“Students of Virginity” Actually Pretty Horny
We did a mini-post yesterday on the NYT article "Students of Virginity" featuring Harvard's True Love Revolution, Lena Chen stuffing her face with ginger cake, and our own esteemed IvyGate commenters. Today we considered writing a lengthier post deconstructing the article blow-by-(not that kind of)-blow, but then we thought, why rush this? If we've learned one thing from TLR it's the value of "taking it slow." So instead we will deal with this in painstakingly small increments, gradually, pleasurably, one baby-sized scrap of hilarity at a time. Now presenting hilarious scrap #1: TLR co-president Leo Keliher ('09) in one of the more glorious photo/caption combos of our time:
Is that even a dorm room, or did he import a 12C monastery to sleep in? Leo's 15 minutes of rather embarassing fame after the jump.
Now, we do have sympathy for Leo, given that his childhood souds pretty awful (father imprisoned for molestation, runaway step-dad, etc.). So nobody make pederast jokes because it's extra-inappropriate and even grosser than usual in this context.
But you know what's also kinda gross? The bodice-ripping romance novel Leo appears to be composing as he extols the virtues of chastity.
He described the act he has never experienced as something "breathtakingly powerful" that "lights all of your body on fire." He spoke of his lust as "this untamed beast."
Fredell was incredulous: "Leo said that?"
He told me that he struggles constantly against "physical lustful temptation" - that he can be aroused just by a woman's touch, by even a look at a woman or at a photo or sometimes by "thoughts that just come out of the blue - basically pornography in my head." They come to him when he's merely walking around campus, or even when he's alone in the library - "like a fly buzzing around."
To the matter of masturbation, he said, "This was really tough for me . . . because when you have a habit that's so deeply ingrained, it's hard to stop."
Oh, Leo. Oh, Leo, Leo, Leo. Our pity for you is rivalled only by our pity for the girl you describe here:
When he finds himself aroused these days, he endures it and waits for it to pass. In this way, he said he has "matured out of that more infantile need for a woman into a recognition of self-sufficiency." But some women, Keliher granted, continue to give him trouble.
One of these is a freshman - "a very gentle, caring soul," he said, who "works with little kids and stuff." Keliher can't help thinking about her glossy hair and beautiful skin.
How much you want to bet some freshman chick filed a restraining order against this guy today? Leo's co-president, the clearly more PR-savvy Janie Fredell might want to consider distancing herself from Keliher, too:
Another appears to be Janie Fredell. Keliher smiled and said he was "a little bit" attracted to her - "in very superficial ways," he added. "It's something we laugh about - if we dated."
But Fredell did not laugh. "No!" she erupted, and with increasing volume, "No! No! No! I can't emphasize enough that there is nothing between me and Leo! It's just that we're not compatible in that regard."
Oh, Leo. We continue to shake our heads in chagrined pity.
67 Comments | 
| 
Print This Post
Read more: Harvard, new york times, Sex, true love revolution
Email – 
Search
About
Follow us on Twitter
Report a bug
Archives
RSS Feed
March 31st, 2008 at 5:27 pm
While that section of the article is incredibly awkward, I would say it describes the average guy.
March 31st, 2008 at 5:46 pm
Someone buy this guy a copy of The Game. This article is going haunt this kid for the rest of his fucking life.
March 31st, 2008 at 5:49 pm
This guy is coming to cut his dick off.
March 31st, 2008 at 6:14 pm
A fact that Style will openly admit to: pick-up is oriented towards dumber girls. The smarter the girl, the less they will be wowed by your corny openers, your stupid magic tricks, or your sleazy attempts to ‘connect’ with them.
March 31st, 2008 at 6:30 pm
@6:14
The lady doth protest too much, methinks. Was your heart broken sweetheart? Have you been damaged by the wrong kind of man? LOL. Clearly, “the game” is designed only for ensnaring the vapid and superficial. Fortunately enough for the males of this species the vapid and superficial also seem to be the attractive. Probably by evolutionary necessity as the ugly and stupid have great difficulty finding mates.
March 31st, 2008 at 6:33 pm
clearly something terribly wrong is going on with this kid. at least janie is secure in her abstinence, but leo here sounds like he’s walking around with a constant wet dream.
March 31st, 2008 at 6:36 pm
In the words of Mad Men, “The juiciest gazelle is the easiest to catch.” Bring on the bimbos.
March 31st, 2008 at 6:39 pm
in 20 year this kid will be Governor of New York and arrested for banging multiple whores. Mark my word, shit like that has happened before.
March 31st, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Leo’s honesty is refreshing.
His insight into his own sexuality is much more revealing, open, honest and realistic than Lena Chen and her ilk.
Every single guy on the planet can relate to the sexual desires he describes- they are haunting. they are pornographic. And if left unrestrained, they lead to serious malformation.
Leo deserves praise for seeking to exercise self-discipline- a virtue many of our generation have long lost an appreciation for.
Guys would much rather marry Fredell.
Girls would much rather marry a guy who thinks and respects them like Leo.
If they say any different, they are lying or are completely unawares of their own true needs.
March 31st, 2008 at 7:58 pm
I can’t even explain how much I disagree with your comment. Just to start, you presume to speak for all guys and all girls. Something tells me that you don’t quite have the background to tell at least 50% of the population that they are “lying or completely unawares of their own true needs”.
March 31st, 2008 at 8:52 pm
No, actually I’m a guy who spent 4 years in the community, including seminars with Mystery. So you’re an idiot. Chupame.
by the way, your condescension just illustrates all that is wrong with the seduction community today. The reason, as Style has pointed out (and House MD commented on in its first season), that the attractive and the intelligent rarely go together is because attractive females don’t have to work as hard to get ahead/attention/recognition.
The holy grail that Style recognizes in his book are those girls who are intelligent, confident, and attractive. The structure of his ‘game’ didn’t work as well, for instance, on Leveridge. The Game works best on insecure shallow girls. It works worst on girls who use their brains.
gg, douchebag.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:41 pm
The vast majority of girls do not want Leo thinking about them, period. He’s a creepy self-repressing weirdo. Besides, any girl who enjoys sex but isn’t ready to settle down (maybe cuz, i donno, she wants to start a career, finish school, etc.) will appreciate a guy who accepts that neither his sexuality nor hers is something to be punished and suppressed until marriage. Sex is fun… and so far I haven’t overdosed on oxytocin.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:47 pm
Dear IvyGate,
Please do not drag out this deconstruction of the NYT Magazine’s non-news tour-de-snore article for too long. Sure, you’ve got to revel in the glory of getting your name printed several on the magazine’s thin, glossy paper, but really, the article on the whole was terrible, journalistic failure.
It failed to push to understand why some students have chosen not to have sex and failed more so in not asking why students ARE having sex. Perhaps IvyGate’s time would be better spent by writing the article that Time’s should have written in the first place.
Next up for an intrepid investigative journalism piece – some students don’t drink booze! Discuss.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:47 pm
House MD? Seriously?
March 31st, 2008 at 9:49 pm
Dear IvyGate,
Please do not drag out this deconstruction of the NYT Magazine’s non-news tour-de-snore article for too long. Sure, you’ve got to revel in the glory of getting your name printed several on the magazine’s thin, glossy paper, but really, the article on the whole was terrible, journalistic failure.
It failed to push to understand why some students have chosen not to have sex and failed more so in not asking why students ARE having sex. Perhaps IvyGate’s time would be better spent by writing the article that Time’s should have written in the first place.
Next up for an intrepid investigative journalism piece – some students don’t drink booze! Discuss.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:51 pm
Dear IvyGate,
Please do not drag out this deconstruction of the NYT Magazine’s non-news tour-de-snore article for too long. Sure, you’ve got to revel in the glory of getting your name printed several on the magazine’s thin, glossy paper, but really, the article on the whole was terrible, journalistic failure.
It failed to push to understand why some students have chosen not to have sex and failed more so in not asking why students ARE having sex. Perhaps IvyGate’s time would be better spent by writing the article that Time’s should have written in the first place. Although I love the reactionary work of the blogosphere, some of the most interesting stuff IvyGate’s done has been original thought and journalism.
Next up for an intrepid investigative journalism piece – some students don’t drink booze! Discuss.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:52 pm
@Yalie-I’d rather have a guy who respects my intelligence and personality and wants to uninhibitedly physically express his respect if you get my drift. Will Leo not kiss or each touch his future wife before marriage for fear of triggering an oxytocin release?
March 31st, 2008 at 9:54 pm
Acceptance letters are out, Yale has a new record-low 8.3%, and we want more numbers!
March 31st, 2008 at 10:11 pm
Does this strike anyone else as incredibly mean? Seriously, this reminds me of high school jocks making of the-supposedly-less-virile segments of the population. Let the man struggle with his beliefs.
March 31st, 2008 at 10:43 pm
IvyGate, you’re dragging this out not because it’s hilarious (which it is), but because you’re afraid no good news is going to appear for you guys to cover over the next few days, or because you’re lazy journalists and want to write one story and then make it last five times as long as it’s supposed to. Raise the bar. How about delivering us awesome new shit about different things every day?
March 31st, 2008 at 10:48 pm
what a fool that girl is. I find it incredibly offensive that any group thats so actively oppressive towards gay people calls itself feminist. Also that they think that a solution to the “suffering” of women due to “cultural double standards” that “devalues women for their sexual pasts” is to encourage women to step back into chastity.
FUCK YOU YOU FUCKING OPPRESSOR.
March 31st, 2008 at 11:05 pm
@8:52:
And as Doogie Houser MD demonstrated in his first season, you my friend are most likely a closeted homosexual. (Not that there’s anything wrong with that)
March 31st, 2008 at 11:09 pm
That kid looks like he’s 13.
Some people use religion to justify their prude-like behavior. I don’t think he’s one of them, though; he openly discusses masturbation with a nationally-syndicated newspaper. He might just be deranged.
April 1st, 2008 at 12:27 am
@florida state:
why the fuck would you suggest that 8:52 is gay? because he appears to be pro-women and you find that anti-thetical to heterosexual masculinity? And if you really don’t think theres anything wrong with being gay then why are you using that suggestion as if it is a rebuttal of his point?
In your first response you tried to delegitimize his voice by suggesting he was a woman, and that as a woman his argument must be entirely emotion-based, and in your second response by suggesting that he is gay. You are an ignorant, ineloquent, and sleazy oppressor. Enjoy your vapid and juicy gazelles, and may one of them get carried away by her emotions and stab you in the face.
April 1st, 2008 at 12:39 am
@florida state:
http://www.stateugateblog.com prz
April 1st, 2008 at 1:14 am
I think he’s cute.
April 1st, 2008 at 1:16 am
I think he’s cute.
April 1st, 2008 at 1:56 am
yes, because 4 years spending money on picking up chicks makes me…gay? u so smart.
@D08: Sorry to disappoint, but I’m not really that much into the whole feminist movement. Just someone who knows the limits of my own manipulative abilities.
April 1st, 2008 at 2:15 am
As the original poster of the “juicy gazelles” comment (in jest), I don’t want any part of the flame war that is now going to ensue. Still, it should provide testable proof of Godwin’s law.
April 1st, 2008 at 3:10 am
It’s well-known that discussing godwin’s law prior to mention of naziism is an automatic dq. effing kids these days.
April 1st, 2008 at 3:26 am
Maureen: As if you ever get any satisfaction.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:24 am
HAHAHAHAHA.
Jesus christ. What makes this guy deranged is that he revealed all of this way personal stuff to a journalist of the New York Times.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:29 am
HAHAHAHAHA.
Jesus christ. What makes this guy deranged is that he revealed all of this way personal stuff to a journalist of the New York Times.
April 1st, 2008 at 5:38 am
@D’08:
I didn’t try to delegitimize him, I simply assumed from his initial response that he was a woman. His response seemed a little over wrought given that I only suggested someone give Leo a copy of a book. It smacked of a woman who had had the techniques of said book used on her only to later discover their providence. I don’t suggest that he’s gay to delegitimize him either, I simply find that often it is those with his brand of generally transparent braggadocio, those who refer to so called pick up artists as “the community”, they are often over compensating for something, homosexuality is only one possible option.
April 1st, 2008 at 5:59 am
what a bunch of fucking dorks. that kid looks like he’s about to jerk off on the cross
April 1st, 2008 at 8:57 am
Try forming an argument that doesn’t involve vague nonsensicalities like “it smacked of” and “I simply find” that often”.
April 1st, 2008 at 9:11 am
have a little respect, please. the kid is a kid. he’s trying to work through his beliefs. he had a bad childhood and he made it to harvard. he’s naive, too honest, too candid, doesn’t seem to have an ironic bone in his body – but why ridicule him? sure, he’s an easy target. so were the skinny nerds on the playground.
April 1st, 2008 at 9:55 am
I knew another Leo once, actual name was Leo. Could not score here, went to Russia to “sample” brides-by-mail even!; he ended up marrying an American, but they are not a pretty couple to look at. At least now this kid will have psycho’s seeking him out, like prisoners do, he’ll be fine.
April 1st, 2008 at 10:00 am
@1:56
don’t worry, dude. I didn’t assume anything of the sort, being that ivygate commenters are usually assholes. this is why I used the phrase “appears pro-women.”
@florida state:
shut up, dick. you’re not making your weak, oppressive tactics of argumentation seem any smarter.
April 1st, 2008 at 10:02 am
nice pic with the hand between the legs, pinching off.
April 1st, 2008 at 10:25 am
miel, i am with you on this.
April 1st, 2008 at 11:39 am
Usually I agree with a lot of the material IvyGate publishes, but here I do not. Congrats for getting your name into an important paper, but can we please stop ripping Leo to shreds? I thought most people in the Ivies were liberal thinkers – which, at least in the classical sense, includes tolerance of other, different points of view. We’re all guilty of being hypocritical if we accept people with numerous partners or a different orientation, yet we ridicule those who abstain.
April 1st, 2008 at 11:45 am
Did “@Florida State ‘13″ call someone else a douchebag after admitting to attending seminars dealing with how to pick up girls? Don’t you relinquish all rights to calling others douche when you do something like that?
April 1st, 2008 at 11:46 am
Usually I agree with a lot of the material IvyGate publishes, but here I do not. Congrats for getting your name into an important paper, but can we please stop ripping Leo to shreds? I thought most people in the Ivies were liberal thinkers – which, at least in the classical sense, includes tolerance of other, different points of view. We’re all guilty of being hypocritical if we accept people with numerous partners or a different orientation, yet we ridicule those who abstain.
April 1st, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Well, I think the key thing that makes liberals so hostile to groups like True Love Revolution is that they more actively try to push their lifestyle on others–that is, they want others to abstain like they do. LGBT groups do not try to make others gay, and most sexual liberation groups do not try to force others into nyphomania. Rather, both the LGBT and other liberally “acceptable” groups tell the community to accept them and to stop persecuting them.
If the goal of TRL were to stop Harvard students from persecuting those who choose to abstain, then liberals would be all for it. The problem is that kids like this encourage others–not to accept those who practice abstinence–but to practice abstinence themselves.
April 1st, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Yeah, 12:10 how dare they encourage people to do stuff!
April 1st, 2008 at 1:53 pm
It’s great that you got a mention, ivygate. commenters you too. However, there’s really no need to continue dragging out the spectacle of this rather awful article. The Times did a terrible job of actual reporting, misrepresenting and caricaturing two students who actually aren’t all that strange. Sure, it was stupid of them to tell all of that personal information, and hey, Leo might be a bit awkward. But it’s doubtful that no guy can relate to having a crush on a cute freshman, or that no girl can relate to Fredell. What the Times article, and now ivygate, did NOT do was atually engage and discuss the issues that TRL and other societies have to present — whether correct or not. Rather, they just relied on silly stereotypes, which you guys seem intent on propagating.
April 1st, 2008 at 3:17 pm
“The problem is that kids like this encourage others to practice abstinence themselves”.
What, is this is a problem?
And your statement about sex groups not encouraging sex is just false. At Yale, we had an entire SEX WEEK. They handed out free sex toys. They screened porn. If that’s not encouragement, I don’t know what is.
Stop being a fake liberal and respect the marketplace of ideas for what it is, jackass.
April 1st, 2008 at 5:20 pm
…as far as I know, I’m not a fake liberal…maybe just a jackass, as you say. And I think, from modern liberals’ perspectives, it is a problem to tell others that their personal lifestyle choices are wrong. So, in that sense, abstinence groups are seen unfavorably in the eyes of liberals, because they tell those who do not practice abstinence that they are doing something wrong. Here at Princeton, sex groups do hand out free toys as well…and it is not telling others that they are wrong for being abstinent…it is just saying that if you don’t want to be abstinent, then join us in making the sexual experience more enjoyable.
There is a difference, as far as I see it.
April 1st, 2008 at 5:34 pm
There is no difference between TLR sending pamphlets inviting people to abstain, and Yale sex-addicts handing out condoms. Why don’t you admit that the real issue is that TLR takes a conservative stance that is traditionally espoused by the christian faith, and therefore, as a “modern liberal,” you’ll have none of it. Otherwise, if it were about tolerance you would tolerate TLR, Anscombe, and the list of many other conservative movements equally. (you can ignore their pamphlets as easily as a conservative can ignore a gay-rights parade)
April 1st, 2008 at 9:06 pm
whore whore slut
April 1st, 2008 at 10:23 pm
poor guy. he’s cute too. maybe nerd cute, but that’s why i’m at an ivy. i can’t imagine he likes inducing head-porn in boys, but he shouldn’t have been so visceral and open in his descriptions… anyway, he’s struggling, but he’s so hung-up on the idea that one can’t have a fulfilling relationship or sex without marriage that he’s may end up with a very unfulfilling marriage for a while.
April 1st, 2008 at 11:11 pm
As one of the organizers of Princeton’s sex toy parties, I just thought I’d correct the story. We don’t hand out free sex toys to any rando walking around on campus and tell him/her that masturbation is really fun and morally ok (unless they ask, of course). People willfully enter raffles, attend sex toy parties, or otherwise request to obtain sex toys. While we advertise the sex toy party (which, by the way, is a pretty tame educational event hosted by a sex toy salesperson) to the entire student body, we do not pass judgment on anyone who doesn’t wish to attend. In contrast, our counterparts in Anscombe consistently write op-eds in the Prince and invite speakers to campus denouncing the evils of sex, masturbation, and the “hook-up culture” (whatever that means). While they have every right to do so, many find this offensive because it is a claim of moral superiority. Princeton Pro-Choice, on the other hand, is simply providing an educational service for any interested students. We see masturbation and consensual sex as amoral activities that should be made as safe and pleasurable as possible through education and health care services.
April 2nd, 2008 at 12:14 am
I hope IvyGate does not publish a series of articles about this. You got your cheap shots in, so move on!
April 2nd, 2008 at 2:20 am
Yawn. What a straw man argument. Liberals do tolerate TLR, Anscombe, etc. As I understand it, there are no gangs of liberals trying to shut those organizations down or otherwise preventing anyone who wants to be abstinent from being abstinent. Lets face it, the kid who decided to describe his non-sex life to a national newspaper is kinda pathetic. Thats the caveat that comes along with free speech. You can say whatever you like, but other people can and will call you out if what you’re saying is rubbish.
April 2nd, 2008 at 3:44 pm
Liberal students don’t like these groups because they actively discourage sex and try to make those of us having it feel like we’re going to hell. Pro-sex, or at least, non-anti sex groups on campuses don’t tell people that abstaining is immoral or evil. In general, these extremist abstinence groups are louder than any other voice on the matter. Princeton has a new sex blogger, for all you liberals out there: http://dpstreet.blogspot.com/
April 2nd, 2008 at 6:06 pm
For the benefit of anyone who would like to hear the whole story:
Randall Patterson misused my quotations by leaving out their context, giving the appearance of inflated problems. I included important general comments about how most men in our culture live at a hyper-stimulated level of sexual arousal, fed by pornography, their own fantasy, advertising, women’s fashion choices, etc. This is thought of as the norm, and people don’t realize is that it’s not a natural state. Our bodies and minds react directly to the input we give them, so the less sexual stuff we put into our heads, the easier it is to control sexual urges. Similarly, if you stop pouring gasoline on a fire it goes down to a normal level.
My comment about lust as an “untamed beast” is not about the strength of my lust, but rather its nature: if given free rein it seeks only its own gratification. A chaste man has the self-control to not focus on or react to different sexual stimuli that cross his path (images, thoughts, touch, etc.). This means his lust has less and less power, and a man becomes more able to love and respect women for who they are, not just how they arouse him. By making a parody of me, Mr. Patterson has perpetuated the myth that controlling your sexuality is equal to repression. In truth, a chaste lifestyle is liberating and empowering, allowing full comfort with your sexuality by taking away its unnatural addiction to stimulation.
I’ll refrain from addressing the issues and misconceptions that appear here, but it’s too bad we don’t have more maturity in the Ivy Leauge. Oh, and I’m a sophomore, not a junior.
April 2nd, 2008 at 6:42 pm
Inquiring minds want to know… why DID you give so much personal information to a NY Times reporter? I mean, you had to know that you wouldn’t be portrayed in the most flattering light, right?
April 2nd, 2008 at 7:18 pm
thank you, commodore douche, for being the arbiter of cool and letting us all know when something is “kinda pathetic.” I have a hat that I was thinking of wearing sideways and your I welcome your thoughts. But as long as we are not discussing how to project a superficial air of superiority please shut the hell up and leave the conversation to those with real ideas and thoughtful input.
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:35 pm
Meh. I reserve the right to mock anyone who thinks that everyone in America should know about their sexual urges. There is really no difference between this guy and Lena Chan. Both of them are attention whores. I really don’t understand what the appeal of sharing the details of your sexuality with the world is. I mean go ahead and fuck – or don’t fuck, whatever makes you happy- but keep it to yourself.
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:10 pm
dude… this is ivygate. we love attention whores who kiss (or don’t kiss) and tell all. if you don’t wanna hear about that stuff, you should probably stay away from gossip blogs. just a thought.
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:47 pm
anymore great lines? perhaps, “arg” or “wha?” Try expressing yourself with words and sentences and not apathetic disfluencies.
Also, maybe you should try reading the thread that you are posting on before commenting. The kid clarified your argument not three posts above you.
Finally, because I too enjoy ridiculing foolishness, you dont understand the point of broadcasting sexual preferences but clearly the only point of your original post was to distinguish yourself from him by making fun of his “non-sex life.” So congratulations on finding another human being who also communicates through interjections. We re all impressed.
April 3rd, 2008 at 9:30 am
The only point of my original point was to say that Liberals are not obligated to encourage this sort of thing.
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:42 pm
Hey, it’s your big sister speaking:
1. In a few years you’ll all mellow out in all ways.
2. The way Janie Fredell “erupts” with NO NO NOs is the most heartless act I’ve heard about in a while. Does any kid need to be publicly rejected like that when you are talking to a reporter from the NYT, Janie?
3. To whoever posted that most guys would prefer a girl like Janie: in a few years most of you will figure out that a girl can be totally chaste and still be out to pussywhip you. Be careful what you wish for.
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Hey, it’s your big sister speaking:
1. In a few years you’ll all mellow out in all ways.
2. The way Janie Fredell “erupts” with NO NO NOs is the most heartless act I’ve heard about in a while. Does any kid need to be publicly rejected like that when you are talking to a reporter from the NYT, Janie?
3. To whoever posted that most guys would prefer a girl like Janie: in a few years most of you will figure out that a girl can be totally chaste and still be out to pussywhip you. Be careful what you wish for.
4. Best wishes to Leo. It’s always good to see people who are not afraid to be sincere and honest (or are brave enough to be sincere and honest despite their fears). Sex is not really that momentous, though. It’s far more important to never break a trust than to never have sex.
April 3rd, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Everyone should read Michel Houellebecq’s “Extension of the domain of the struggle” (also known in English as “Extension of the battlefield” and “Whatever”). Great analysis of commodification of sex and the consequences of that for the proletariat.
April 8th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
May God have mercy on our Ivy pedigreed souls.