the arts.


Goodbye, psychedelic community. I can see your death throes. From my view, the world will be better off without you.
so my reading comprehend has gone down quite a lot and I missed the point completely of the thread and just derailed it a lot.

But the issues that arise with the old community will arrive in any other that try’s to replace it. We are always doomed to repeat the past. With a queer community or women lead or other group they will tend to exclude others that don’t fit their mold and subgroups are formed. Pretty much repeats everywhere with subcultures creating subgroups for each just like religions.

Small businesses grow and with that growth it changes usually following the interests of the investors. Non profits conform to requests of investors to remain financed and the arts as individuals grow in fame they tend to loose the origins that made them special/unique most of the times or only get recognition after the fact.

Personally I’ve never observed these issues but have never paid much attention to the community outside of experiences and techniques of production/extractions. I’ve rarely listened or read any works by large figure heads. I quite like the forum based online community but that has died quite a bit from 10 years ago. I always liked reading about personal experiences and experiments of members on here and thenook very rarely actually posting.

The forum psychedelic community has died for the worse and will be missed :(

@Jungleheart sorry for derailing your thread so much. This is way I rarely post lol
 
Race will always play a role but we think mainly of Europeans enslaving black africans but all of asia and middle east also had this practice and not only with blacks. Race is a weird issue here in Brasil compared to the states. Despite a majority being considered 'mixed' and around 10-20% black and white race places a large issue. Racism is a crime here resulting in prison sentence yet the issues are still similar to in the states despite what some tourists see or think. Slavery wasn't for the benefit of the enslaved obviously but rather the nation or 'owners'. Here we still have the remnants of slavery with entire communities of 'escaped slaves' descendants still living in suboptimal conditions similar to poorer regions of the south in the states like new orleans and such.
I spent two months in Brazil traveling and doing volunteer work so have seen and experienced what you're referring to first-hand... Since I'm primarily black, it's something that impacts me. I happen to be pretty German too, but that's besides the point :LOL:

However, the world over, the darker you are the more oppressed you likely are. Even in Africa.
Historiclly all great empires had some form of slavery even the smaller empires in africa not just counting egypt had slaves and those are the ones that progressed the most in comparison to smaller tribes/peoples that had smaller scale or only class systems. Civilizations with the same time progression around the world didn't progress in the same manner/speed and we could argue possible reason but I'll accept we can't really know. We wouldn't have advanced in sciences without human experimentations as rapidly... (can't know so not valid?)
So we should sacrifice the lives of others for the sake of progress?
Do you condone the Tuskegee experiments?
What about MK Ultra (so we can take a little heat off the racial side, because what we're talking about is deeper than that)
I'm trying to understand, because I don't see how it being historic makes it acceptable? We have historically been a lot more unstable, should we continue to be unstable (even though on the whole we are :LOL: ) I feel similarly about something becoming the norm. I've used this one before, but obesity is becoming more normal in the US, so should it just be accepted?

With the barrier (glass ceiling) placed sure it may be 'harder' for you to enter a certain field but why not just make your own path? I've read in the past a few posts on the lack of black representation or lgbt in the psychedelic community as if forced inclusion would help anything. Everyone already has the same opportunities (rarely is blatant discrimination seen in western world with only a few cases being proven rather than percieved) Forced participation when something was outright banned like black children going to white school and many other examples where you had to force and protect is one thing but now a days we don't have these barriers.
I'd argue that we certainly have these barriers, they've just been masked. Take schools for example. In the US, funding for schools is typically alotted based on the performance of the students of the school on the whole on certain standardized tests. Naturally, the more educated kids from wealthier backgrounds, with more educated and knowledgeable parents, tend to score higher, get the most funding, and therefore the best equipment, the best teachers and coaches, and an overall better education than kids from lower incomes. There are so many tiny variables that add up to the big picture here.
Discrimination has been masked. One way is you just don't say it. I've seen female cultivators get turned away in the marijuana industry because they were women, and yes, I heard men say that was why they chose not to hire them.
We do not have the same opportunities because opportunities are attached to many factors such as socio-economic status, environment, fostering, upbringing, etc. I do not have the same opportunity as Ice-Cube's son.
There's saying like "the good ol boy's group for a reason."
There was a district in Alabama (I think) years ago that closed down the only DMV for a wide radius in a mostly black low-income area, with the excuse being funding. These kinds of acts impact whole communities of people.
There was a bus route changed in a part of Texas years ago, limiting it's movement through another mostly black low-income area. Being low-income means you may not have a car.
These types of changes compound and again impact whole communities that are typically uneducated as well. We are not provided the same opportunities.

I'm not mad at all by the way :)

many have some have made it to the top. They didn't get handouts and quotas for the most part being pioneers. Sure it may be harder but the tops of any field isn't a handout and many spend their entire lifetimes on objectives to just fail.
A very small number overall. Let's be real. For so many it's hard to even get into the room.

I didn't mentioned being hurt by woman being the breadwinner but forced to be a single mother not by choice rather than being present in raising the children. Here in Brasil this is as much an issue as it is in the states with poor black women being the most affected keeping in the cycle of poverty. I'm proud of my mother and all the sacrifice she had to endure to raise me. It may seem I'm misogynistic with some of my choices of opinions shared but like I mentioned I'm not against any choices others make since it never affects me.
It seems that this can also be an argument for how woman are just as good at men at some things we think they aren't... you seemed to have turned out pretty well.
As for me, my dad rarely had a job... and was abusive. Mine was around, and he still couldn't cut the mustard.

. @Voidmatrix just because we are the excepetion doesn't mean make it the norm or possible for most. I'm not against breaking norms but I've not seen any benefits to breaking the nuclear family. Maybe to a fault I generalize and outliner statistics don't change the majority.
Then this also applies to what you said about women being able to make it and equal opportunity :LOL:
On a real note though, my response was misplaced because I didn't realize what you meant regarding how black and latino men are hurting. I thought you meant in the sense that women were making money, not that some are growing up without fathers.
And outlier statistics change a lot of things when they are no longer outliers.

I don't get feeling hurt and prefer anyone share their opinions since helps me think differently and I can be 'behind' in my thinking but like I mentioned everything is based on my lived experience and observations. I'm not a woman I cannot speak for them not can I speak for men nor any race or group but myself.
Well, I'm enjoying talking to you, and I hope you don't think I'm hurt. I'm not. <3

Cycling back to gender a transgender man posted a video at how lonely it was as a man vs when he was a women. Saying how the emotional coldness of solidarity of being a man and not getting any attention or 'help' was jarring and never realized it as a woman. I may be wrong and am interested in different examples but the 'inherent gender' roles like I mentioned are not the social roles/expectations but the deeper behaviors we each have natural tendencies towards. I'm fairly sure these are backed by psychology unless this is an outdated analysis.
I like this example. For me, it shows the societal pressure for men to stifle their emotions. Not all men, very few probably, are in dire positions, that are life or death, on a regular basis where they need to stifle emotion so greatly. They are mainly at desk jobs. It ends up coming out wrong in the end anyway.
Indoctrination can span generations, why not millennia.

One love
 
Here's a recording that seems highly pertinent to the discussion in several ways:
View attachment Live at the Warfield.mp3
Referencing power structures and the sacred feminine alongside promoting solipsistic self-shamanism, this really makes me wonder how much misinformation, inadvertently or otherwise, TMcK may have been responsible for over the years. I do rather feel that some echoes of this may have contributed to bringing about the circumstances that led to @Jungleheart starting this thread. [Thanks for that, JH, too.]
 
Here's a recording that seems highly pertinent to the discussion in several ways:
View attachment 101826
Referencing power structures and the sacred feminine alongside promoting solipsistic self-shamanism, this really makes me wonder how much misinformation, inadvertently or otherwise, TMcK may have been responsible for over the years. I do rather feel that some echoes of this may have contributed to bringing about the circumstances that led to @Jungleheart starting this thread. [Thanks for that, JH, too.]
I'm taking it easy for the rest of the night but just wanted to comment it's funny and silly how the divine feminine is often conveniently so sexy. Not so frequently mentioned as feminine is the unprecedented strength of will to get through childbirth and other unique hardships women face. I think women in general probably have a higher pain tolerance than men.

It's shocking to me how quickly what is best and true is evolving, even day by day. The ideas he promoted were probably necessary for adoption at the time.
 
Well if you want to speak with an off the charts psychedelic feminist then I’m here luv! 🙏

You really seem to be having two topics in this thread: community, and then also feminism

We could start a thread specifically for psychedelic feminism, or the topic of psychedelic community feminism.
I feel like women have different journeys and relationships to hyperspace sometimes.
 
Back
Top Bottom