Current Page: 20 of 30
Re: Victor Baranco, Lafayette Morehouse,Nicole Daedone, One Taste - cults?
Posted by: corboy ()
Date: October 24, 2011 09:43PM


the members are sketch and often playing peek-a-boo out the windows flashing passersby on the street with their boobs or junk when they aren't outside chain smoking on the benches. and they are ALWAYS outside chain smoking on the benches!!!

If this observation, quoted from Yelp is an accurate description, it is quite interesting.

Chain smoking? Not a good sign. People chain smoke when tense.

If you're happy and fulfilled and have just had a good erotic workout, you'd be lingering over and savoring one cigarette. You'd not be chainsmoking.

Public service announcement: Smoking appears to be on the rise amongst twenty somethings, both males and females.

If you start smoking, you are doing exactly what the tobacco companies WANT you to do.

In the short term you will hemorrage money. In the long term your health will suffer, including your sexual health.

My mother started out as a beauty and when she died from smoking related diseases at age 64, she looked 84.

Back to One Taste.

Stay involved with One Taste and your perspective will be as stained as a smoker's snot.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Victor Baranco, Lafayette Morehouse,Nicole Daedone, One Taste - cults?
Posted by: corboy ()
Date: November 05, 2011 11:29PM


Quote from above reader: "Much of what is on Rick Ross' website, and here on Yelp, is based on experiences derived from the first year or three of OneTaste's existence. "

This statement is naive and sounds exactly like something that would be told to a current resident to get them to dismiss what people who have managed to leave the group and are now trying to heal from their experience would say about their experience with OneTaste.

This is classic cult brainwashing technique. Translation: The people who left are bad/not strong enough/weren't able to cope in some way and YOU who are still here are special, enlightened, different from them.

This is exactly how OneTaste works. On the surface, appearing and telling their members that they are free to come and go, free to disagree and have their own opinions, but underneath carefully managing members in all aspects of their lives including and especially their sexuality.

Bottom line, it isn't the practice or any of the surface claims. It is the underneath stripping of your connection to yourself and plugging you into the group think that can be dangerous.

If you are at all in doubt about your OneTaste experience, read the book Combating Cult Mind Control. Believe me, it opened my eyes. OneTaste techniques are on every page.

Ultimately everyone has to decide for themselves. Follow your intuition, trust your inner guide and listen. If any part of you says this is not right or I don't want to go here, don't dismiss it. Don't let anyone violate your boundaries by telling you it is better or more enlightened or "open" to be like them.



/6/2009 b "loody Mary, come to me" h. says:
They used to offer naked yoga class, I never been (nor would I do anything like that), but used to attend their free Friday community yoga classes from time to time. There was a point where all these skeevy investors stepped in, and the classes were immediately halted, no explanation. Afterward I kept receiving calls from their representatives who wanted to talk about the new changes. You can easily sense that something strange was up like they were trying to hit you up for a donation.


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Victor Baranco, Lafayette Morehouse,Nicole Daedone, One Taste - cults?
Posted by: corboy ()
Date: November 05, 2011 11:42PM

Why is it those of us with blogs can’t trust anything those who have editors, and fact-checkers, and legions of writers who went to school for this shit, write?

From The Macho Response :

It's Really Over Now (Read All About It)

Blogging, Cultism, NewAge, Quackery, Science

Jun 16 2011


Today, The Atlantic Magazine joined their ranks with a spiffy bit of conjuring called “The Triumph of New-Age Medicine.” []

Orac’s already jumped on top of it, [] noting other instances where The Atlantic just completely mangled science reporting, but, honestly, why should Orac have to?

Because they aren’t capable of doing otherwise, that’s why – lying (and being stupid enough to think we’re as stupid as they are) is all they know.

Right here, in a story on the San Francisco cult leader, Nicole Daedone, The San Francisco Chronicle just blithely accepts her word for what she’s up to with her One Taste Urban Retreat Center:


She began to explore San Francisco’s sexual underground, briefly studying under Victor Baranco, who had been publicly staging women in orgasm since 1976 and founded the Lafayette Morehouse sex cult in Lafayette, which still runs today. Baranco died in 2002, and Daedone said she has distanced herself from his legacy, insisting there is nothing cultish about OneTaste.

See? No checking. No nothin’ – they just take her word for it – when even a simple check would show she’s been monitored by the Rick Ross Cult Information Forum for quite some time.


But what do they know? The lady said “no,” and no means no, right?

Yeah, sure, and so does Scientology.


So what’s going to become of us without a free press? Who knows. Blogs are trying to fill the void, but – let’s be serious – you can’t open a blog over breakfast and ignore your wife. It’s just not the same.

But that’s where we are now, and we’re just going to have to get used to it, I guess.

Damn you all to Hell.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Victor Baranco, Lafayette Morehouse,Nicole Daedone, One Taste - cults?
Posted by: corboy ()
Date: February 11, 2012 09:32AM

Send a message to Bay Area Reporter and Tell 'Em to Read Rick Ross Message Board

Nothing Mentioned About Victor Baranco


Slow Sex author reveals tips for womenNEWS--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Published 02/09/2012

by Heather Cassell

Nicole Daedone, founder of OneTaste and author of Slow Sex. (Photo: Courtesy OneTaste)

Print this Page
Send to a Friend
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on MySpace!

Yearning for more than Hollywood romance or porn-style sex where everything is glossy and done "right"? Orgasmic meditation might be the key to unlocking unbridled passion in the bedroom that is not made up or comes with batteries, but au natural.

Nicole Daedone, founder and CEO of OneTaste, a sexuality education center for orgasmic mediation based in San Francisco, found her sexual awakening at San Francisco State University.

As a graduate associate teacher and a "young, budding feminist," she stumbled upon women's feelings of sexual inadequacy by accident in the classroom one day, said the Bay Area native.

She was stunned by the response to a questionnaire women filled out in the classroom that asked, "What do you want to know about sex?"

"Every single woman responded back with some version of 'What's wrong with me?'" Daedone said.

"Here I was thinking that we had this big sexual liberation and basically we stopped at equal rights and not equal fulfillment," she recalled.

"I think in my mind, at the time, and in many people's minds around sexuality there is a recipe. I must not be following it correctly, something's wrong with me because I'm not having these explosive experiences that I've heard about," said Daedone, a 44-year-old bisexual woman.

She didn't have an answer for her students that semester, but it set her on a journey that has revolutionized her life and is now her mission: equal fulfillment through orgasmic meditation, also known as OM.

Orgasmic meditation is a meditative practice where a woman's genitals are stroked by her partner for 15 minutes.

Orgasmic meditation isn't tantric sex, she pointed out. While both are "delicious experiences," the difference between tantric sex and OM is ornate versus simplicity, she said. In the tantric sex experience that practitioners take on its culture and language. OM is simply about experiencing what is naturally already present without adding a buzzing bunny or anything else.

"Slow sex is just about peeling it back. You don't add anything extra. You're simply experiencing what's there," said Daedone, "and what's there ends up being so profound that you wouldn't want to put anything on top of it."

The simple act added to everyday sex becomes a revolution under the sheets.

Once she mastered the practice, she ditched what she calls the "empty calorie version of sex" spoon fed to people by Hollywood and the porn industry and is now teaching others how to tap into, "a really deep place that is available, that is far different," she said.

In a city known for talking about sex in public, but which also has a reputation for being "home to all of those damn hippies," Daedone has been debunking skeptics (she used to be one) and demystifying people's frustrations with female orgasm taking it mainstream.

Since 2004, when OneTaste opened its doors, Daedone estimates she's introduced 4,500 people to OM through workshops at its South of Market office, and countless others through online videos and Skype workshops, she said.

The art of female orgasm

After leaving the ivory tower behind to follow her passion, she made a creative stop in 1995 as the founder and original owner of 111 Minna Street Art Gallery, an alternative event space that displays avant-garde art in the South of Market district.

The space brought together performance and visual art in a party atmosphere and created something unique and unseen at the time, said Daedone, pointing out that art and sex aren't that different.

Art and sex carry elements of unbridled "freedom of expression" and "seemingly disparate pieces coming together," Daedone said, that creates something very different from everyday life. Those free-flying radical elements are the underlying force behind OneTaste.

"That same element is what informs OneTaste," said Daedone, author of Slow Sex: The Art and Craft of the Female Orgasm. "It's like a different element of sexuality expressing itself than we see in everyday life."

"Art takes a very different form and experiences what's there without using an end result to determine whether or not what was there was good. I think that's actually what works best for a woman's body," said Daedone, about women's process of reaching orgasm.

"You have to work differently, a plus b equals the ever sought after climax," actually involves the entirety of women's being rather than simply focusing on the genitals, said Daedone.

The one thing she hopes for is that everyone gets the message that, "every person is orgasmic and that your orgasms [are] potentially a whole life journey," she said. Adding, that in life people don't have to fit themselves into a definition, "you can actually use your own body to define what's true for you."

To learn more, visit

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Victor Baranco, Lafayette Morehouse,Nicole Daedone, One Taste - cults?
Posted by: corboy ()
Date: February 14, 2013 07:26AM


Victor Baranco's Flash to Perfection
May 1966

Vic, realizing he was the perceiver and judge of his experiences and thereby the creator, concluded that he was perfect, and everybody and everyone else was too. Further that perfection includes the potential for change.

Note that this is a twist on language. The commonly accepted definitions of 'perfect' imply completion, no further room for improvement.


Having all the required or desirable elements, qualities, or characteristics; as good as it is possible to be.

Make (something) completely free from faults or defects, or as close to such a condition as possible.

The perfect tense. Synonyms adjective. complete - absolute - consummate - utter - thorough
verb. improve - complete - finish - accomplish

Baranco slipped a destabilizing element into this by suggesting that perfection means potential for change--which cancels out the actual meaning of perfection.

Note too that Baranco's 'Flash to Perfection' is a type of story that has been used by others in the commerical human transformation industry.

The Sudden Cure. Or the Sudden Breakthrough.

These stories are much loved and well received, especially in the United States, where we long for inspiration and love stories that make it seem that we can cure ourselves or others through sheer force of will.

In addition to Baranco, such narratives have been offered by such persons as Werner Erhard, Eckhart Tolle, and Byron Katie.

*Byron Katie : stops suffering when she changes her attitude while in a room at a halfway house

*Eckhart Tolle: In a depression, sits on a park bench and cures himself of suffering with a shift of attitude.

*Werner Erhard, founder of EST (aka Landmark Education) has his epiphany driving over a bridge.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Victor Baranco, Lafayette Morehouse,Nicole Daedone, One Taste - cults?
Posted by: corboy ()
Date: February 15, 2013 12:21AM

Definition of perfect is no need for further change. Complete.

Going by this text, Baranco re-defined 'perfect' as capable of further change.

Which loaded the language by taking a word (in this case perfect) and redefining it to mean its opposite.

In this article, The Siren Call of Modern Pied Pipers


The basic Eastern-mystical concept of the unity of all things includes as one of its corollaries that there are no distinctions between truth and falsehood, right and wrong, good and evil. In fact, Eastern/New Age teaching generally attempts to invalidate Aristotelian logic in toto, so that "A" can also be "not-A." This, if carried to the "logical" conclusion, makes nonsense out of language, and meaningful communication becomes impossible. A typical New Age statement is, "That may be your reality, but it's not my reality."

However, it could be stated that Hinduism and Buddhism (at least the non tantric varieties) did and do have codes of ethics, and warnings about the consquences of lying, stealing, intoxicants, greed, and violation of relationship boundaries.

The problem is that most Westerners are not made aware of the ethical guidelines of these Asian religions, and are only told they are sources of peak experiences or special powers.

More information.



Finally, a paper describing distortions of logic on the Oprah show


Final note on Victor Barano and this topic:

Fourteen More House elite currently (1972) live with Victor (Baranco) either sharing his house or camping out in a large tent in the backyard. For their recreation, said Bobby, Victor plans to build a tennis court behind his purple garage.

"Victor had not yet returned from his afternoon rhetoric class at the Berkeley campus of the University of California...a course described by Bobby as "the art of persuasion" (Baranco says he doesnt read well: his wife attends classes with him to take notes."

From a chapter entitled the $19.95 Banana page 135 of Robin Green's article on Victor Baranco, taken from the book, "Mindfuckers: A Sourcebook on the Rise of Acid Fascism in America, Including Material on Charles Manson, Mel Lyman, Victor Baranco and their followers by David Felton, Robin Green and David Dalton, Straight Arrow Books, 1972.

So friends, here it is. While the kids were mostly getting stoned, becoming trustful and yet more trustful, this man is taking or auditing a university level course on rhetoric.

To say the rhetoric is all about the 'art of persuasion" is like saying you learn a lot about anatomy in medical school.

In a well taught course on rhetoric, you learn tio think consciously about language, how to analyse language and learn terminology and catagories that empower you to use language with greater precision.

In rhetoric one learns the deep structure in language,and metaphor. One learns the conventions in usage, and how to asses when it is most effective to stay within the conventional use of language and when it is more effective to break the rules.

One learns the use of metaphor, how to insinuate an idea without actually mentioning it. One learns the use of story/narrative, how to use phrases, how certain methods of repeating words or phrases or use of interruptions can bring attention and build suspense.

Plato argued against rhetoric precisely because he feared its potential for abuse when in the hands of unscrupulous people.

Quintillian and other teachers insisted that only persons of good character be given a full rhetorical education to keep the subject from falling into the wrong hands.

Again, it indicates a lot that in 1971 or 1972, Victor Baranco, who was so trusted by so many hippies, was taking a course that most hippies would have shunned--rhetoric.

Here for perspective is a website on the subject.


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Victor Baranco, Lafayette Morehouse,Nicole Daedone, One Taste - cults?
Posted by: The Anticult ()
Date: February 15, 2013 02:57AM

Sounds like these alleged "writers" at are either totally naive, completely incompetent in "journalism", or simply work in advertising directly, (or through brown envelopes full of cash), and publish the press release of whoever pays.

When cults use sex to manipulate people, that is very dangerous territory.
Worse, when they use sex to lure vulnerable people with "pleasure" and then use hidden advanced persuasion techniques to break down their Identity, this is a recipe for disaster for many people.

It can be a dangerous world, and some of the worst are parading themselves around in sheep's clothing...notice the constant claims to "Buddhism" or "feminism", when in fact those concepts are being used as misdirection and fig-leafs in this instance.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Victor Baranco, Lafayette Morehouse,Nicole Daedone, One Taste - cults?
Posted by: corboy ()
Date: February 15, 2013 11:21PM

Many, including Baranco's young disciple, assume rhetoric is the "art of persuasion".

Here is what Aristotle says. Baranco may have given that young man partial information about rhetoric and let him believe that was complete information about rhetoric.

Here is what Aristotle, the most influential classical authority on rhetoric said about the subject. And Aristotle would have been referred to plenty of times, in that rhetoric class that Baranco reportedly attended.


It is clear, then, that rhetoric is not bound up with a single definite class of subjects, but is as universal as dialectic; it is clear, also, that it is useful.

(That is, rhetoric is not bound to particular subject matter or situation. Potentially it can be used in any situation, not just politics or the law courts or when preaching on special occasions. )

Aristotle continues:


It is clear, further, that (the function of rhetoric) is not simply to succeed in persuading, but rather to discover the means of coming as near such success as the circumstances of each particular case allow.


Rhetoric aims at the art of the possible. One doesnt aim to persuade everyone; one aims to persuade enough customers or audience members to achieve one's goals.

Examples of 'particular cases'.

A merchant who has a cargo of ripe fruit. He or she would need to craft a particular sales pitch to emphasize the evident quality of the fruit. He or she might be able, as part of the sales pitch, to offer samples.

What if another merchant has a cargo of fruit that is going bad and doesnt want to throw the stuff in the garbage and take a financial loss?

If the merchant wants to persuade people to buy fruit that is going bad, he or she will be crafting a sales pitch (rhetoric) but will have to use different approaches than someone selling fruit that can pass the sniff test.

What kinds of sales pitch would that person need to sell as much of that rotten fruit as possible?

* Persuade customers that fruit that is going off can still be used in some recipes.

*Persuade customers that looks and aroma are misleading indicators of quality.

* Create a line of argument that fruit that is going off is *better* for us than what the authorities claim. Get customers to believe they are part of a venturesome avante-garde.

In addition to use of evidence and of logically persuasive arguments, Aristotle included manipulation/movement of emotions in his rhetorical methods.


Nevertheless, persuasion that takes place before a public audience is not only a matter of arguments and proofs, but also of credibility and emotional attitudes.


4.1 The Definition of Rhetoric
Aristotle defines the rhetorician as someone who is always able to see what is persuasive (Topics VI.12, 149b25). Correspondingly, rhetoric is defined as the ability to see what is possibly persuasive in every given case (Rhet. I.2, 1355b26f.).

This is not to say that the rhetorician will be able to convince under all circumstances. Rather he is in a situation similar to that of the physician: the latter has a complete grasp of his art only if he neglects nothing that might heal his patient, though he is not able to heal every patient. Similarly, the rhetorician has a complete grasp of his method, if he discovers the available means of persuasion, though he is not able to convince everybody.

4.2 The Neutrality of Aristotelian Rhetoric
Aristotelian rhetoric as such is a neutral tool that can be used by persons of virtuous or depraved character. This capacity can be used for good or bad purposes; it can cause great benefits as well as great harms. There is no doubt that Aristotle himself regards his system of rhetoric as something useful, but the good purposes for which rhetoric is useful do not define the rhetorical capacity as such. Thus, Aristotle does not hesitate to concede on the one hand that his art of rhetoric can be misused.

Means of persuasion

A speech consists of three things: the speaker, the subject that is treated in the speech, and the listener to whom the speech is addressed (Rhet. I.3, 1358a37ff.). It seems that this is why only three technical means of persuasion are possible: Technical means of persuasion are either (a) in the character of the speaker, or (b) in the emotional state of the hearer, or (c) in the argument (logos) itself.


) The persuasion is accomplished by character whenever the speech is held in such a way as to render the speaker worthy of credence. If the speaker appears to be credible, the audience will form the second-order judgment that propositions put forward by the credible speaker are true or acceptable

(Corboy Aristotle taught that honestly and honor were important qualities for a speaker; today the emphasis is on exuding confidence and having a convincing backstory)

(Arouse emotions in the audience--this sounds only too contemporary)

b) The success of the persuasive efforts depends on the emotional dispositions of the audience; for we do not judge in the same way when we grieve and rejoice or when we are friendly and hostile. Thus, the orator has to arouse emotions exactly because emotions have the power to modify our judgments: to a judge who is in a friendly mood, the person about whom he is going to judge seems not to do wrong or only in a small way; but to the judge who is in an angry mood, the same person will seem to do the opposite (cp. Rhet. II.1, 1378a1ff.).

Aristotle has descriptons of differences between younger persons and older persons, because a knowledge of psychology and the different stations in life are useful to a word merchant who is trying to devise a strategy.


Aristotle, an aristocrat, had nothing to say about uses of rhetoric by merchants or pedlars. And because women had no role in jury duty and did not vote on public policy, nothing is mentioned about women in Aristotles writings.'

But in his advice to the word merchant on how to suss out an audience, Aristotle had this to say about young men vs older men.

And this may explain why so many 'word merchants' target young people.


Part 12 "Aristotle's Rhetoric

<<<Let us now consider the various types of human character, in relation to the emotions and moral qualities, showing how they correspond to our various ages and fortunes. By emotions I mean anger, desire, and the like; these we have discussed already. By moral qualities I mean virtues and vices; these also have been discussed already, as well as the various things that various types of men tend to will and to do. By ages I mean youth, the prime of life, and old age. By fortune I mean birth, wealth, power, and their opposites-in fact, good fortune and ill fortune.

To begin with the Youthful type of character.

Young men have strong passions, and tend to gratify them indiscriminately

Of the bodily desires, it is the sexual by which they are most swayed and in which they show absence of self-control. They are changeable and fickle in their desires, which are violent while they last, but quickly over: their impulses are keen but not deep-rooted, and are like sick people's attacks of hunger and thirst. They are hot-tempered, and quick-tempered, and apt to give way to their anger; bad temper often gets the better of them, for owing to their love of honour they cannot bear being slighted, and are indignant if they imagine themselves unfairly treated.

While they love honour, they love victory still more; for youth is eager for superiority over others, and victory is one form of this.

They love both more than they love money, which indeed they love very little, not having yet learnt what it means to be without it-this is the point of Pittacus' remark about Amphiaraus.

They look at the good side rather than the bad, not having yet witnessed many instances of wickedness. They trust others readily, because they have not yet often been cheated. They are sanguine; nature warms their blood as though with excess of wine; and besides that, they have as yet met with few disappointments. Their lives are mainly spent not in memory but in expectation; for expectation refers to the future, memory to the past, and youth has a long future before it and a short past behind it: on the first day of one's life one has nothing at all to remember, and can only look forward.

They are easily cheated, owing to the sanguine disposition just mentioned.

They have exalted notions, because they have not yet been humbled by life or learnt its necessary limitations; moreover, their hopeful disposition makes them think themselves equal to great things-and that means having exalted notions. They would always rather do noble deeds than useful ones: their lives are regulated more by moral feeling than by reasoning....

..They are ready to pity others, because they think every one an honest man, or anyhow better than he is.... They are fond of fun and therefore witty, wit being well-bred insolence.

So, while the youngsters were out smoking weed and being trustful, eager to be part of an avant garde, Baranco was diligently attending a rhetoric class, sharpending his wits, and refining the methods he'd already been using as a salesman and street merchant.

And learning how to understand young people as a catagory to be manipulated.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Victor Baranco, Lafayette Morehouse,Nicole Daedone, One Taste - cults?
Posted by: corboy ()
Date: February 15, 2013 11:42PM


It is clear, further, that (the function of rhetoric) is not simply to succeed in persuading, but rather to discover the means of coming as near such success as the circumstances of each particular case allow


"He'd sell you a rat's ass for a wedding ring."

Attributed by some to Damon Runyon.

Rhetorical Situation: You are in possession of the nether regions of (we hope) a dead, disease - free rat.

Someone skilled in rhetoric could apply its methods to this situation and sell the rat's rear end to someone at retail jewelry prices.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Victor Baranco, Lafayette Morehouse,Nicole Daedone, One Taste - cults?
Posted by: corboy ()
Date: February 23, 2013 04:41AM

According to the article in Mindfuckers, (page 112) "full time residents pay $200 a month rent, wgucg entitles them to room and board, parties, affection, and the opportunity to restore dilapidated houses for Victor."

Besides rental fees, $384,000 a year, the Institute also collects money from some 70-odd weekly courses at $45 each."

(Mindfuckers was published in 1972.)

So, using 1972 as the benchmark, lets go to a website that calculates changes in purchasing power for the US dollar between 1972 and 2010.

Must say, what got me was the mention in Mindfuckers that back in 1971/72, 'ol Victor Baranco was taking a rhetoric class (or auditing one) at UC Berkeley, while the trustful hippie kids were trustfully living in his More Houses, despising establishment schooling, etc.

According to that article, Baranco charged $200 rent (1971/72) plus, those living at the More Houses also donated sweat equity by working to improve the houses and grounds.

Going to a website that calculates changes in purchasing power


It appears that 40 years ago, $200 a month rent was serious money.

In 2010, the relative value of $45.00 from 1972 ranges from $188.00 to $528.00.


Am not too sure how accurate this website is. Interested readers can go to other websites and run calculations.


Your results

In 2010, the relative value of $200.00 from 1972 ranges from $834.00 to $2,350.00.

If you want to compare the value of a $200.00 Commodity in 1972 there are four choices. In 2010 the relative:
real price of that commodity is $1,040.00
real value of that commodity is $1,010.00
labor value of that commodity is $959.00(using the unskilled wage) or $1,150.00(using production worker compensation)
income value of that commodity is $1,590.00

Options: ReplyQuote
Current Page: 20 of 30

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
This forum powered by Phorum.