anybody tried having sex while doing the infamous "candyflip"..?

Absolutely! And I would recommend it wholeheartedly to seasoned travelers. It's not for lightweights, though, since it can get very weird. It's a great sneak preview of having your heart chakra opened.

Candyflip = does not compute..

?

A candy flip is when u take both x-tacy, and A-cid at the same time..you get a rather weird sensation, but you have the stamina of an endurance horse x 10...

oh yes, and all your senses are hightened tenfold...so it feels just damn good...

After 8 to 10 hours you start thinking of how sore ur going to be the next day, but u dont really want to stop

You need X and acid to last for 10 hours? Weak!

Ha - Ha...

No man...i need no drugs to make me last ten hours. What i need is somebody intelligent enough to understand the experimental architechture of ones mind to try new grounds, and hence from there decide what you keep, and what shall be the ones to throw out.........

Like anything, it depends on what you do with it. Drugs are a tool which can be useful or ruinous. They offer a glimpse of what can be done naturally, through Yoga, meditation or Tantra.

It seems like a lot of people here neglect the primary sex organ: the brain. Sex can be creative, funny, sacred, wild, initiatory...whatever! By inflaming the senses, one can easily enter into altered states of intimacy. For me, the most erotic experience is seeing my lover's eyes roll back or her pupils blow out as she loses herself in the act.

I haven't been here long, but it seems like a lot of posters are threatened by sexual variations since these tend to weaken one's ego walls and require trust and a little risk, leading to a more profound union.
Others may just be conditioned by society or religion that sex is somehow wrong or sinful.

X is cool because you can sit in front of your partner and experience waves of orgasmic bliss without even touching. When couples draw the pleasure out over hours, it's a totally new experience. Beyond that, I completely believe that one may have mystical experiences on X. There is a sanskrit word- "Lila"- which means "sacred play." I think our Puritanical, violent society needs more Lila and personal freedom.

Drugs are bad, mmmkaaaaaay?

This is not a rant about don't do drugs, you're cheating yourself if you do drugs, blah blah blah. I don't think you're doing anything wrong if you use 'em to enhance the experience.. but.. the stuff is mind-altering. You have final control over your mind. In the long run, I sincerely believe you're better off learning to let yourself go and feel everything you can while in a normal state of mind than using anything to help. That goes for everything from alcohol to whatever. When you can do it yourself, you can do it anytime.. and that's when it's really cool.

Right..now this may sound very contradictory,,but i agree with both spiffy, and sum wung...ask me how..well here goes...

being on some kind of stimulant changes the reality in which you are, and makes a few changes in why u are doing what ur doing. x for example puts ur body in a very eronous state, so any touch, be it erotic, or simply a kiss on the hand, gets new meaning.in other words, u and ur partner can sit the whole night and do nothing but kiss, or maybe even less, but still enjoy the experience a great deal. if it should happen that you become more intimate, then the experience is also different, and the reason for touch become unanamous.both parties enjoy the touch, and can achieve orgasmic sensations without ever reaching one.if i may add, these can happen while u both still have ur clothes on...what i'm trying to say by all of this, is not to use drugs for sex, but simply that its another way of ocasionally enjoyin a different feeling, and passionate encounter.i would never even vaguely suggest that any person should use drugs to be able to have sex..then u are lost in a world from which its difficult to return...being in a "sober" state should be as powerful as when not..the only difference beingthe occasion, and the difference in emotion and touch..the intensity of both experiences should not be different, and the same amount of pleasure can be achieved from both..the only difference being..the "difference"

now come on you two...gimme some feedback on this..both of you are very logically inclined, and we all have a different opinion and some agreement on this topic...so lemme here it ....

Hmm.

In that light, I won't knock X.. it's everyone's preference whether to try it or not.. I know that I used to sit for hours with my ex-girlfriend, just resting in each other's arms, no more than kissing.. and it was great. But I seriously doubt that two sober people could recreate what you're describing. So for the curious, hey, go for it.

I've never done any drugs, so what I know comes from the ample number of things I hear from my friends, as well as on this board. Some stuff is exaggerated, but damn near everything has some truth to it, and most of my friends are pretty damn honest about stuff like this. So I think it's safe to say that experiences like what you describe are few and far between. I would be hard-pressed to believe that the sober mind is incapable of much that a drugged mind can do. Looking for a specific feeling, though.. I can't bust on anyone for that.

Booze, caffeine, sex, yoga, meditation, biofeedback, exercise, pain, emotion and rest ALL CREATE ALTERED STATES OF CONSCIOUSNESS. The danger comes from addiction, loss of control and lack of balance. People should make their own decisions based on self-knowledge.

How does one decide which altered state is "good" and which one is "bad"? Again, it's a matter of self-knowledge.

Before passing judgment on drugs, it might be helpful to do some reading. Like everything, there are bad drugs and life-enhancing drugs. In some cultures, psychedelic plants are part of the spiritual tradition. People like William James (father of Western psychology), Aldous Huxley, Groucho Marx, Cary Grant, Maynard Ferguson, Paul Bowles all had positive psychedelic experiences. Others don't.

As for "drugs", this catch-all makes it seem like LSD, Crack, Pot, Caffeine and chocolate are all in the same category. Well, they're not. There are sub-categories.

Knw your limitations, you bet. Save the judgements for yourself, too. It's next to impossible to know what others have experienced. Personally, I did research for two and a half years before trying any drug. I don't rely on them, but I do enjoy them occasionally. And I can say without qualification that my life has been enhanced because of my choices. Others have not been so fortunate- no argument.

Who's right? Each person must decide.

Be aware, informed and cautious.

I severely doubt that one can have an unhealthy addiction to meditation or yoga. Such things are done to focus the mind, not alter the way it works. Caffeine, exercise, and pain all affect the way the body works, not the chemical balances of the brain (still, caffeine really is a weak drug). Emotion is as natural for humans as anything. Booze is as much a drug as any other. I have no idea what biofeedback is.

Since you've done so much research, then maybe you can clarify something for me. If you take a drug that's considered psychedelic, it's directly affecting your brain. That's how I've always learned it, and the rather vast combined knowledge of the people I know doesn't suggest any differently. It may not do it much- certainly weed doesn't seem to have a great effect on many people- but it does it.

Is this, in any case, not true? Before any defensive reaction starts, know my intent in asking this. I feel that everyone has a right to know what's going to hurt them- and even a little is hurting them- and what isn't. (I would be very surprised if there is a psychedelic drug that literally does nothing to a person. Wouldn't be a very good drug.) If something doesn't, then anyone who wants to try it will be able to do so with at least one less concern. If they all do, then at least whoever reads this will know that they need to be careful if they don't want to get fucked up by whatever they take.

Heads are fragile. I've had two major concussions (easily of the most severe type), and although that's not what's keeping me from doing any drugs, it's still a damn good reason not to start. I don't know how quickly stuff would start to affect me. Generally, it would take someone with a healthy brain longer to be adversely affected, but who knows when an accident will happen? Brain damage is brain damage. Everyone's gotta be careful, and it does no harm for people to know just what they've gotta be careful with.

Well Spif...
the mind is a very powerful tool, and certain drugs that you take, can help you in using your mind in a different way, and enhancing certain capabilities that would normally not even be known of in a normal state of mind..when these drugs are used for a wrong purpose, their power can be harmful to you..not just the chemicals inside, but also the power that it gives to your mind, to alter your way of thinking, and the way you look at and treat things..you can subconsciously change the way you think, and when ur not careful, make harmful changes...if you do this carefully, you can actually enhance your capabilities for all times that you are not on anyting....so in my terms, yes, it can be bad, but like all things..if you do something too much, its bad for you......................

Sum....
you say you occasionally take the recreational drug as well...then you should agree on how powerful these things can be..not only do they put you on a different level, but those levels are easily climbable if you have control over your brain, and its at these levels that one has to be specially careful in what you do..many people underestimate the power of the subconscious mind, and its a wrong place to fool around, especially if ur a person that did not even know that you had a "subconscious what you say??" for if you have made a change to something you did not even know existed, how would you be able to go back and alter it to a more positive state...

Hi Spiffy and Cat:

Spiffy- no offense but you're wrong if you think that all of the factors I mentioned don't alter the way that the brain works. The only way that drugs work is by keying into brain receptors that are naturally there. Opium fits the same receptors that naturally occurring endorphins fit. Another example, the effect called "kindling" can come from fasting, sleep deprivation, meditation or psychedelics. The only problem with psychedelics is that they are a short-cut, so one must face things at an accelerated rate. But they, too, focus the mind. Meditation and Yoga, in advanced stages, do change the way that the brain works- both neurochemically and brainwave-wise. A great overview of all of this is THE THREE POUND UNIVERSE.

I agree with you that people should be careful- by being more informed and taking logical precautions.

Please note that for many shamans and Indians of the Americas, psychedelic plants have a long history of ritual usage which is fascinating. The judgment of "drugs" v. other methods is, I think, one that is culturally ingrained in our society. "Just say no" has replaced the caveats, "Be informed" and "Know thyself." The idea that one method is better than another is pretty subjective. Each person must find the mode that suits their life and goals.

Cat: I think you're referring to bad trips. For the prepared psychonaut, a bad trip can be a real opportunity to confront a deeply rooted fear or recognize its existence. You're not learning if you don't confront certain truths about yourself. Psychedelics magnify these truths and certainly should not be used by emotionally or mentally unstable people. Set, setting, companions, music can all make a difference in this area.

I have never heard of a bad X trip, though.

A lot of the problem with drugs has to do with where you're at when you take them. They are all potentially addictive. Anything that gives pleasure or comfort is.

Although it's been a long time since I've used drugs to any great extent and I can't speak about X at all, I have used a lot of psychedelics. I came to them as an explorer and I've always had a good sense of self. My exploration with them was completely positive. I began to view the world new ways.

On the other hand, I abused amphetamines. I took one form of speed or another daily for close to a year. It was all about getting high and partying. Although it was fun in the beginning I stopped because I began to get paranoid. Speed is very much a "body" drug. Alcohol, in my opinion, is in the same category and therefore very dangerous.

This isn't a lecture a partying. I still smoke weed occasionally and drink somewhat. I'm merely pointing out that coming to any kind of drug use from the standpoint of escapism is more dangerous than coming at it from exploration

Hi Digital_Birth:

In general, I agree with what you're saying. Explorers tend to go forth in spite of discomfort, fear, unpleasantness or adversity. With this mindset, they tend to learn and get to the point at which the sacraments are no longer necessary.

However, I believe that a little escapism is good for the soul, too. The irony of compulsive escapism is that it usually stops working- your paranoia is a good example. In trying to escape too much, we find ourselves captive in another sense.

There is mundane bliss and then there is Ananda bliss, which is transcendental. The mundane bliss is like a ladder step to the greater bliss which can include mystical ecstasy, divine love, compassion, happily performing one's duty and so on. But in this place and time, we are out of balance and have been taught to fear bliss and feel guilty about it. To me, that's no better than addiction.

So escapism for the sake of escaping is self-defeating. But escapism in the sense of trying to create a better world- that's another matter.

Sun, you're without doubt the first person I've ever met who would describe psychedelic drugs as having a "focusing" effect on the mind.

You make a good argument for experimentation, but here's where I have to disagree with some of your comparisons- you can't hurt yourself through too much meditation. Physical exercise, taken to an extreme, can cause fatigue and possibly injury, but no matter how many times you push your body to the edge of what it can handle, your brain will not suffer for it.

In other words, no matter how much you partake in some of your examples (from your earlier post, I would include sex, yoga, meditation, and exercise; most likely pain and emotion as well), your brain will function pretty much the same way as it would if you didn't do those things. They won't have an adverse affect on you.

Psychedelic drugs DO have an adverse effect. That effect is the entire reason for taking them. I've never been one to say experimentation is necessarily bad, if only to know what something is like, but to call it a good idea is hardly a smart thing to do.

Too many people will figure out their limits based on other people, who often have much greater tolerances towards certain drugs. Others will forget simple math; one time doesn't hurt, but one time, plus one time, plus one time, ad infinitum, can be extremely dangerous.

BTW, to my knowledge, the jury is still out on the long-term effects of X.. so if anyone feels better taking something as long as nothing bad is proven, there's your thing.. But as for other stuff.. acid simply doesn't leave your system.. pot.. well, they call it getting baked for a reason.. I can't claim great knowledge on anything else, but those seem to be what the vast majority of people use.

Spiffy:

Show me one scientific study that shows that "acid doesn't leave your system." Yes, it can remain in fatty tissue for a while, but ultimately it is purged.

Let me put it to you simply. One cookie may not make you fat. But one cookie after another will make you fat, strain your heart, raise your blood pressure and perhaps ultimately cause a stroke. Should we regulate cookies to protect fat people from themselves? What about cigarettes? They kill more people per year than ALL ILLICIT DRUGS COMBINED. What about automobiles? You may not get in a wreck the first time, but one day you may and it might take your life. I was in a wreck last week- should I be whining about the evils of technology? And yet thousands upon thousands of people die in car accidents each year. As for:

"Sun, you're without doubt the first person I've ever met who would describe psychedelic drugs as having a "focusing" effect on the mind."

I would recommend that you do some reading on this topic to increase your awareness of what the effects of psychedelics are, what the real risks are and what scientists have to say on the matter. There are hundreds of books that starkly contradict the Nancy Reagan/ D.A.R.E. propaganda model you seem to be embracing. I would be happy to recommend some good books to you if you'd like. Opinions are nice but being informed is better.

"Psychedelic drugs DO have an adverse effect."

Which is what, exactly? Please be specific and provide statistics so we can put this discussion in perspective, i.e. if they are dangerous, how dangerous are they?

Yes, if someone takes a huge amount of acid, they will burn out their fuses. But the same thing could be said of any kind of behavior that has an associated risk attached to it. Should amusement parks be banned because roller coasters occasionally derail and kill people? Should those foods linked to cancer when eaten in excess be banned? Should sex be made illegal because you could get AIDS and die? Where does this type of thinking stop, Spiffy? How much risk is too much? Because liquor is a bigger menace than LSD (which has been used in therapy to combat alcoholism and reduce recidivism in prisoners).

If you wish to continue this discussion, I would be interested to hear if: a) you have ever tripped; and b) have you ever read an academic book on this subject and what was it? If you'd like an eye-opening read, check out SMOKE & MIRRORS by Dan Baum. I would also recommend books by Dr. Stanislov Grof who uses LSD therapy for terminal patients with great success. You might also enjoy STORMING HEAVEN by Jay Stevens.

I WOULD say that LSD never did me any harm when I used it every week from 1978 to 1982, but how would I know if it did or not? However, yes, it can and does focus the mind in certain situations, although I would not recommend driving or motorcycling (both of which I did) unless you have very, very good control of your mind with or without LSD.

My take is that, fortunately, I have always been able to 'turn off' the trip if it starts to go bad, but I know that not everyone can do that.

I wouldn't do it again now though, although sex on acid does sound like an experience not to be missed.

------------------
The Rev Spooner says I am a Shining Wit

I have heard- I stress "heard"- repeatedly that acid stays lodged in either your brain or spinal column. I do know that a certain number of acid hits (I believe six, not sure if that's decided by state or federal mandate) renders you clinically insane by law. I know several people who have done that much acid, and they're not crazy. It's a bullshit law. However, it's been my experience that even bullshit laws are more often based on half-truths than total lies, which suggests that there is truth to the idea that it stays with you in one way or another. Flashbacks are something else attributed to LSD use, and they can happen well after a user's last hit. Is that BS propaganda? I don't know. I've never heard anything from users to contradict it. If you can show me something that says it completely leaves your system in time, then I'll rethink this.

One cookie will not make you fat. One hit of acid will not leave your brain utterly shot. One hit off a joint will not bake you. Many cookies will make you fat. Many hits of acid will leave you fucked up. Many joints will leave your brain somewhat worse for wear (in some cases- I fully realize some people don't feel the effects at all).

The main difference is that you can exercise away the fat. With the others.. hey, if you've got enough spare brain cells so that constant smoking doesn't bother you, have fun. Not everyone can do that. Unfortunately, some of those people think they can, and try. Regardless, if you can overdo it, then it has to be harming you in a small way each time you use it, and brain cells don't grow back.

Regulations? In a word: no. But I'll get back to that.

I avoid propaganda like the plague. What I'm telling you, though, comes from many a friend who has firsthand experience with these things. Firsthand experience is the best teacher, no? Listening to people with it would be second. (I'm not talking about one or two people, either- probably double digits.)

I don't have statistics. What I have is the experience of being told by several people who have done weed, acid, et al., "You never did any of this? Smart motherfucker." Why would they tell me that if the drugs didn't adversely affect them?

Yes, they overdid them. No, I don't believe that it'll happen to everyone who tries drugs. But everyone's breaking point is different, and these are people I know who thought they were fine, and weren't.

This brings me back to laws. No, I don't think any of the things you mentioned should be outlawed, regulated, etc. If you want to compare the drugs to booze and cigarettes, fine; leave the rest out, because the only comparisons that can be made is that "something bad can happen". Awfully vague. Besides that, I don't think alcohol or cigarettes will ever be outlawed, nor do I think they should- Prohibition should be enough proof that more harm than good would come of it. And, to be honest, if weed were made legal, I wouldn't agree with it, but I wouldn't be on a rampage about how horrible a decision it is. Let's leave laws and regulations out of this, because it's distracting from the main focus of what the drugs actually do to you.

No, I've never tripped. (If you never tripped, and were told you were smart for it, would you be terribly tempted to start?) And, no, I've never read an academic book on the subject; hell, I never realized they were around (save the common sense "There's a book about everything"). I may check some out if I get a chance, but no matter what it says, I've seen firsthand what this stuff can do to people. Nothing can change that.

Propaganda be damned, laws be damned, I think it's fair to say that a good number of regular visitors to this board are more likely to listen to regular people like us than some unseen authority figure saying, "Drugs are bad." I'm not debating this to push some D.A.R.E. bullshit on everyone, I'm doing it to, when you think about it, back up something you've been saying from the start- you gotta be careful, because you don't know at what point you're going to start to go downhill from doing any kind of drug (alcohol and cigarettes included).

lsd can be checked by a spinal tap; it's in your spinal fluids your whole life.

it can also be tested by your hair; which tell a life story of yourself and chemicals injested from the last time you got it cut to the root.

7 hits in a lifetime legally insane i believe it is.(i dropped 9 at one time; usually take 4 or 5 at a time to get a good peak)

tell me i'm crazy spiffy.

drug propaganda relates only the extreme cases; and cheech and chong cases;

reality from a drug sense is a whole lot different for more than half who use;

but it's a good platform to run on for elections; and when you focus on users and not suppliers(which IS how they work);

it generates money in increased taxes for law enforcement and several special interest groups both of which considerable campaign contributions to get the money in.

while joe blow has his life ruined not because he uses drugs but because of the fact that they are illegal.

(to spare an argument spiffy; i acknowledge as we've discussed before that some people just can't handle their shit and shouldn't use at all.)

Just to clarify- I don't think you're crazy. For that matter, I don't believe I've ever met anyone who's taken the prerequisite amount of acid required to be clinically insane who's any loopier than anyone else I know. It's the single biggest load of BS about drugs I know.

"while joe blow has his life ruined not because he uses drugs but because of the fact that they are illegal."

This you'll have to explain a little more. I don't get it. Are you saying that somebody is worse off because having a little bit of something on them can land them in jail, when they really don't deserve it, which is worse than taking a few extra drugs?

Yeah, the laws are a bit (understatement) harsh in that sense. I wouldn't mind seeing penalties and jail times dropped for small amounts of a drug, but raised for large ones (the kinds only important suppliers would have).

I think the punishment directly is only a small part of this. Also, because the drugs are illegal an cliquey 'culture' springs up around them, and there is a tendency to become involved in other nefarious activities as a result.

------------------
The Rev Spooner says I am a Shining Wit

[QUOTE]Originally posted by lostmind:
[B]lsd can be checked by a spinal tap; it's in your spinal fluids your whole life.

****Well, let's see your evidence, Lostmind. If this is true (it's not), it shouldn't be hard to back it up.

it can also be tested by your hair; which tell a life story of yourself and chemicals injested from the last time you got it cut to the root.

****This IS true. However, the drug testing of hair is so prohibitively expensive that it is seldom utilized.

Acid is how many people get that permanent wave style.

Let's get one thing out of the way immediately. I think everyone can agree that excessive drug use can and, most likely is, harmfull to some extent. Even Marijuana, which is relatively benign, creates some harm.

There are really two questions. Are the efforts to prevent drug use more harmful than the drug use itself? And are there potential benefits which can offset the potential harm?

I think the drug prevention policies in this country are clearly more harmful than the drug use itself. As of 1997 (the last year that I was able to get statistics), there were 1.7 million people in prison and an additional 5.5 million under some other type of Corrections control (probation, etc.) 85% of those convicted since 1985 were for drug offences (the vast majority of which are users or street dealers). This country spends 3 times as much on law enforcement as it does for treatment. Meanwhile, deaths related to drug use have increased since 1985 by 540%. Drug related crimes are directly attributable to the cost of drugs because the are illegal. A little history, Marijuana was originally made illegal in the '30s so states in the southwest had a reason to deport Mexicans, therby preserving job for Depression era white workers.

As for the second question, I believe there are potential benefits, as I've stated I've experienced both the benefits and the harm. And a little simple escapism (not taken to an extreme) can also be considered a benefit.

Hi Digital Birth:

Good and interesting points. What I don't understand is why a general discussion of drugs immediately skews to the extremes of abuse rather than the points you raise- which affect drug users and non-drug users alike.

The American prison population topped 2 million in February.

Yes, much of the war on drugs is rooted in racism. Nixon's tapes reveal that the modern version of the "drug war" was intended to taget blacks and hippies. Presently, due to racial profiling, one out of three black males are tied up in the U.S. justice system (jailed, imprisoned, on parole, etc.). This is a much worse problem than drugs themselves. But the knee-jerk reaction to drugs has created a virtual police-state, almost destroyed the 4th amendment and taken its toll in civil liberties.

I think it's fair to say we've been conditioned to see one side of this issue. Again, if anyone on this thread wants to read an amazing book on the drug war, pick up SMOKE & MIRRORS- you won't believe what's going on!

I'll definately check the book out.

And I'll just make one more comment for anyone out there who disagrees with what we are saying and leave it at that.

Supposedly we live in a free society. Any society requires laws and constraints. But, in a free society legality should be the norm and there should be a good reason to make something illegal. Relative harm and relative good need to be carefully weighed before laws are passed. There is something wrong when the the supposed "Land of the Free" has a higher rate of incarceration than any other advanced society on the planet including Russia and China

i agree totally;

has the crime rate gone up; or have the things we define as criminal gone up.

every four years politicians need a platform to run on.

they can't say things are great; they have to preach change and that they're the man/woman for the job.

and what's the easiest platform to campaign on?

crime.

You'd think it would be the national debt.

I would not be surprised if the politicians start campaigning against the bad aspects of sex..

anyway, there is so much truth in what almost everybody mentions, that it would be a good standing point against those mongrols who want to rule people's lives. behind closed doors, they are the ones that use the banned substances the most, but to get a proper standpoint, they have to mess everybody else's choices up. In all the stats that i have seen, there has not been one death related to lsd, and the O.D limit is so dang high, that it almost impossible to have that happen to you.
what about everything else that is dangerous to a person. when caught doing too much drinking, ur told.."you should have controlled urself, and not have that much to drink" well, no shit hay..but alcohol is not banned from our tables. We are given the choice, so why not give us the choice on what drugs we want to use. I'm pretty sure the death rates currently associated with drugs like xtacy, will dramatically come down if legalised (u can figure for urself why)

Post not. We started off with sex, and we ended with politicians. why does sex always end up with politicians..?

Sex always ends up with politicians.

There definitely needs to be more female politicians...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy McBang:
Sex always ends up with politicians.

There definitely needs to be more female politicians...

---

No, Just more good looking politicians!!!!!

*Definitely* more good-looking female politicians.

that'll never happen...u have to take in mind that most attractive people have brains too,,,so u'll never get an attractive politician...!!

hmm...i just had to put something in here to get it back at the top of the list..
sorry..