I was browsing netflix and saw there is a new show called "Chelsea Does...", and in the description it mentioned something about mind-warping drugs. Curious, I did a quick search and this article was the first result.

I don't really know too much about this show, or who this woman is (I guess she's very famous?)...but this certainly will draw some attention to our increasingly popularized community.

Lisa Ling's segment on netflix is better and addresses ayahausca tourism, where Chelsea seems to be participating in it and honestly comes off disrespectful towards Peru. She does redeem herself at the end with talking about how it helped her see her relationship with her sister in a new way, maybe allowing her to grow in that fashion.

...is it strange that I miss the days when only spiritual freaks, mckenna fans, hippies, shamans, artists, ethnobotonists, freak chemists and explorers were well aware of ayahuasca?

I've seen ayahuasca on the history channels "ancient aliens", I've seen DMT as the focus of a fictional horror movie titled "banshee chapter", and "ayahuasca vine of the souls" and "DMT the spirit molecule" are featured on Netflix...I think I even heard about Lindsay Lohan taking ayahuasca for a cocaine habit...

I've always wanted psychedelic and entheogen use to be reintegrated into modern cultures, and now it's kind of happening, though the channels it's happening through are a bit disturbing...I was all for terence mckenna and "botanic dimentions", I was extremely happy with MAPS and other research institutions, and all of this is great...

...it's when DMT, and ayahuasca (a core of my spiritual practice) become popularised by superficial channels in modern culture that I have an issue with it.

...I can only hope this mainstream exposure turns out to be beneficial in the end, resulting in legalization and acceptance...though I fear that it will lead to people who lack the education and respect to be dealing with such things to begin to use them carelessly, possibly hurting themselves, and generating negativity and bad press towards the yagé, which generally results in legislation, scheduling and oppression of genuine ayahuasca users.

This stuff is not to be taken lightly, and I fear many uneducated or unprepared folks out there will not realise this until it's too late.

-eg

Someone recently watched a few episodes of this show while I was around, including the aya one. What a piece of garbage.

Not only does the show's host make a ton of outright disgusting remarks (homophobic, racist, classist, generally rude, etc.)...she's not particularly funny/engaging from an entertainment perspective (unless you find said remarks funny...but that's a whole other issue).

The aya episode was pretty terrible. My favorite part was how she treated all of the middle-aged white dude "authorities" with reverence/respect and within the first couple minutes of Peruvian footage, she's referring to it as a "godforsaken country".

Welcome to the future...the spectacle is well underway.

The only decent representation of Aya I have seen in popular media was from an episode of Weeds . . . . Aya Scene

This is exactly my thoughts as well. I couldn't believe she said that.

My favorite part was when she finally started purging lolololo

Yeah this is exactly what I was afraid of. I didn't want to make assumptions without actually watching it myself, but thanks for sparing me from that. I haven't seen Lisa Ling's piece on netflix, my curiosity is piqued though so I'll check it out later tonight.

I wonder how many more times this kind of thing has to happen before all of the "spiritual freaks, mckenna fans, hippies, shamans, artists, ethnobotonists, freak chemists and explorers" recognize the pattern and decide to do something about it.



So when Mckenna or Hancock do it, it's legit; but when someone who doesn't conform to the mold of popular psychedelic culture chooses to engage it is superficial? The problem, imo, started with the hippies and academics. It wasn't as though things were fine and respectful before "everyone else" decided drugs were cool and interesting. With the increasing popularization of psychedelics, what we are seeing now is not a new problem, but an intensification of a sub-culture that was already inherently dysfunctional. I feel very strongly that this double standard of the "enlightened us" vs the "ignorant mainstream" has really been a detriment to any kind of real progress towards assimilating the psychedelic experience into modern culture in a meaningful way.



Like the college kid who discovers psychedelics, has to try them all, and orders a kilo of root bark off the internet? Or the hippies who pay big bucks to spend some time in Peru, and upon their return feel qualified to administer ayahuasca or cactus en masse?

I want the same thing you do, really--but we gotta be real about it. We're never gonna get there if we can't recognize where we're at now; and right now I think our community at large plays a significant role in perpetuating this kind of thing. We can't always be putting the blame on everyone else.

Not at all, I know nothing of Hancock, but as far as mckenna goes I feel he had reverence and respect for the compounds and the people connected with them. botanical dimensions was started with Ralph metzner, Denis mckenna, Kat Harrison, etc...it was started to preserve not only the plants but the lore and culture behind them, for future generations the real world action mckenna took and work he put in proves his honest devotion to entheogens and Entheogenic culture

Mckenna had an honest interest and respect for the compounds and cultures that he was incorporating into his own subjective interpretations of the psychedelic experience.

I also said I love what MAPS, the heffter institute, films like "neurons to nirvana"etc...are doing, I consider this mainstream exposure, but it's appropriate.


I was saying I miss the days when ayahuasca was the focus of those who had devoted a good deal of their time to understanding it (chemists, botanists, researchers, hippies, artists, mckenna fans, philosophers, etc...) and had developed a healthy respect for it...rather than a person who watches a Lisa ling show and decides to jump into an ayahuasca session, just like that...

I've never placed blame of any kind...

I said I can only hope this mainstream exposure turns out to be beneficial...

I consider Lisa ling and this "Chelsea" superficial channels for ayahuasca to enter the mainstream...(as well as the Hollywood horror flicks and the tv shows) when Chelsea has the reverence, education and respect for these things that say... Richard Evans schultes or terence mckenna did, I'll cease to consider it a superficial channel.

---

I'm not sure I understand your response, but I'll attempt to respond.

I'm not saying things were perfect before mainstream exposure...though I hope the mainstream exposure is beneficial, I can also see many ways it can be detrimental...


Everybody has their own individual introduction and initiation into psychedelics, 1000 people, 1000 paths (-Buddha), to say one person's path is any more righteous than another is hyppocritical, but responsibility must always be key, and yes I discourage uneducated and irresponsible use of ayahuasca and all entheogens...

That being said,

I order several kilos of rootbark per year, I'm also a member of an ayahuasca using community, and we do hold group sessions, we have a shaman from Peru, but honestly every member of this yagé community has spent many years researching and exploring ayahuasca as well as other entheogens and the shamanic traditions connected to them. I see no problem with any of this, we have our practices, and wish to be left alone, every human has the right to practice their religion...


I've also researched and consumed many novel psychedelic compounds, not all of them, but all of them I felt would further my goals... I actually research all of them and continue to do so, but I've never been irresponsible. this has actually done much to enrich my understanding of chemistry, pharmocology, psychology, spirituality, and my very existance...if I make a mistake and get hurt, I take full responsibility, but aside from a few "freak outs" I've never made any mistakes, and attribute education and respect to this.


When I read the sections of mine you quoted, and then read your response to them, there seems to be miscorelation...i responded the best I could, but had difficulties in understanding the relations in subject matter...

-eg

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't believe that intent should be a measure of the impact that one has in the world, and I don't see how Chelsea's intentions were any less noble simply because they don't fit into a new-age box. While I've been influenced by, and respect the work of, folks like Mckenna, I don't think that his actions (or that of his peers) were completely harmless.

If we're going to critique Chelsea, I think we also need to think about how and why she decided to film herself drinking aya in Peru in the first place. What conditions made this desirable and possible for her? This specific trend did not start with the celebrities, it started with the well-intentioned academics and anthropologists and it has had devastating consequences. The actions of Chelsea Handler are a continuation of a much larger legacy of colonialism, and if we don't bother to learn about that legacy we will continue to see the same pattern repeat itself at exponential rates.

My apologies if my post came off as though it were directed towards you specifically. I don't necessarily disagree with you, I think we have similar goals and I know you weren't placing blame. But you did seem to imply that "in the good ol' days" most of the people who engaged with ayahuasca were driven by nobler intentions. My points are that 1) I don't think their intentions were more noble. They were driven by curiosity just like anyone else who engages with psychedelics and 2) I don't think it matters what their intentions were, they started a trend of exploitation and now we are seeing the consequences of that as ayahuasca is assimilated into the larger mainstream. In other words, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I hope this makes sense? I'm not the greatest at getting my thoughts across, especially in a concise way--but my post wasn't personally directed at you at all, I just felt as though some of your thoughts provided an opportunity to connect this specific story with a larger picture. I'm all about those micro/macrocosms, and I sneak them in when I can

This all makes sense and is reasonable.

I'll admit that I do somehow feel that mckenna was a more Nobel representative, though I'm glad your articulation did point out a flaw I'm my thinking which I had not even considered



The piece above made me reconsider my position a bit...Though I don't see mckenna on the exploitation side of psychedelics...

But, here's why I think mckenna was a Nobel representative:

“If you charge off with some political agenda that is not informed by clarity you’re going to end up with business as usual. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, but it is not paved with clarity.” -Terence McKenna

I think Mr. Mckenna had attained a degree of clarity into the situation and the consequences of his actions which Chelsea or some of the other mainstream television segments or episodes which dive into the topic had not...

Mckenna dedicated his life to these things, Chelsea dedicated a single episode, some mainstream shows dedicate a 5-10 minute segment...so in terms of who should be more qualified I think the choice is obvious.
(Though mckenna was a human as well, he made mistakes, he had his moments without clarity, and of coarse not everything he did was perfect, but by through his lifetime dedication to the study of shamanism and entheogens, through his ventures into the Amazon (in the 1970s when ayahuasca was only known to ethnobotanists few others) and through his study of spirituality and through his global travels, as well as the real world work he put in with botanical dimensions, which saved more than just the psychedelics, he preserved other useful plants as well...by going through all this I feel mckenna had proven he was qualified to speak about these things and educatevothers about them.
Once mckenna said he saw a time when the young men of these Amazon villages were leaving their homes to get jobs in the city , and the older shamans had nobody to pass their knowledge down to o, plus the rainforest was (and still is) being destroyed at an alarming rate, now, mckenna saw this and thought "something must be done" and he got together with some friends and family (Kat Harrison, Denis mckenna, Ralph Metzger, etc..), rounded up some funds, and opened a greenhouse dedicated to preserving plants used by humans as well as the lore, culture, and history connected to those plants, thus taking Nobel action for the cause of saving Entheogenic plants and history....

but this probably is not the time or thread to go in depth on my stance on mckenna.


I understand its curiosity that draws people like Chelsea into these things, the difference is she has a tv crew and cameras, and also cares about keeping sponsors, ratings, and trying to find hip topics to keep folks invested in her program, whether her personnel interest was genuine or or not, I'm sure the long list of things involving her career came first.

I feel all people with a genuine interest in these things should be able to seek them out and explore them, and I'm not saying that only philosophers, artists, psychologists, chemists, etc...should be allowed to do these things, but there should be some standard as to who represents them to the masses...

MAPS, the heffter institute, shulgin research institute, erowid.org ,Richard Evans schultes, Gordon wasson, Rick statesman, terence/Denis McKenna, David e. Nichols, Alexander shulgin, Nick sand, Ralph metzner, etc...these were all channels I believe had proven to be worthy of representing these things, as every one of these people or institutions had dedicated their lives to understanding entheogens...

Where as some of these newer mainstream channels that ayahuasca has entered through have only dedicated what ever resources it took to make the episode or segment...they saw the success of legitimate documentation of these things by people who dedicated all they had to them and decided that this was too good to pass up, but unfortunately probably never really cared about the ayahuasca or the people who use it, they just know it brings ratings.

I don't know, I really hope this mainstream exposure turns out to be beneficial in the end, I really do not like it all that much and can see many ways in which it could be detrimental.

I want legal and social acceptance so I can practice my spirituality in peace, and so I can obtain my plants in peace, without fear of persecution or prosecution, but this mainstream exposure really does not seem to be promoting social or legal acceptance, it may even be setting these goals back...and it's not even so much the mainstream exposure, it's the channels it's comming through...If Denis McKenna became the mainstream representative over chelsea I would at least feel insured the person distributing is qualified to do so.

Thank God for places like the DMT-nexus, this way people can obtain accurate information by directly asking the people who spend a good deal of time with these things...

I probably ended up being fairly repetitive, and I apologize for that, it just still doesn't sit well with me when I see who and how these things are being represented in the mainstream.

Hopefully it's a passing phase for the superficial, hopefully the superficial don't cause irreparable damage to the reputation of these things...i honestly hope all the mainstream exposure is benneficial, though I remain fairly skeptical the way things are headed, hopefully my suspicions are incorrect.

-eg