Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a nutshell, can you describe the book and why it’s controversial? Your subject title intrigued me.

I'm not OP but I did read the book. In a nutshull, the author took psychadelics in therapy and through that experience claims to have uncovered long-repressed memories of her being SAed when she was in high school.

I think it was middle school, but was it true. That's what I don't get.

And she's a billionaire why make it up.

I guess I'm confused is it a grift or what is the expose about.

For attention. She’s a billionaire but that doesn’t mean she’s happy or fulfilled

I mean she wasn’t happy or fulfilled. Wasn’t that the reason for her MDMA therapy.

Her husband took it too. It's interesting that they are investing in it.

It also occurs to me that the fallout from this could be much worse for people with more precarious life circumstances. I mean, Gwyneth Paltrow can recommend a lot of treatments and ideas because they won't break her bank or probably her personality. She seems pretty strong. The author is too. Experimenting with these drugs may have fewer consequences for them. But what about an average person or someone who is not as resilient? Also, drugs don't work for everyone or have the same effect. Why do this?

So much harm caused by one person’s insatiable need for validation:

To her classmate who was actually abused
To her teacher who may be innocent
To the people who may buy into her MDMA grift

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a nutshell, can you describe the book and why it’s controversial? Your subject title intrigued me.

I'm not OP but I did read the book. In a nutshull, the author took psychadelics in therapy and through that experience claims to have uncovered long-repressed memories of her being SAed when she was in high school.

I think it was middle school, but was it true. That's what I don't get.

And she's a billionaire why make it up.

I guess I'm confused is it a grift or what is the expose about.

For attention. She’s a billionaire but that doesn’t mean she’s happy or fulfilled

I mean she wasn’t happy or fulfilled. Wasn’t that the reason for her MDMA therapy.

Her husband took it too. It's interesting that they are investing in it.

It also occurs to me that the fallout from this could be much worse for people with more precarious life circumstances. I mean, Gwyneth Paltrow can recommend a lot of treatments and ideas because they won't break her bank or probably her personality. She seems pretty strong. The author is too. Experimenting with these drugs may have fewer consequences for them. But what about an average person or someone who is not as resilient? Also, drugs don't work for everyone or have the same effect. Why do this?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the book and the NYT article. The book was well-written (and the NYT states she had a ghostwriter) but I don't believe that she recovered memories that had been completely buried and were brought up by MDMA use. It is exactly like recovered memory through hypnosis thst happened in the 1980s: something completely forgotten with no corroboration from others brought back to full awareness of it. I think it is the same old story in new packaging.

The book downplayed how rich and connected she is. I had not heard of her or her husband but she's friends with Goop and that level of influence/wealth. Easier to get book deals and interviews (and hire ghostwriters) in that world. But also she and her husband are investing in microdosing and want to profit from it. I think she and he (he used it before her) think it's a valuable tool. Do others? It's trendy right now.

I haven't read the book but this whole thing is making me less interested in macrodosing psychedelics for therapeutic purposes. I have battled depression and anxiety for decades. I have childhood trauma but I know some of my memories are suppressed (not totally hidden, just fuzzy and it can be hard for me to remember details especially of traumatic incidents). My family is aware of the trauma but worked hard to cover it up and pretend it was normal. My siblings and I have all dealt with this in different ways, with one sibling deciding none of it was a big deal at all, one deciding to cut our parents off completely and views it as unforgivable abuse. I've considered using MDMA to try and make sense of it all.

But this story doesn't make it sound like a useful solution. It seems like microdosing could make it worse by confusing me further, potentially making me think I'd recovered a memory that was invented or borrowed, and just generally cause even more conflict in my family than already exists. I'm going to stick with traditional therapy, sorry.

I feel this way too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a nutshell, can you describe the book and why it’s controversial? Your subject title intrigued me.

I'm not OP but I did read the book. In a nutshull, the author took psychadelics in therapy and through that experience claims to have uncovered long-repressed memories of her being SAed when she was in high school.

I think it was middle school, but was it true. That's what I don't get.

And she's a billionaire why make it up.

I guess I'm confused is it a grift or what is the expose about.

For attention. She’s a billionaire but that doesn’t mean she’s happy or fulfilled

I mean she wasn’t happy or fulfilled. Wasn’t that the reason for her MDMA therapy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the book and the NYT article. The book was well-written (and the NYT states she had a ghostwriter) but I don't believe that she recovered memories that had been completely buried and were brought up by MDMA use. It is exactly like recovered memory through hypnosis thst happened in the 1980s: something completely forgotten with no corroboration from others brought back to full awareness of it. I think it is the same old story in new packaging.

The book downplayed how rich and connected she is. I had not heard of her or her husband but she's friends with Goop and that level of influence/wealth. Easier to get book deals and interviews (and hire ghostwriters) in that world. But also she and her husband are investing in microdosing and want to profit from it. I think she and he (he used it before her) think it's a valuable tool. Do others? It's trendy right now.

I haven't read the book but this whole thing is making me less interested in macrodosing psychedelics for therapeutic purposes. I have battled depression and anxiety for decades. I have childhood trauma but I know some of my memories are suppressed (not totally hidden, just fuzzy and it can be hard for me to remember details especially of traumatic incidents). My family is aware of the trauma but worked hard to cover it up and pretend it was normal. My siblings and I have all dealt with this in different ways, with one sibling deciding none of it was a big deal at all, one deciding to cut our parents off completely and views it as unforgivable abuse. I've considered using MDMA to try and make sense of it all.

But this story doesn't make it sound like a useful solution. It seems like microdosing could make it worse by confusing me further, potentially making me think I'd recovered a memory that was invented or borrowed, and just generally cause even more conflict in my family than already exists. I'm going to stick with traditional therapy, sorry.

I don't think human brains (especially children's brains) work the way people want them to -- they don't contain tidy little memory packages wrapped up in paper and all you have to do is have a tool to unwrap the paper to reveal the "real" memory. There is tons of evidence about how distorted memories can be -- even adults witnessing something like a car accident will legitimately remember it in significantly different ways. The brain will often borrow something from a different memory to fill out holes or things it missed. Kids memories in particular are really compromised because kids often don't have a frame of reference for what they are experiencing some the brain will borrow from some other experience to make sense of it, which is why kids often remember things that couldn't have happened (becuase their brain is borrowing from a fairy tale or kids show, and so adults will know that it couldn't be true). It's more problematic when the kids brain borrows from a different, possible experience --- like substituting a different (known) person for an unknown person in a memory.
Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately), your best path forward is probably not trying to figure out the past, but instead figure out how you and your family fit into the future together.

Anonymous wrote:She sent an email to friends reminding them to buy the book with an arty nude photo of herself attached. Particularly given the topic of the book it was gross.

How do you know this?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a nutshell, can you describe the book and why it’s controversial? Your subject title intrigued me.

The author went from a wealthy, privileged childhood to an even more wealthy and privileged adulthood. She wondered what made her feel like she had to be perfect all the time. Her husband had a significant financial stake in a business that was promoting the use of psychedelic drugs by patients in therapy. She felt like there was some dark reason behind her quest for perfection, so she decided to try drug assisted psychotherapy. Under the influence of the drugs she either hallucinated or recovered actual memories of repeated violent sexual abuse at the hands of one of her middle school teachers. Despite a heavy saturation of celebrities promoting her book and her whole hometown being aware of the book, no one has corroborated her account and zero other victims have come forward, which was very unexpected since the assaults recounted in her book were brazen and sexual offenders with easy access to kids tend to have multiple victims. There is one classmate of hers who had a rather traumatic childhood and suffered remarkably similar sexual assaults, but at the hands of a completely different teacher. The classmate didn’t need psychedelics to remember the details of her attacks. The attorney for the author says that the Times even trying to fact check the author’s account is an unacceptable attack on a victim of sexual assault.

It is the height of irony - and bald faced grift- that this particularly attorney is representing Griffin. He usually is the one *bringing* defamation claims, and now he’s suddenly on the other side supporting the attack of this poor teacher who is likely having his life upended, and also calling the other woman who seems to have been legitimately a victim (and who works at a minimum wage job) a ‘fabulist’ for noting that their stories align, implying Griffin might have co-opted her experience.

Disgusting on all levels. People are gross

I read the book and was uncomfortable with many aspects of it, but holy crap was I put off by the bolded. In fact, I kept re-reading that part of the article, because I was sure I was misreading or misinterpreting something. But, no. Truly vile.

It seems highly unlikely to be a coincidence that there were 2 such similar patterns of repeated assault at the same school at the same time. It does seem an awful lot like Griffin's recovered memory may well be someone else's reality.

It is highly unlikely that this teacher was a one time offender, as the police noted that they were surprised no one else came forward.

It is also highly unlikely that this teacher would target a wealthy, connected, popular student as his sole victim. Abusers target people who are vulnerable, like that other woman who was in foster care. The whole story is ridiculous.

She has led a life of extreme privilege and wanted to know what it would be like if people felt bad for her. So she stole a poor classmate’s story and didn’t think anyone would find out.

She sent an email to friends reminding them to buy the book with an arty nude photo of herself attached. Particularly given the topic of the book it was gross.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a nutshell, can you describe the book and why it’s controversial? Your subject title intrigued me.

The author went from a wealthy, privileged childhood to an even more wealthy and privileged adulthood. She wondered what made her feel like she had to be perfect all the time. Her husband had a significant financial stake in a business that was promoting the use of psychedelic drugs by patients in therapy. She felt like there was some dark reason behind her quest for perfection, so she decided to try drug assisted psychotherapy. Under the influence of the drugs she either hallucinated or recovered actual memories of repeated violent sexual abuse at the hands of one of her middle school teachers. Despite a heavy saturation of celebrities promoting her book and her whole hometown being aware of the book, no one has corroborated her account and zero other victims have come forward, which was very unexpected since the assaults recounted in her book were brazen and sexual offenders with easy access to kids tend to have multiple victims. There is one classmate of hers who had a rather traumatic childhood and suffered remarkably similar sexual assaults, but at the hands of a completely different teacher. The classmate didn’t need psychedelics to remember the details of her attacks. The attorney for the author says that the Times even trying to fact check the author’s account is an unacceptable attack on a victim of sexual assault.

It is the height of irony - and bald faced grift- that this particularly attorney is representing Griffin. He usually is the one *bringing* defamation claims, and now he’s suddenly on the other side supporting the attack of this poor teacher who is likely having his life upended, and also calling the other woman who seems to have been legitimately a victim (and who works at a minimum wage job) a ‘fabulist’ for noting that their stories align, implying Griffin might have co-opted her experience.

Disgusting on all levels. People are gross

I read the book and was uncomfortable with many aspects of it, but holy crap was I put off by the bolded. In fact, I kept re-reading that part of the article, because I was sure I was misreading or misinterpreting something. But, no. Truly vile.

It seems highly unlikely to be a coincidence that there were 2 such similar patterns of repeated assault at the same school at the same time. It does seem an awful lot like Griffin's recovered memory may well be someone else's reality.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a nutshell, can you describe the book and why it’s controversial? Your subject title intrigued me.

The author went from a wealthy, privileged childhood to an even more wealthy and privileged adulthood. She wondered what made her feel like she had to be perfect all the time. Her husband had a significant financial stake in a business that was promoting the use of psychedelic drugs by patients in therapy. She felt like there was some dark reason behind her quest for perfection, so she decided to try drug assisted psychotherapy. Under the influence of the drugs she either hallucinated or recovered actual memories of repeated violent sexual abuse at the hands of one of her middle school teachers. Despite a heavy saturation of celebrities promoting her book and her whole hometown being aware of the book, no one has corroborated her account and zero other victims have come forward, which was very unexpected since the assaults recounted in her book were brazen and sexual offenders with easy access to kids tend to have multiple victims. There is one classmate of hers who had a rather traumatic childhood and suffered remarkably similar sexual assaults, but at the hands of a completely different teacher. The classmate didn’t need psychedelics to remember the details of her attacks. The attorney for the author says that the Times even trying to fact check the author’s account is an unacceptable attack on a victim of sexual assault.

It is the height of irony - and bald faced grift- that this particularly attorney is representing Griffin. He usually is the one *bringing* defamation claims, and now he’s suddenly on the other side supporting the attack of this poor teacher who is likely having his life upended, and also calling the other woman who seems to have been legitimately a victim (and who works at a minimum wage job) a ‘fabulist’ for noting that their stories align, implying Griffin might have co-opted her experience.

Disgusting on all levels. People are gross

The fact that she may have co-opted an actual victim’s story leaves me speechless.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a nutshell, can you describe the book and why it’s controversial? Your subject title intrigued me.

I'm not OP but I did read the book. In a nutshull, the author took psychadelics in therapy and through that experience claims to have uncovered long-repressed memories of her being SAed when she was in high school.

I think it was middle school, but was it true. That's what I don't get.

And she's a billionaire why make it up.

I guess I'm confused is it a grift or what is the expose about.

For attention. She’s a billionaire but that doesn’t mean she’s happy or fulfilled

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a nutshell, can you describe the book and why it’s controversial? Your subject title intrigued me.

The author went from a wealthy, privileged childhood to an even more wealthy and privileged adulthood. She wondered what made her feel like she had to be perfect all the time. Her husband had a significant financial stake in a business that was promoting the use of psychedelic drugs by patients in therapy. She felt like there was some dark reason behind her quest for perfection, so she decided to try drug assisted psychotherapy. Under the influence of the drugs she either hallucinated or recovered actual memories of repeated violent sexual abuse at the hands of one of her middle school teachers. Despite a heavy saturation of celebrities promoting her book and her whole hometown being aware of the book, no one has corroborated her account and zero other victims have come forward, which was very unexpected since the assaults recounted in her book were brazen and sexual offenders with easy access to kids tend to have multiple victims. There is one classmate of hers who had a rather traumatic childhood and suffered remarkably similar sexual assaults, but at the hands of a completely different teacher. The classmate didn’t need psychedelics to remember the details of her attacks. The attorney for the author says that the Times even trying to fact check the author’s account is an unacceptable attack on a victim of sexual assault.

It is the height of irony - and bald faced grift- that this particularly attorney is representing Griffin. He usually is the one *bringing* defamation claims, and now he’s suddenly on the other side supporting the attack of this poor teacher who is likely having his life upended, and also calling the other woman who seems to have been legitimately a victim (and who works at a minimum wage job) a ‘fabulist’ for noting that their stories align, implying Griffin might have co-opted her experience.

Disgusting on all levels. People are gross

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had assumed that by now Oprah would have been better about sniffing out a fake story.

Oprah's whole career is based on fraud

THIS! Think of all the nonsense that Oprah has unleased on society: Dr. Phil, The Secret, Dr. Oz...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the book and the NYT article. The book was well-written (and the NYT states she had a ghostwriter) but I don't believe that she recovered memories that had been completely buried and were brought up by MDMA use. It is exactly like recovered memory through hypnosis thst happened in the 1980s: something completely forgotten with no corroboration from others brought back to full awareness of it. I think it is the same old story in new packaging.

The book downplayed how rich and connected she is. I had not heard of her or her husband but she's friends with Goop and that level of influence/wealth. Easier to get book deals and interviews (and hire ghostwriters) in that world. But also she and her husband are investing in microdosing and want to profit from it. I think she and he (he used it before her) think it's a valuable tool. Do others? It's trendy right now.

I haven't read the book but this whole thing is making me less interested in macrodosing psychedelics for therapeutic purposes. I have battled depression and anxiety for decades. I have childhood trauma but I know some of my memories are suppressed (not totally hidden, just fuzzy and it can be hard for me to remember details especially of traumatic incidents). My family is aware of the trauma but worked hard to cover it up and pretend it was normal. My siblings and I have all dealt with this in different ways, with one sibling deciding none of it was a big deal at all, one deciding to cut our parents off completely and views it as unforgivable abuse. I've considered using MDMA to try and make sense of it all.

But this story doesn't make it sound like a useful solution. It seems like microdosing could make it worse by confusing me further, potentially making me think I'd recovered a memory that was invented or borrowed, and just generally cause even more conflict in my family than already exists. I'm going to stick with traditional therapy, sorry.

Smart move, no need to apologize. Elon Musk is another billionaire proponent of MDMA “therapy.” Enough said.