By MBQ Legal Desk

OneTaste once positioned itself at the vanguard of a bold new frontier in wellness and sexuality. Marketed as a lifestyle brand focused on “orgasmic meditation” (OM), it promised spiritual enlightenment, sexual healing, and community. At its peak, OneTaste attracted thousands of followers, hosted expensive retreats, and drew media attention from major outlets like The New York Times and CNN. But beneath its provocative façade, federal prosecutors argued, lay a coercive scheme that exploited vulnerable individuals for sex, labor, and money.

This June, after a four-week trial in Brooklyn federal court, OneTaste founder Nicole Daedone and former head of sales Rachel Cherwitz were convicted on charges of forced labor conspiracy, marking the dramatic downfall of a company accused of operating more like a cult than a wellness brand.

The Charges: Coercion Disguised as Consent

Timeline of a Downfall

According to the prosecution, Daedone and Cherwitz orchestrated a systematic campaign of emotional, psychological, sexual, and financial manipulation to control OneTaste members and employees.

Key allegations included:

• Forced Sexual Acts: Members were pressured or coerced into engaging in sexual activities with clients, investors, and other employees to serve the company’s financial interests.

• Unpaid or Underpaid Labor: Employees worked long hours, often for little or no compensation, under the belief that their suffering was part of a spiritual journey.

• Financial Exploitation: Many were driven into debt by the cost of OneTaste’s high-priced courses, which could run into the tens of thousands of dollars.

• Surveillance and Indoctrination: Members were subjected to 24/7 surveillance, forced to sever outside relationships, and indoctrinated with teachings that demanded absolute loyalty to the organization.

• Targeting the Vulnerable: Prosecutors claimed that OneTaste deliberately recruited individuals with prior trauma, leveraging their emotional wounds to deepen dependence on the group.

Former members testified that fear of expulsion, public shaming, and ostracization kept them compliant. In their view, OneTaste functioned not as a wellness community, but a sex-based cult using pseudo-spiritual language to mask abuse.

The Defense: Freedom, Consent, and Choice

Attorneys for Daedone and Cherwitz argued that the prosecution’s case distorted reality.

They claimed:

• Participation was Voluntary: Individuals joined and engaged with OneTaste of their own free will and could leave at any time.

• Retrospective Regret: Negative portrayals by former members were described as “revisionist” accounts from people who had once embraced the organization and later regretted their choices.

• First Amendment Concerns: Defense attorneys argued the trial criminalized spiritual and sexual exploration, raising serious concerns about freedom of religion, speech, and assembly.

Despite these claims, the jury returned a guilty verdict. Daedone and Cherwitz now face up to 20 years in prison each. Their legal team has signaled plans to appeal the decision, framing the case as a dangerous precedent for policing consensual adult behavior.

Behind the Curtain: A Cult or a Community?

The fall of OneTaste has reignited debate over the fine line between alternative wellness practices and exploitative cult dynamics.

The 2022 Netflix documentary “Orgasm Inc: The Story of OneTaste” helped bring public scrutiny to the company. The film featured former members detailing manipulative and coercive experiences inside the organization. However, the prosecution suffered a blow when handwritten journals referenced in the documentary were found to be fabricated, forcing the withdrawal of a key witness and raising questions about some of the government’s evidence.

Still, the jury found enough credible testimony and supporting documentation to convict both women.

What’s Next for OneTaste?

Surprisingly, despite the criminal trial and mounting controversies, OneTaste continues to operate under a new name: The Institute of OM Foundation. Its website maintains that its practices are rooted in consensual exploration of intimacyand claims the criminal charges are baseless attacks on free sexual expression.

As appeals move forward and sentencing looms, the case leaves behind a deeper set of cultural questions:
Can sexual wellness practices be commodified ethically? Where is the line between consent and coercion when power dynamics are at play? And when does a community become a cult?

For now, Nicole Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz await sentencing, their conviction marking a stark fall from the heights of Silicon Valley-adjacent success to federal criminal court.

MBQ Legal Analysis:
The OneTaste case is a chilling reminder of how wellness culture can be weaponized when combined with charismatic leadership, spiritual language, and unchecked authority. It also poses a complex legal challenge at the intersection of labor law, sex crimes, religious freedom, and personal autonomy. As more groups emerge in the ever-growing personal development space, this conviction sets a legal precedent that such operations—no matter how unconventional—are not beyond the reach of the law.