• MDMA &
    Empathogenic
    Drugs

    Welcome Guest!

Why do people refer to Ecstasy and Molly as though they are two different things?

Ecstacy is notorious for being cut with multiple drugs sometime no MDMA at all.. molly is pure MDMA maybe with a bit of non psychoactive cut
 
I would caution against assuming that "Molly" is pure MDMA. In my experience, ecstasy usually refers to the pills and Molly refers to the powder/crystal. However, adulterants or impure product can be found in both pills and powder as is demonstrated on sites like ecstasydata.org.

Nomatter what it is called - test your product. If possible, send it in to a lab. If not, use reagent testing kits.
 
Well ya anyone can be a dick in the drug world.. but that's the idea behind molly when it first hit the streets
 
It is sort of irrelevant what the original idea was if that is not the current reality. To say that Molly is always pure MDMA is false. Unfortunately, some of the Molly floating around that is being advertised as 100% pure is actually some pretty nasty stuff. In my personal experience from 2000 to today, I have had more purity issues with "Molly" than with pills. Molly was always hyped up as being the purer and better product, but that was never the case in my area.

Better to be safe than sorry and approach both products with caution.
 
Ignorance, really. Most people know nothing about drugs, all of us here seeking answers online are in the minority. Slang names happen - ecstasy for pills, molly for crystals/powder. Since it's 2 different names, many people think of them as 2 different drugs. This would happen even if both forms were always pure, clean MDMA.
 
indigoaura said:
I would caution against assuming that "Molly" is pure MDMA. In my experience, ecstasy usually refers to the pills and Molly refers to the powder/crystal. However, adulterants or impure product can be found in both pills and powder as is demonstrated on sites like ecstasydata.org.

Nomatter what it is called - test your product. If possible, send it in to a lab. If not, use reagent testing kits.
Click to expand...
I completely agree with this. I'm not even sure the initial (real) idea was for it to mean 'pure MDMA', the term molly only really became popular when cut MDMA was already everywhere, I see it as more of a marketing ploy to be able to sell cut MDMA as pure. You know, like "of course it feels different than pills, it's molly, it's supposed to feel different". In my part of the world pills are usually pure, so there should be no difference between most pills and 'molly'. But there is, because most 'molly' over here is cut to shit. And still they say that because it is 'molly', because it's crystals, it is more pure. Pure marketing and nonsense yeah. I suspect it's like this in a lot of places. Test your shit
 
I think this all comes down to semantics, angles of view and technical definitions etc.

When I say "ecstasy", I mean MDMA. Unless Im tripping, Ectasy was the name given to MDMA when it emerged onto the scene, in its purest state.

Over the years MDMA pills have been adulterated of course and given pills a bad press.
But there have always been genuine MDMA "ecstasy" pills around.

In my very strong view, it is a mistake, even a travesty, to allegedly collectively change the definition of ecstasy to mean- "all the stuff sold as pills/E's etc that was supposed to be MDMA but there's so much other stuff in pills now".

It just doesnt make any sense to me. An Ecstasy pill is an MDMA pill, plain and simple, that was the definition as it was created and that can't be changed.

It's the sort of thing the British government would try and do lol to pass a new bill for Brexit.
An "ecstasy" pill which does not contain MDMA or contains additional ingredients is a "dud" or "contaminated" "ecstasy" pill.

Or for semantics sake, you could give it a different label system.
-Only pure MDMA in pills = ecstasy pill.
-No MDMA at all = Simply not ecstasy.
-MDMA plus other psychoactive compounds....okay not sure about that one at present, that's for the drawing board (that means you guys lol ?)

And also by definition, MDMA powder, Crystal, Rocks, you name it. If it's MDMA, it is ecstasy. "Molly" is just a modern invention and alternative name which coincided with and sort of identifies with the more recent culture of powder/crystal/rocks etc, and crucially also- Caps, over pills which were the stsndard norm for a long time, even though powder and crystal was always around.

Back then it was called "MDMA powder", or MDMA, or ecstasy I'm sure. In my own experiences in 2002-2005, powder and crystal became much more common.
With a widespread increase the new term "Molly" was born. Molly means ecstasy, as in, MDMA, be it pills, powder...

It's just unfortunate that the masses appear to have collectively made a distinction between Molly in its crystal or powder form and ecstasy in Pill form which is now assumed to be validly defined as a mixture of compounds.

I hope this is actually making sense to people I mean there really can't be any other way of looking at this surely or have we all gone mad in this world??


And yes I totally agree with @BlueBull that it's a huge mistake to assume that Crystal and powder is purer than pills when ironically these days certainly in Europe it is vastly the other way round.

Regardless the term Molly by definition should still be referring to MDMA in whatever form, or it is a useless or inaccurate definition.
 
Last edited:
AutoTripper said:
I think this all comes down to semantics, angles of view and technical definitions etc.

When I say "ecstasy", I mean MDMA. Unless Im tripping, Ectasy was the name given to MDMA when it emerged onto the scene, in its purest state.

Over the years MDMA pills have been adulterated of course and given pills a bad press.
But there have always been genuine MDMA "ecstasy" pills around.

In my very strong view, it is a mistake, even a travesty, to allegedly collectively change the definition of ecstasy to mean- "all the stuff sold as pills/E's etc that was supposed to be MDMA but there's so much other stuff in pills now".

It just doesnt make any sense to me. An Ecstasy pill is an MDMA pill, plain and simple, that was the definition as it was created and that can't be changed.

It's the sort of thing the British government would try and do lol to pass a new bill for Brexit.
An "ecstasy" pill which does not contain MDMA or contains additional ingredients is a "dud" or "contaminated" "ecstasy" pill.

Or for semantics sake, you could give it a different label system.
-Only pure MDMA in pills = ecstasy pill.
-No MDMA at all = Simply not ecstasy.
-MDMA plus other psychoactive compounds....okay not sure about that one at present, that's for the drawing board (that means you guys lol ?)

And also by definition, MDMA powder, Crystal, Rocks, you name it. If it's MDMA, it is ecstasy. "Molly" is just a modern invention and alternative name which coincided with and sort of identifies with the more recent culture of powder/crystal/rocks etc, and crucially also- Caps, over pills which were the stsndard norm for a long time, even though powder and crystal was always around.

Back then it was called "MDMA powder", or MDMA, or ecstasy I'm sure. In my own experiences in 2002-2005, powder and crystal became much more common.
With a widespread increase the new term "Molly" was born. Molly means ecstasy, as in, MDMA, be it pills, powder...

It's just unfortunate that the masses appear to have collectively made a distinction between Molly in its crystal or powder form and ecstasy in Pill form which is now assumed to be validly defined as a mixture of compounds.

I hope this is actually making sense to people I mean they really can't be any other way of looking at this surely will have we all gone mad in this world??


And yes I totally agree with @BlueBull that it's a huge mistake to assume that Crystal and powder is purer than pills when ironically these days certainly in Europe it is vastly the other way round.

Regardless the term Molly by definition should still be referring to MDMA in whatever form, or it is a useless or inaccurate definition.
Click to expand...

Bang on! That's exactly the way I see it as well.
 
I think this mainly in USA, in Australia ecstasy = MDMA nobody uses the term Molly.... Maybe the media occasionally
 
@AutoTripper - Completely agree man, it kills me that the beautiful name “ecstasy” is now associated with the supppsed crap version of the drug when it started as something so special.

That probably happened for a number of reasons though. The 90’s didn’t seem to accept the drug well and it needed a rebranding in order to gain fresh ground in popular culture. Molly/Mandy in crystal form was that rebranding.

-GC
 
Well thanks guys for being a nice sounding board to assure me of my own sanity on this matter.

I actually I've always really liked the name ecstasy and I have always chosen to use it in pretty much all situations when using any sort of official name beside pills.

Although I would be far more inclined to use the term MDMA nowadays, towards a broad range of society. I just think it will get people's attention onto the matter, more swiftly, with a higher chance that they will have a more favourable opinion of the substance if they have heard about it and if they have not then their minds may remain more open initially while the topic is introduced or further explained.

The term ecstasy unfortunately could still create a little mental run around with a variety of outcomes depending on people's ignorance, experience and education, or more like media-manipulication.

But I will always champion the name ecstasy whenever I am given the chance. I always have, as that was the Drug's mystical and divine identity as it entered my world, simply growing up as a kid, excited by rebels like East 17 and Eberneezer good lol!

I have never Forgotten when Brian from East 17 hit the headlines after speaking out publicly about the positive benefits of ecstasy and admitting that he had once taking 12 tablets in one night.

I know he went on to regret that very heavily in time.
So I will always do my bit to lead by example and honour MDMA with consistently valid and appropriate use of the various official definitions as best I understand them.

A confession I must make though is that I particularly liked the controversy around MDMA, and this is heavily attached to the term Ecstasy.
So as a rebellious teenager I used to have quite some fun pulling out this trump card and throwing the word into various conversations when I thought I could get away with it just to see how people would react.

And boy they did. I dont think "MDMA" would ever have had the same effect. Hahaha, makes me grin. ?
 
Last edited:
Heh heh, Brian Harvey - shot himself in the foot there didn't he? ?

Y'know, I always suspected that their name wasn't derived from their postcode 'E17' as claimed, rather it was how many pills Brian could bosh in a night...

Them were the days...
 
Molly<ecstasy

X doesn’t even exist anymore. And molly is trash too. I won’t even touch either one anymore. The euphoric feelings are so few and far between and the hangovers are just awful.

Back in 2002-2008 x was incredible. It’s really sad, where did it all go?!
 
ecstasy and molly are the same thing. ecstasy = the drug MDMA Molly = the drug mdma. If you dont have "mdma" then you dont possess ecstasy or molly. Doesnt matter if its pill or powder form. All the same.
 
TrapZeppelin said:
Molly<ecstasy

X doesn’t even exist anymore. And molly is trash too. I won’t even touch either one anymore. The euphoric feelings are so few and far between and the hangovers are just awful.

Back in 2002-2008 x was incredible. It’s really sad, where did it all go?!
Click to expand...

This is completely false information and should be ignored fyi. Both pills and powders are readily available all over the world and pure at this moment. However, your opinions could be used in the "what is wrong with mdma today" thread as i think you may be noticing something up like we all are. ;)
 
epic11 said:
This is completely false information and should be ignored fyi. Both pills and powders are readily available all over the world and pure at this moment. However, your opinions could be used in the "what is wrong with mdma today" thread as i think you may be noticing something up like we all are. ;)
Click to expand...
Are we not here expressing our opinions? I’m sorry I must have stumbled upon a website I thought you could do that. Yes they are readily available and I can attest from my experience that from east coast to west the shit is wack and has been for a decade.
 
Last edited:
TrapZeppelin said:
Are we not here expressing our opinions? I’m sorry I must have stumbled upon a website I thought you could do that. Yes they are readily available and I can attest from my experience that from east coast to west the shit is wack and has been for a decade.
Click to expand...

Your post is incorrect though. That is all.
 
TrapZeppelin said:
Molly<ecstasy

X doesn’t even exist anymore. And molly is trash too. I won’t even touch either one anymore. The euphoric feelings are so few and far between and the hangovers are just awful.

Back in 2002-2008 x was incredible. It’s really sad, where did it all go?!
Click to expand...

Ok since you seem to missing the point, lemme break down what you've said and why its wrong.

"Molly<ecstasy" You seem to be claiming one is different or better than the other here. Im saying thats wrong. Molly and ecstasy should be the same thing, and if they arent pure mdma, then you dont have pure ecstasy or molly. Thats why its wrong.

"X doesnt even exist anymore" Um, yes it does. It never went anywhere, but a lot of people suspect something has changed in its manufacturing, hence why i said you could be HELPFUL on that thread i mentioned. How bout going there and helping the discussion with your current experiences, rather than what you think you are doing here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top