Onetaste founder sentenced: is orgasm a crime?
Nicole Daedone, the enigmatic figure behind OneTaste, an orgasmic meditation enterprise, faces nine years in federal prison after being convicted of forced labor conspiracy. The verdict, delivered last week in Brooklyn, caps a years-long saga that has ignited a fierce debate over the boundaries of personal freedom, consent, and the potential for exploitation within the wellness industry.
The rise and fall of onetaste
OneTaste, founded in 2005, gained notoriety for its practice of “OMing,” a trademarked method that encouraged prolonged arousal and meditation. Rooted in Buddhist Tantric sex, the practice promised spiritual connection, mental clarity, and emotional wellbeing – a potent cocktail that attracted a dedicated following. Daedone, known as “The Oracle,” became the face of the movement, presiding over sessions where adherents reportedly spent hours in states of heightened intimacy under her guidance.
The group's trajectory mirrored the mainstreaming of alternative therapies, ascending from the fringes of the wellness world to establish a presence in major cities like Los Angeles, New York, Austin, and London. At its peak, OneTaste boasted 300,000 members, drawing both curiosity and skepticism. A 2009 New York Times article wryly observed the group's unusual nature, questioning a community publicly dedicated to “creating ‘the orgasm that exists between them.’”
Coercion or empowerment? the prosecution's case
Federal prosecutors allege that OneTaste’s practices were far from empowering, painting a picture of systematic manipulation and exploitation. They argued that Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz, OneTaste’s former head of sales, used “psychological, emotional, and financial coercion” to control members and extract labor, assigning tasks ranging from cooking and cleaning to providing sexual favors to investors. U.S. Attorney Joseph Nocella stated that the defendants “combined forced labor with sexual exploitation to cause trauma to the victims in ways that extend beyond lost wages or long hours.”
Testimony from seven former adherents corroborated this account, detailing a descent into isolation and diminished self-worth. One witness, identified as Becky, testified about losing her sense of reality and incurring debt, alleging verbal abuse and unwanted sexual touching. Defense attorney Jennifer Bonjean countered, characterizing the charges as a misapplication of forced labor statutes and an attempt to “criminalize thoughts and beliefs.” She described Daedone as a “ceiling-shattering feminist entrepreneur” whose vision was unfairly targeted.
A cult or a community?
The case has raised profound questions about the nature of cults and the potential for manipulation within wellness communities. Steven Hassan, an expert on cult dynamics, believes OneTaste fits the bill, citing “authoritarian control and narcissistic leaders.” He argues that the internet and social media have amplified the ability of such groups to indoctrinate followers, bypassing traditional forms of physical isolation. However, the American Psychological Association and the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom have formally rejected the concept of “brainwashing,” a term often associated with cult analysis.
Current OneTaste CEO Anjuli Ayer dismissed the prosecution as an attack on ideas, particularly those concerning “women’s power and volition.” But the specter of exploitation hangs heavy over the case, highlighted by the recent Netflix documentary, Orgasm Inc, and the forthcoming book, Empire of Orgasm.
Daedone’s defiant “No” in court – her refusal to address the judge – only deepens the mystery surrounding this controversial figure and the future of OneTaste. The appeal process promises to further dissect the legality of orgasmic meditation and the delicate line between spiritual exploration and criminal coercion.