What about the OneTaste deceptive tactics of getting new young people to join OneTaste?
People have a right to know what is going on in various organizations before its too late, and they waste years of their lives.

If a former member of a group or sect does not want to be associated with a sect anymore, they could explain why not.

Or a former member of a sect could share the details of what really went on in the sect, without using their name, so other people can find out what the sect is really all about.

Does everyone have to learn by the school of hard knocks?
Or can they learn from others past experiences?

Posted by Allyson Wyenn
I was a student of Nicole’s and involved in the running of the original yoga and meditation center where Nicole taught her workshops. I have not been involved in the organization since 2006. I do not want to comment on my participation and experience there because it is extremely personal and I have many feelings about it. When I left, there was tension between the organization and me. After many years, I have made peace with my experience.

One thing that I can say is true is that the suggestions on this website about Nicole’s organization being full of people using substances is not true. People do not use any substances at the organization or in the live in community.

Also, the idea on this website about the workshops being so that people can have 60’s like sexual activities is not true either. When her organization first began students, community members and anyone else visiting the facilities could participate in any kind of sexual activity they wanted to, outside of courses. Everyone was free to do whatever they wanted. There were no rules, no guidelines. The courses were strictly educational and for the purpose of people having better and conscious sexual lives. After courses were over, there were no rules. People were free to do whatever they wanted and they were not policed. Although, the focus of the work of the organization was conscious sensuality and if that element seemed to be getting forgotten the workshop leaders would point it out. It is my understanding that students that take courses and people who live in the community, now, have to sign contracts that give exact, specific rules and guidelines for where the line is drawn between courses, living in the community, relations between members, etc...

Taking the courses is one level of participation there. But living in the community is another level. It is similar to getting promoted in a business. The higher up you go, the more closely what you do can be tied to the overall goals of the organization. As a community member you can have more responsibilities tied with the overall goals of the organization. And, just like a business owner, Nicole does decide the direction of the organization. So, people should be aware that if they decide to go that one step deeper into the organization, they should ask as many people as possible what the expectations are. They should find out what the current goals of the organization are and how much and in what regard community members are expected to participate in, asked to participate in, or can volunteer to participate in the activities of the organization. Then, people can make up their own minds from an informed place.

There are two aspects of the organization. One, is that it is an educational organization where you can participate as a student and learn and the other is that it is a for profit business, which means that the owners are looking at the bottom line. They are looking at the numbers and they do want to be successful. Where the line is drawn and to what extent the organization is a business and for profit vs. how much it is really a community, I am not sure. I do know that Nicole had an opportunity a while back to move the organization more in the direction of a business and away from the community aspect and she chose not to. I think she did that because she really wants to keep the spirit of community, and not money, alive. In our world, everyone needs to make a living. I think she has monetary concerns but also wants the organization to be as “not-for-profit” as possible. I think she has been trying to figure out how to strike a balance between those two for a very long time. She also may have had other reasons for doing this. She may have thought a different business approach would be better than the one she turned down. But, I am not sure.

As far as there being any danger there, I never experienced any. There is a one no vote rule and decisions are made by the community as a whole. A one no vote can be intimidating for some people because saying no could change the entire course of some decision. This is weighty. I feel that this is a balance between the individual, their personality, and how the workshop leaders act. The right mix of personalities could be no problem, but the wrong mix could have some people feel unheard.

As far as the connection between Nicole and Morehouse, there was an organization that links Nicole to Morehouse and that organization is not even mentioned on this website. The people who run that organization were students of students of Morehouse. I was a student of this organization and so was Nicole. We both left because we learned that the organization is a fraud. They live in Northern California and they have many students in the San Francisco Bay Area. There students invite other people to the workshops, etc.. I can’t even begin to say how strongly I would advise anyone to stay away from this group. I do not want to reveal there name because I am using my name, here, and I do not feel comfortable doing that. They do teach workshops similar to those of Morehouse and it is run by a man and several women. They live in Northern California. So, if you find an organization that teaches workshops on sensuality and you find out they reside in Northern California but teach courses in the Bay Area, I would not participate.

The organization was in its very early days when I was there and it was going through many growing pains. The goals of the organization, the degree to which community members participated in the business vs. were students were being figured out on a daily basis. Also, the lines about research partners were being defined. Someone could feel a certain way about their relationship and the workshops leaders could feel a different way. Then, it becomes a choice for the student of who is right and what does the student want. The workshop leaders will make their viewpoints clear and it is up to the student to decide what they want to do. People may decide that they disagree with the workshop leaders and then they would have to decide if and how they wanted to continue their participation and whether they wanted to stay or go. On the other hand, people might agree with the workshop leaders and everything is fine.

Also, when I was involved, if you lived in the community, you did have research partners. You gave your preferences as to who you would like as a partner and then you would get matched up with someone. Similar to giving your preferences at a job and then getting assigned to a specific project. With the “research” aspect, there is an emphasis on it being research. This area gets a little bit grey for me. But, what I do know is that it is an educational research facility. So, if you go there looking for education and then you end up falling in love with someone it becomes a more complex terrain to navigate. At least, it was for me. Most people there seemed to have absolutely no problem with this. I had a lot of difficulties with it. Since leaving there, I have looked back on what was difficult for me and can see my part clearly. As mentioned before they now have specific rules and guidelines for student/live-in community members relating outside of workshops. I think the reason why they set this up is so that things would be clearer and easier to navigate around this area. Another aspect around this is a hierarchy of goals. Someone could have a goal of finding a boyfriend. They could also have a goal of learning how to say no. They could also have a goal of saying yes. Whatever their goals are, they will come into play within the framework of their research. So, as I mentioned earlier, if you have a research partner and something comes up within your relationship with your research partner, that is outside the lines of the goals, that you stated, you will need to figure that out. And, you will need to communicate and sort it out with the workshops teachers. You will also need to make decisions as to which goal is more important to you, if two goals conflict. The workshop leaders may disagree or agree. If the workshop leaders feel that what they are teaching you is not what you are looking for, they may also point that out.

I feel very uncertain about posting this. Both because there were invaluable things that I learned from Nicole that I could never have learned anywhere else and that I am forever grateful for. I do not want to write anything to take away from that fact. I also want to share my experience with other people and allow them to make their own choices. What I have written is my truth and my truth only.
Allyson

Just to clarify, when I wrote, "The organization was in its very early days when I was there and it was going through many growing pains." and everything written after that is about Nicole's organization, not the one to avoid.

Also, to clarify about the one no vote. I did not give a no vote when I felt like giving one and I created quite a mess for myself. I was the one that suffered the most from me not saying how I felt. This is a significant aspect of this community and I would seriously consider this element of it and how you feel about it. And, I don’t even know if they still have this rule as it was so many years ago.
Allyson

one last thing. Everything that I have written was from many years ago. And, as far as I know things may be nothing like that today. It is my understanding that Nicole is very hand off now, focusing on her own personal goals. The community is really just operated by the people that live there. What I wrote was from what I experienced years ago, so it may be nothing like that today.

Its interesting to see some of the thoughts of an apparent former member of OneTaste.

First off, this is not a personal criticism of a former member of OneTaste, who has their own view of what may or many not have happened to them.
But it is very interesting to see those views, and to compare them to the objective known facts, and other knowledge about these kinds of groups and sects. People can look at those facts, and make up their own minds.
OneTaste is not some type of "original" group, it has been directly copied from Victor Baranco, and others.



But to move forward, there are some serious problems in much of what is being said.
Even an outsider can easily see that obviously Nicole Daedone is not "hands off", whatever that means. Its her group. Nicole may have become more aloof recently, perhaps due to media criticism, but the record shows she has been very much hands on.
Perhaps Mr. Moneybags now owns everything by buying things out behnd the scenes.


How can a for-profit business model like OneTaste, based on Victor Baranco's system, be community run? Its designed based on Baranco's concept to be FOR-PROFIT, and controlled by the person the owner.

Also, the (Victor Baranco tactic) One-NO-Vote idea, is literally a cultic scam. Its absurd.
Any even lowest level cultish group leader knows that even MINIMAL social pressure to conform will make people want to BELONG to the group.
So a so-called On-NO-Vote idea, is literally a tactic, used by Victor Baranco, and its quite clever.

You see, if they allowed a SECRET BALLOT democracy, then people could actually vote their conscience on issues, without fear of being ostracized.
But since there is some silly one-NO-vote scam, then each person who wants to belong to the group and get accepted, is going to go along to get along.
Those that don't, get pushed out.

That is very very basic stuff.
The ultimate punishment in any sect is what?
Being ostracized, kicked-out, ex-communicated.

So the Victor Baranco One-NO-vote idea, is a cultic scam designed to lock people into Groupthink by social pressure. Its very clever.

Also, Daedone used to brag she was a direct student of Victor Baranco, until what Baranco was really doing was exposed in this thread, and then all of those links about Daedone being a direct student of Baranco were removed. That's a fact.
Some of the only places that information remains is in this thread.

Why did they now choose to conceal the direct links with Baranco?

And if it wasn't noticed, the other person (Trellis House run by Marc Beneteau) who was in this thread defending Daedone and OneTaste with their own communal house was shut-down. [forum.culteducation.com]


Just a few more points:
- how does anyone not involved with a sect for years, know who may or may not being using substances?
- all of these so-called rules about "sexual activities", and when one can have it, and with who, and when not, is completely absurd. Even recent news articles stated that Daedone was pairing people up, so one can see why they want to counteract that. Time to research cultic groups 101, and look into how they control and distort people's sexualities, many sects do that.

- its incorrect to say that Daedone chose to move away from a for-profit business model. That is clearly false. Its been proven, that Mr. Moneybags was buying things, and Mr. Moneybags runs businesses, sometimes with a long-term investment. There is plenty of information of how they were going to try and position Nicole Daedone in the culture as an "expert".

- the stuff about the workshops, is unfortunately either painfully naive, or is not being honest, or is very distorted. It was very obvious, that the OneTaste people were attemping very hard-ball TACTICS learned from people like Victor Baranco. There were dozens of complaints about OneTaste as shown in this thread. Those are not "growing pains". Those are someone who is starting up their own cultish group, and is bluntly using their TECHNIQUES on people.
And yes, after media criticism, they smarten up a bit, and make it more subtle and harder to see. That is NOT a good thing, that is worse.

- the stuff about "research partners". One must see this is directly from the dreaded Victor Baranco. Its a very ugly tactic, to take normal healthy human intimacy, and turn it into some kind of "experiment".
OneTaste is NOT an educational facility or group.
Link to ONE scientific paper published in a peer-reviewed journal by OneTaste on sexuality.
There is nothing, nothing at all.

Sorry for the many postings. But I can't figure out how to edit my posts. I read the Index: tech guide and don't see any directions how to edit posts.

Regarding what I wrote about the one no vote and people may not feel heard...I really can not comment on anyone else's experience. If I could have edited that part out of my post, I would have. The only thing I can talk about is my own experience, which I described above.

I know what I wrote about based on my experience when I was a student there. Not, about when I wasn't there (after I no longer participated).

I am not denying Nicole's connection to Vic either. I know that she took a 2 week course from him. I just didn't include that in the post.

During the time that I was there, I did not agree with Nicole about almost everything.

But I felt quite alone in this.

There were other people who had disagreements with her too, but I did not know the details of what was going on so I couldn’t confirm that I was experiencing the same thing that they were.

I eventually left.

When I left, it still wasn’t clear to me what had occurred. What it me or was it them? So, I talked with many counselors and other organizations. I talked about what happened. I got support that my feelings were valid. I made peace with the situation. And, then I moved on.

There are very strong statements being made on this website but I am curious to learn more about them.

One final comment: I made my peace by looking back at my arguments with Nicole and seeing my side of the street and taking responsibility for that and by forgiving.

There were many invaluable lessons that I learned from Nicole.

A recent photo marketing the sex-LGAT seminar system, (which in that case is actually more of a group around the cultish personality of their leader) called One Taste led by Nicole Daedone.

Thursday, March 3, 2011 Nicole Daedone / One Taste SF
[4.bp.blogspot.com]
[timothyarchibald.blogspot.com]
You have Ms Daedone, smugly supervising 3 men all dressed in black (on purpose), with 3 women naked from the waist down, one assumes being sexually stimulated as a group under the Madame's orders.

That is called sex marketing.
And that group uses viral marketing with terms like "sex cult", as can also be seen in the photo where everyone is dressed in all black clothes, like some sort of weird sex cult where everyone wears black.
Its just brazen sex marketing.

And guess what? Some people will pay money for access to sex. News flash.
Those who run these groups know exactly who will pay for access to sex, and how much they will pay. They know the prices and the going rates, and have to be competitive for services rendered.

People need to wake up and realize this is not some new method of sexual liberation, its the exact opposite.
Its copying the methods of extremely damaging manipulators like Victor Baranco, and just copying those methods of manipulation and abuse.
They target young people, who have no idea of what the Madame is doing to them psychologically.

OneTaste [forum.culteducation.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/19/2011 07:23PM by The Anticult.