Orgasm Inc: The Story of OneTaste

Orgasm Inc: The Story of OneTaste-360P

Orgasm Inc: The Story of OneTaste-360P

nice

Orgasm Inc: The Story of OneTaste_720p(480P)

source: Orgasm Inc: The Story of OneTaste

I witnessed much of the history of One Taste, and had many friends heavily involved. Some reactions to the movie: * I'm glad that they spent the first while in the show showing and talking about the good sides of what One Taste did and was, what drew people to it and what value people got from it, and that they let Nicole and One Taste speak for themselves * I am happy the movie introduced Nicole's top lieutenants like Rob and Rachel. It could have gone deeper with them, since it seemed to me that they did actually have a lot to do with how things went in OT (for good and bad). But it also seems right that the movie was as focused as it was on Nicole the twisted, broken, cold-hearted, charismatic genius. * With effort, they probably could have found twenty, thirty, fifty people formerly involved who would have been willing to be filmed spilling negative beans. Leaning so heavily on Chris Kosely, with random unshaved hairs sticking off his head, and the awkward woman who tripped over her words undermined their case, since they are physically unattractive and could just be dismissed as discontented outcasts. * It seemed wrong that they made it sound like rape was central to what was wrong with or a big part of what went on at One Taste, and repeatedly showed the video of the woman struggling to get a guy off of her (which I imagine may have been a filming of real violation scenario, or may have been play-acting for a workshop). I don't think there was much of it there. It did seem to me that people were sometimes rapidly and forcefully pushed beyond their comfort zones, realizing years later that they consented to something that it might have been healthier for them to have said "no" to. And I have had physical sexual boundary crossing at OT described to me by women who were involved in the community. But what it seemed to me was the central problem with OT, bigger than any of that, was instead that, so it seemed to me, much of its revenue model was basically based on semi-prostitution, which the movie just relatively briefly touched on. Find hot frisky open-minded relatively young women who are new in town or just went through a break up, love bomb them into involvement with and commitment to the community, help them to feel free alive beautiful and on the side of progress for being extra sexual, and then have them offer access to their sex to lonely affluent men (guys with more money than social skills). * I could easily have gotten wrapped up with OT, as I said many of my friends did (it was disconcerting to see friends in the movie, as well as the many One Taste regulars who I kind of knew), there was much interface of people, activities, and paradigms between OT and my social world. And I did have the intention for years to study OMing with them and admired the capacity for ease with physical and emotional intimacy and closeness that OT regulars seemed to have. But to me there was always something off-putting about the scene that had me keep my distance, and the revelations of the past few years validated that semi-conscious choice that I made.

I am confused, the IMDB credits show that there are paid actors in this movie. Why would you hire people to act in a "documentary"? Meanwhile I watched it and didn't see any scene in the movie labeled as a reenactment or dramatization, which I feel they should be required to divulge so the audience can have a grasp on what's real and what's recreated for effect. It just feels irresponsible to me to hire actors and not name the why, who, when, and what of it all. I'm guessing they did it to make this movie "sexier" maybe? It really didn't work for me. And honestly, the movie also felt a bit abrasive, in a manipulative kind of way, like the filmmakers were trying really really hard to scare the audience. I miss documentaries that present facts in a way that lets me discover my own opinion. This felt like a series of dramatic music cues, actors, and a few talking heads. I know "fear sells", so I get it, but also, who is making money off this movie? As I was looking up these actors, I read that the other people in the movie, the people who aren't actors, were not contacted about being in it, and I'm assuming they did not get paid. Apparently the videos of these non actors was actually stolen and then used in the movie without their consent. That's kinda messed up.

This is just horrific. Some people are true psychopaths and there should be more strict laws for people taking advantage and manipulating the more sensitive ones or traumatized ppl. And not traumatize them even more. It made me sick to watch it until the end. And i am shocked that this person and others envolved in abuse off all kinds are still free. The documentary started with kind a positive vibes, even though i was expecting that some kind of fraud was involved. But this was some other level of evil. Zero empathy! This is a true horror story of an inhumanity. And she is still among people!?!

Having done some research on this topic, one of the major misses with this documentary is the fact that it combines the history of Morehouse "Do-ing" timeline, experiences and terminology with One Taste and "OM-ing". It's a huge miss in my humble opinion because it highlights how the producers did not either A: Understand the concepts or timelines being discussed here and/or B: Did not care to properly portray data collected. The lawsuit by previous students citing breach in data used by the producers, coupled with the misappropriation of facts, produced a heavily biased documentary that clearly lacked journalistic integrity. With such a slanted perspective, what could have been educational and expansive into the realm of such a taboo topics of sexual exploration and spirituality instead felt scandalous, salacious, and overly exaggerated. On the flipside, reading between the lines of dramatized scenes and interviews, there is a theme that many interviewed for this documentary expressed that the principles of this organization appeared to offer more intimacy, more connection, more vulnerability, and hitting on basic needs we have as a society. It was also very interesting to see former students and reporter Ellen Huet speak on the positives available in this realm, whether that was intentional or just my perceived perspective.

As someone who has been through different cults in my early 20's and am now in my late 40's, I think this documentary was done very well, but in order to truly understand what was happening, one has to have more knowledge. It's certainly not all black and white, good or evil. This seems to be in every story on cults today. There is some good, that attracts and helps people with their problems of living in a modern society, or problems that humans are facing since the dawn of time. Then there is some bad. But is it really that bad or it just doesn't fit with current narratives and how we see people, what the current mainstream morality is? I think that Nicole is at a very high level of spirituality and with that she is losing the understanding of how it is to function on a lower level. But also, no guru is ever perfect. I can't remember which guru said that occasionally they don't feel jealousy. I can see how Nicole built her armour to thrive in life, with all the horrible baggage of her childhood trauma and everything that happened afterwards, but I also see how this made her a less empathetic person. She was enforcing a therapy that worked on her, on others. It can't possibly work like that. No medicine is perfect for everyone. She was also manipulative, in order to expand her empire. To further understand some of the practices, people should study the cults of left hand tantra. Stories there are even more bizarre. Especially if this is not something you need in life.