Join the Fight and Support Revolver Now… Donate…
Sign up for our email list… Stay on the bleeding edge…
Disclosure: OneTaste is an advertiser at Revolver News. Advertisers have no editorial input, and reporting is independent.
By Joe Brucker
Two sexual wellness businesswomen were convicted of forced labor conspiracy yesterday in an unusual federal court case in Brooklyn. Nicole Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz, founder and former head of the sexual wellness education company OneTaste, each face up to 20-year prison sentences.
Unlike most forced labor cases, in which victims work to avoid physical violence or legal action, the government alleged that victims were “manipulated” by other means. Prosecutors placed Daedone’s teachings at the center of their case: the defendants’ emphasis on sexuality, spirituality, and communal living was not for “liberation,” but instead was intended to coerce women to work for their benefit, “entirely by design.”
Nicole Daedone founded OneTaste in California in 2004 with Robert Kandell, following a background with other Bay Area intentional communities with a sexual focus. Both groups—More University and Welcomed Consensus—offered a meditation practice focused on women called “Deliberate Orgasm.” According to testimony, Daedone impressed multiple students with her erudition and charisma, and, after More University’s attempt to appoint Daedone as a successor had failed, she and Kandell struck out on their own. Daedone also brought changes to the deliberate orgasm practice, making it a regimented 15 minutes instead of spanning anywhere from minutes to hours and focusing the practice on the woman’s perspective.
Daedone’s teachings originally focused on personal responsibility in communication, but Kandell testified that the team switched back to sexuality after the former overwhelmed students. The eventual mixture of ideas and practices emphasized that women could enter into flow states and evolve spiritually through the Orgasmic Meditation, or OM, practice, directly engaging one’s aversions and fears (particularly sexually), and through group connectedness.
The prosecution argued that, rather than sincere belief, this was an intentional scheme “to lower [women’s] boundaries” and “break them down” so students, volunteers, and staff would “do “whatever Rachel and Nicole directed them to do,” from sales to sexually servicing investors or potential clients.
The defense countered that the prosecution aimed to “dirty up” the narrative of OneTaste, Nicole, and Rachel. They argued that OneTaste’s business and community practices, while unconventional, were consented to by grown adults and far from serious harm. Also, that the prosecution’s argument was “dangerous” for free speech.
Over five weeks of trial, jurors heard lurid testimony of coworkers being told to “make out” (a OneTaste term meaning anything from kissing to sex) to resolve workplace tension, allowing older wealthy clientele to OM with them, agreeing to cook for and sexually service an investor, or following a group activity to have sex with 30 different people in 30 days.
The evidence offered by the government was not always lurid. Seeing money as an obstacle a la self-empowerment gurus like Tony Robbins, one client testified that Rachel Cherwitz showed her how to open a credit card to pay for expensive courses. Drawing from the self-help 12-step program, some group house residents had a daily routine of listing their fears and resentments and reading their list to their roommates before tearing up the list. In a similar exercise, staffers had a practice of “reverse engineering” their frustrations when they hit a wall, in which they’d write out the decisions they made and emotions they’d experienced to get there. When calling prospective course attendants, the sales team would ask OM class registrants about their goals, which could extend into their personal background or desires. Residents and staffers would be members of group texts where they’d be expected to share their daily activities in an effort to “stay connected.” The government described these as efforts to “induce participants to incur debt,” “collect sensitive information,” or “surveil” the community, keeping them “trapped.”
The purpose of these efforts and sexual activities was to induce underpaid or unpaid labor, in the government’s telling. As is common for many small or new businesses, OneTaste blurred the lines of W-2 versus independent contractor designations. Work would also be done for OneTaste for free in order to take courses or live in group residences in “work trade” programs, similar to those found in “work study” programs, hostels, or summer camp counselor programs. However, according to the prosecution, in OneTaste’s case, this was far from benign. Some tasks were simply setting up chairs but could extend to cooking and cleaning—evidencing victims’ alleged subservience to the defendants.
According to testimony, some community members “worked” as “handlers” for an investor—for whom they cooked, cleaned, and indulged various sexual fantasies and routines they claimed, retroactively, they didn’t want to participate in.
The defense argued that this was no “bait and switch” for basic living needs—all the alleged victims agreed to participate, knew what they were signing up for, and expressed they’d wanted to be there, sending enthusiastic messages and signing consent forms.
The defense emphasized that these were grown women, often well-educated, who weren’t taking responsibility for their actions.
Because of the environment Daedone and Cherwitz created, prosecutors argued, the defendants had no choice. The prosecution agreed that the women weren’t “chained” to OneTaste and were adults who were often well-educated but countered that “That just shows how powerful the coercion was.” Because of the cumulative toll of the environment and the group morale for pushing one’s own boundaries, “Choice wasn’t something they were in a position to make,” according to the government.
The theory has drawn criticism from social conservatives and libertarians who claim it’s a dangerous precedent for freedom of speech and the freedom of religious groups.
These may have been part of arguments the defense was hoping to make but ultimately didn’t. Both defendants rested after only one witness, despite planning for over 20. While that witness directly contradicted an earlier government witness’ testimony—that his interest in leaving expensive coaching training pushed OneTaste leaders to ask a saleswoman to “do whatever it takes” to keep him as a client—the defense moved straight to closing arguments the next morning.
“We have plenty of witnesses that we would have presented, but it’s very clear that what we want to present, the court has disagreed would be admissible,” Jennifer Bonjean, counsel for Daedone, explained. “We are not going to sit here through three days and just get beat up with sustained objections.” In the 30 minutes their first and only witness took the stand, US District Court Judge Diane Gujarati sustained 12 objections. While deliberating, jurors also requested to see documents that the defense had argued shouldn’t have been admitted. Bonjean told reporters outside the courtroom that they plan to appeal.
This may not be the case the prosecution expected to argue, either. Less than two months before trial, and after years of investigation, the government dropped a witness and her evidence, no longer believing it to be authentic. The FBI investigation and EDNY indictment followed media reports that compared OneTaste to NXIVM, alleging human trafficking and rape—but at least one of those stories has been retracted. In the midst of the trial, the BBC pulled the most scandalous of its 2020 ten-episode series on OneTaste, citing “legal reasons.” Revolver emailed the BBC and the series’s journalist for elaboration, but neither could comment.
Tensions before and outside the trial have rivaled those in it, escalating to shouting matches between Judge Gujarati and Bonjean.
Ahead of the verdict, the judge cautioned the court she wanted “no noise” from the public, which has been full of (sometimes vocal) OneTaste supporters, several of whom have flown in from other states. Although the government argued that Daedone’s teachings were disingenuous, Cherwitz and Daedone maintained the group’s trademark positivity through the verdict. Cherwitz and Daedone smiled and greeted each other with long hugs once allowed to stand.
President Trump’s nominee and current Acting US Attorney for the Eastern District of New York celebrated the verdict in a press release, stating, “I commend the witnesses who testified at trial notwithstanding the trauma that they experienced at the defendants’ direction. It is my hope that the just conclusion of this process will bring them closure, and that future charlatans think twice about exploiting human beings in this manner.”
As we publish this story today, June 10th, there is a 10 a.m. EST hearing regarding whether Daedone and Cherwitz will be held in custody until their late September sentencing. Under U.S. law, judges are to presume defendants dangerous and a flight risk and imprison them upon conviction of forced labor conspiracy while sentencing is pending, unless they can make a showing otherwise. To highlight the unusual nature and novelty of the charges, Daedone and Cherwitz were granted pretrial release, and the government has not sought to revoke their bond; however, the court has indicated openness to remand pending sentencing and other options.
Annual Ad-Free Subscription… Join the Fight and Support Revolver Now…
Check out the new merch! — Donate…
Sign up for our email list… Stay on the bleeding edge…
NEWSFEED — FOLLOW ON X — GAB — GETTR — TRUTH SOCIAL — BLUESKY
Join the Discussion