The reason this comes up is because I was reading Imp1 comments and replies to them and he’s mentioned multiple times before that he believes that the actual answer to a lot of this is making artificial wombs so that you can cut out women from making kids and relationships with women have to be about something else. That would mean that since women can't use their wombs as a bargaining tool, their intellect and personalities have to be what keeps a man interested, at least imo, and I can see why it would appeal to him, but are they even reasonable?
I haven't done the research myself and thought it would be more fun to have a discussion over it, but still, I’m just curious as to how the tech works if at all. I've seen things where the tech is being “suppressed” (hidden from the public like a lot of current tech we use today was during the Cold War, ala the internet), but is that true, or not? It's just genuinely an interesting topic to me.
Actually, I think it might be a bit different.
I think it might be a bit of proof that the Libertarian view on drugs might be correct. Yes, a lot of people self-medicate, but there are people that are using some of these very hard drugs recreationally, and in a mature and reasonable method.
I've noticed that there are a lot of boomers who've done very hard drugs, even to this day, but are the types that have mushrooms on their birthday, or take a hit of LSD for a once-a-year family reunion. I've noticed that long-term recreational drug users are actually quite careful with what they are doing, and how. Making sure never to even pop on piss tests, without even resorting to illegal or illegitimate nonsense.
Effectively, what you are seeing as people age is a conservative approach to drug use. Not "Conservative" but 'conservative'. Being more cautious and intentional in it's use.
I think the mass introduction of in the 60's was done because the Left-wing establishment had a fad and got high. Elites have always been high on something, and psychedelics was one specific era of that. That did promote more of what you mentioned, but as time goes on, I think those tastes begin to moderate so long as there isn't heavy institutional efforts to put it in front of kids.
I would expect the same thing to happen with any prohibited drug: a sudden fad introduction and a wave of cases and knock-off behaviors, followed by a slow trend to a more mature approach over the span of a decade or two.
Honestly, pushing corporate chemicals and drugs seems to be way more dangerous because of how much aggressive institutionalization they want to sell their products. Even if you had a dispensary for mushrooms and LSD, I don't think they'd be as much of a problem as Pfizer getting into it.