Comeuppance: how an orgasmic ‘cult’ ended in a prison term for its founder 60%

By Edward Helmore0%

4/5/2026, 3:00:47 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 32 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Appeal to Authority, and Confirmation Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 28.4% saturation with 297 hits. Analysis detected 2,262 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,045 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 56.2% and a BS Rank of 60% (8,769 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 59.90% of the article peer group.

Clitoral stimulation as a path to spiritual connection, mental clarity and emotional wellbeing has been practiced for millennia. 
After being convicted on forced labor conspiracy charges related to the practice (and getting sentenced to nine years by a Brooklyn court last week), Nicole Daedone was given the opportunity to address the court. 
Known as the “The Oracle” of OneTaste, a trademarked orgasmic meditation enterprise that extolled the benefits of hours of arousal, Daedone, 57, swiveled her chair toward the public gallery, smiled broadly, and said: “No.” 
Outside the court, supporters described Daedone’s conviction as wrong and dangerous. 
Some said the seven former adherents of OneTaste, co-founded by Daedone in 2005, who testified against her at trial did not account for hundreds more who said they were indeed satisfied. 
Anjuli Ayer, the current CEO of OneTaste, called it “a terrifying day for freedom. 
If persuasion can be a crime and consent doesn’t matter, then no one is safe.” 
Rori Montali, a wellness practitioner and intimacy influencer, argued that orgasmic meditation had helped her recover from trauma. 
“It helped me get back into my body and know that it is safe to feel and not be afraid. 
It taught me that it’s OK to touch and feel alive again through what God gave us,” she told the Guardian. 
But orgasmic ecstasy was not the lens through which federal prosecutors viewed the principals of San Francisco-based OneTaste when, in 2023, they charged Daedone, OneTaste’s founder and former CEO, and Rachel Cherwitz, its former head of sales, with forced labor conspiracy. 
Prosecutors claimed Daedone and Cherwitz “used psychological, emotional, and financial coercion to control their victims and extract labor and services for their own benefit”. 
After their sentencing, US attorney Joseph Nocella said, “Coercion disguised as wellness or empowerment is still exploitation and it is a crime that causes harm to vulnerable victims,” adding that the defendants had combined forced labor with sexual exploitation to cause trauma to the victims “in ways that extend beyond lost wages or long hours”. 
OneTaste has recently been the subject of a 2022 Netflix documentary called Orgasm Inc and the 2025 book Empire of Orgasm: Sex, Power, and the Downfall of a Wellness Cult by the Bloomberg reporter Ellen Huet. 
Formed in San Francisco, California, in 2004, the group gained steam over time as alternative therapies moved mainstream and the once-fringe idea of orgasmic meditation, or “OMing”, which has roots in Buddhist Tantric sex, became part of the wellness industry we know today. 
Daedone became the face of OneTaste early on. 
OneTaste adherents sometimes lived together in communes devoted to Daedone’s teachings. 
Huet described attending an OM session where she witnessed Daedone on a massage table in a position described as “butterflied open” while a helper, Josh, stroked her for over an hour. 
“Nicole seemed to be levitating to another planet,” she wrote, “And the audience members felt themselves pulled skywards in her wake.” 
At its peak, OneTaste had 300,000 members and established outposts in Los Angeles, New York, Austin and London. 
OM attracted publicity, with the New York Times writing skeptically in 2009 that “a commune dedicated to men and women publicly creating ‘the orgasm that exists between them,’ in the words of one resident, may sound like the ultimate California satire”. 
But the slow sex movement drew the attention of the FBI to Daedone, who planned to make OM as mainstream as yoga. 
The Los Gatos native had originally graduated from San Francisco State and opened an art gallery before transforming herself into The Oracle. 
After a lengthy investigation, resulting in charges, the government said that Daedone and Cherwitz had lured women, often those who had suffered trauma, into the OM community, then isolated them. 
They claimed that Daedone and Cherwitz assigned these women duties such as cooking, cleaning, gardening or providing sexual favors for investors. 
Prosecutor Sean Fern said the women had come to the community seeking personal growth but “left as shells of their former selves”. 
“And what did the defendants get out of this? 
Power, prestige and money,” Fern said. 
The first government witness, named Becky, said she lost her sense of reality, went into debt, and was subjected to both verbal abuse and unwanted sexual touching. 
“OneTaste, to me, is a cult,” Becky testified. 
Outside court last week, defense attorney Jennifer Bonjean, who described Daedone as a “ceiling-shattering feminist entrepreneur”, argued that the government had misused forced labor statutes and the charges had come “painfully close to criminalizing thoughts and beliefs”. 
“We are deeply concerned people having a normal developmental life and changing their views will look back at a time and say, ‘Hmmm, I think I was manipulated and coerced.’ 
People can look at all types of experiences, college, marriages, and say I really was manipulated and did things I really didn’t want to do,” Bonjean said. 
Hanging over the case, which is now set to be appealed, is the question of if OneTaste and its practice of orgasmic meditation rises to the level of a cult. 
Ex-Moonie  a former member of the Unification church  Steven Hassan told the Guardian it does, in part because it “relied on authoritarian control and had narcissistic leaders who think they are above the law and control the behavior, information and thoughts of their followers”. 
Hassan believes that cults coming out of the wellness movement are becoming common and they no longer need to rely on physical isolation because the internet and cellphones can do the job. 
“They’re constantly being indoctrinated online,” he said, adding that the hallmarks of brainwashing were indoctrination, distrust and cancel culture. 
“It’s all part of brainwashing somebody.” 
But supporters of OneTaste argue that that FBI had adopted Hassan’s “dangerous theories” into their official training despite the American Psychological Association and the US Commission on International Religious Freedom each formally rejecting the idea of brainwashing. 
OneTaste’s current CEO, Ayer, said in a statement that the case against Daedone and Cherwitz  who received a six-and-a-half-year sentence  was not “a case of labor or even conspiracy”. 
“This is a case to say ideas are dangerous,” Ayer said. 
“And of course ideas about women’s power and volition would be the most dangerous.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 12.4%Edward Helmore: 6.4%the Guardian: 3.7%Confirmation Bias12.4%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.4%the Guardian: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 15.3%Edward Helmore: 4.4%the Guardian: 3.1%Availability Heuristic15.3%This article: 7.2%Edward Helmore: 1.0%the Guardian: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic7.2%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.9%the Guardian: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 2.0%the Guardian: 1.6%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 9.5%Edward Helmore: 7.9%the Guardian: 6.1%Framing Effect9.5%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 4.1%Edward Helmore: 0.5%the Guardian: 0.6%Status Quo Bias4.1%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.6%the Guardian: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.2%the Guardian: 2.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 2.9%Edward Helmore: 1.3%the Guardian: 2.1%Pessimism Bias2.9%This article: 28.4%Edward Helmore: 6.1%the Guardian: 10.4%Negativity Bias28.4%This article: 5.5%Edward Helmore: 4.6%the Guardian: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias5.5%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.1%the Guardian: 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.3%the Guardian: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 2.4%Edward Helmore: 0.7%the Guardian: 1.3%In-Group Bias2.4%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 4.1%Edward Helmore: 2.2%the Guardian: 3.2%Halo Effect4.1%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.3%the Guardian: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 6.8%Edward Helmore: 1.1%the Guardian: 1.2%Recency Bias6.8%This article: 7.5%Edward Helmore: 1.1%the Guardian: 0.4%Primacy Effect7.5%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.2%the Guardian: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 4.4%Edward Helmore: 1.7%the Guardian: 2.0%Ad Hominem4.4%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 1.4%the Guardian: 0.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 15.3%Edward Helmore: 5.8%the Guardian: 3.8%Appeal to Authority15.3%This article: 5.5%Edward Helmore: 1.4%the Guardian: 1.7%False Dilemma5.5%This article: 6.9%Edward Helmore: 3.1%the Guardian: 1.1%Slippery Slope6.9%This article: 2.4%Edward Helmore: 0.7%the Guardian: 0.1%Circular Reasoning2.4%This article: 12.3%Edward Helmore: 3.6%the Guardian: 6.3%Hasty Generalization12.3%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.9%the Guardian: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.9%the Guardian: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 10.0%Edward Helmore: 6.6%the Guardian: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion10.0%This article: 3.9%Edward Helmore: 1.5%the Guardian: 0.9%Begging the Question3.9%This article: 2.1%Edward Helmore: 1.5%the Guardian: 2.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)2.1%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 2.9%Edward Helmore: 1.4%the Guardian: 0.4%Burden of Proof2.9%This article: 5.8%Edward Helmore: 1.3%the Guardian: 0.2%Appeal to Nature5.8%This article: 2.6%Edward Helmore: 0.3%the Guardian: 0.4%Composition/Division2.6%This article: 11.2%Edward Helmore: 4.2%the Guardian: 3.1%Anecdotal11.2%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.6%the Guardian: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 2.0%Edward Helmore: 1.1%the Guardian: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)2.0%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 1.7%the Guardian: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 7.1%Edward Helmore: 0.8%the Guardian: 0.1%Special Pleading7.1%This article: 1.3%Edward Helmore: 0.7%the Guardian: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy1.3%This article: 2.3%Edward Helmore: 1.4%the Guardian: 1.6%Unattributed Quote2.3%This article: 1.2%Edward Helmore: 0.9%the Guardian: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection1.2%This article: 1.2%Edward Helmore: 5.6%the Guardian: 10.4%Biased Writer Voice1.2%This article: 9.9%Edward Helmore: 1.4%the Guardian: 1.8%Indoctrination9.9%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.0%the Guardian: 3.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Edward Helmore: 0.0%the Guardian: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

1045 words analyzed.

Speakers

8speakers47%attributed speech552writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageAnjuli Ayer • 14 words • 0.0% coverageAnjuli Ayer • 15 words • 0.0% coverageRori Montali • 18 words • 0.0% coverageRori Montali • 20 words • 0.0% coverageRori Montali • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageJoseph Nocella • 55 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 43 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageEllen Huet • 31 words • 0.0% coverageEllen Huet • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageSean Fern • 22 words • 0.0% coverageSean Fern • 9 words • 0.0% coverageSean Fern • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageBecky • 8 words • 0.0% coverageJennifer Bonjean • 37 words • 0.0% coverageJennifer Bonjean • 30 words • 0.0% coverageJennifer Bonjean • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageSteven Hassan • 46 words • 100.0% coverageSteven Hassan • 32 words • 0.0% coverageSteven Hassan • 19 words • 100.0% coverageSteven Hassan • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageAnjuli Ayer • 31 words • 0.0% coverageAnjuli Ayer • 11 words • 100.0% coverageAnjuli Ayer • 14 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Jennifer Bonjean

100%flagged-word coverage
94 attributed words19% of attributed speech93% writer coverage
0%2.5%5.0%Unattributed Quote-4.3 ptsWriter: 4.3%Jennifer Bonjean: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-3.8 ptsWriter: 3.8%Jennifer Bonjean: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-2.4 ptsWriter: 2.4%Jennifer Bonjean: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-2.4 ptsWriter: 2.4%Jennifer Bonjean: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.