The founders of OneTaste Inc., a women’s wellness company known for its promotion of “orgasmic meditation,” have been found guilty of federal forced labor charges. A Brooklyn jury delivered their verdict after a five-week trial, determining that Nicole Daedone, 57, the founder, and Rachel Cherwitz, 44, the former sales director, used manipulation and intimidation to control their followers.
Prosecutors presented a case that depicted Daedone and Cherwitz as exploiters who coerced individuals—many of whom had experienced sexual trauma—into engaging in sexual acts for the company’s benefit, claiming these were paths to “freedom” and “enlightenment.” Additionally, they alleged that the organization failed to provide promised payments, often forcing members to incur debts to continue their involvement with OneTaste.
U.S. Attorney Joseph Nocella described the verdict as revealing Daedone and Cherwitz as “grifters” who targeted vulnerable individuals under the guise of empowerment. Assistant U.S. Attorney Nina Gupta emphasized how the women’s actions led victims to compromise their bodily autonomy and mental wellbeing in service of corporate gain.
While the defense characterized Daedone as a feminist entrepreneur, the argument was made that participants voluntarily engaged with the organization and could opt out when they chose. Despite this, the court found sufficient evidence of coercive tactics employed by the defendants.
Founded in 2004 in San Francisco, OneTaste gained attention for its unconventional approach to female sexuality and wellness, featuring sessions of “orgasmic meditation” where men would manually stimulate women in groups. At its peak, the organization received significant media attention and expanded internationally, but faced increasing scrutiny regarding its practices.
Following Daedone’s 2017 sale of her stake in OneTaste for $12 million, concerns about the company’s ethical standards intensified. The current owners, who have since rebranded OneTaste as the Institute of OM Foundation, have defended the organization, asserting that consent has been a foundational principle.
As the case progresses toward sentencing, both defendants maintain their innocence and plan to appeal the verdict.
This verdict highlights the ongoing conversation about ethical practices in businesses claiming to empower marginalized groups, particularly in wellness and sexual health industries. It serves as a reminder of the importance of consent and the potential for exploitation under a façade of empowerment.