I have no doubt by now you’ve read all about Miranda Kerr and Evan Spiegel’s sex life.
Sure, you weren’t actively searching for the details when the supermodel spilled the ins and outs of her bedroom activity in February. But one too many headlines popped up in your Newsfeed, meaning by the fifth you felt it was your duty to be across the news of the day.
And what news of the day it was. Kerr, supermodel and former Victoria’s Secret Angel, admitted in an interview with The Times that her and Evan Spiegel were “waiting” until they marry to have sex.
Considering Kerr is the mother of a six-year-old and a confirmed non-virgin, the quotes took hold of the news cycle. And for Spiegel, founder of tech giant Snapchat and perhaps not as accustomed to the bright lights of stardom as his world-famous wife, his “traditional” values found themselves across every headline. Traditional being Kerr’s own words.
I, like so many others, was intrigued. For some strange reason, and one I can only put down to human nature, I have a natural curiosity in the inner-workings of high-profile relationships. Kerr’s admission was cool, different. I didn’t particularly care. The news couldn’t have affected me less.
So you can imagine my surprise when my colleague read the interview, did a small-scale roll of the eyes and found the admission interesting given 26-year-old Spiegel’s “history”.
Why is the Victoria’s Secret model revirginizing herself? Post continues after audio.
I’m sorry – what history?
A quick search online and I found the “history”. And it makes for interesting reading.
In 2014, a Silicon Valley website called Valleywag released a set of emails written by Spiegel during his college years.
The emails, written to other fraternity members, are lewd and grossly sexist. They could be indicative of college and fraternity culture, or it could speak volumes for his character. You can be the judge.
Spiegel is on record describing peeing on women, drinking underage, getting his friends laid by wasted “sororisluts”, getting high and shooting lasers at “fat chicks.”
Most of the quotes are too vulgar for me to publish here if I want to keep my job. However, these are just some of the highlights:
"F*ck Bitches get leid."
“Hope at least six girl sucked your d*ck last night.”
"Have some girl put your large kappa sigma d*ck down her throat."
For someone who made their fortune from inventing a platform where messages disappear within seconds, you can imagine how much Spiegel wishes he had invented Snapchat before he started sprouting his misogyny all over Stanford email servers.
But alas, he didn't. And his words are held firmly in the throes of the web now.
In response, the Snapchat Founder and CEO wrote to Bloomberg saying he regretted his actions.
“I’m obviously mortified and embarrassed that my idiotic e-mails during my fraternity days were made public,” the then 23-year-old said. “I have no excuse. I’m sorry I wrote them at the time and I was jerk to have written them. They in no way reflect who I am today or my views towards women.”
Whether Spiegel is genuine and his character has evolved and matured since his college days is anyone's guess. But the stark contrast between the man we read about eight years ago, and the traditional man Kerr talks about today, couldn't be more pronounced.
So which one really is the true Evan Spiegel? The misogynist, or the traditionalist?
At 26, perhaps he sits somewhere in between.
Top Comments
Does it surprise anyone that those that buy into the idea of "purity" don't have the best views about women? Phrases like "saving yourself" or even the concept of losing ones virginity all speak to this bizarre concept of being less after having had sex, and, while not always the case, tend to be mostly applied to women, with the idea of a woman being a virgin a much more desirable thing in these circles than men, and with women who have had sex (even with the men involved) being worthy of little to no respect (as is evidenced by his emails). Look at purity balls and that nonsense. By all means conduct your relationship how you want, but if you buy into the idea of remaining "pure" I think its important to look at what that idea entails and where it came from.
Whilst I agree with everything you said, keep in mind that some people (admittedly few these days) might like the idea of only have experienced sex with the one partner. Not from a purity stand point but just to them sex may be such an intimate act that they don't like the idea of doing it with anyone that they don't plan to spend the rest of their life with. I used to actually think that way but having not met the right person it didn't work out that way, on one hand I am glad that I have had a variety of experiences, but on the other hand if I had met the right person when I was younger then perhaps that's how I would have lived my ife, because I do know some people who married their first love and seem to be blissfully happy.
Of course, the difference is, presumably you don't require your partner to be 'pure' or to wait until your wedding night. I've had two sexual partners - my current partner, and another I was with for four years, both of whom I had/have intentions of spending my life with.
By all means, view sex as special, but don't fetishize virginity or purity. Like I said, do what you will in relationships, but if you do have these ideas that not having sex = pure/having sex = impure, I think you need to look at the root of these beliefs, because I have yet to see any logic supporting this idea that wasn't sex negative at best or misogynist at worst.
It is not a bizarre concept.
We can look at it from a market perspective and understand that scarcity factors into value.
We can look at it from a scientific perspective, a virgin is not likely to carry sexually related diseases and the less intimate partners a person has had, the greater their ability to pair bond.
We can look at it from a variety of social perspectives which basically boil down to evolutionary imperatives such as ensuring you are not raising a competitors offspring.
You can bring men up in any culture you want, they are inherently going to incorporate the number of sexual partners a women has had or is being perceived as having, into their value of that women as a partner. You can spout whatever libtard rationalisation you want.
We were taught in Australian culture that this was a hateful belief that hurt women, that a women is no less valuable after losing her virginity and that slut shaming is ethically wrong. Not many of us bought into or supported this rubbish, we all knew inherently that it was in our DNA to place value on the exclusivity of our partner.
This is a phenomenon present in every culture and society on earth. If you don't understand it, you don't understand yourself.
Yeah, excuse me if I don't take the words of someone who says 'libtard' seriously.
If people held me to the standard of my 18 year old self I would be doomed. I have changed and matured a lot, and this guy is older than I am.
Were his actions and words awful? Yes.
Should we assume he is still that man? No.
But did you change your views a full 180 degrees since you were 18? Because that's what it'd take to reform this guy. In my experience, people rarely change their morals and perspectives so radically.
Some of them, yes absolutely. Some of my moral standards themselves changed. Mostly because at 18 my morals weren't fully developed, neither was my mental capacity and my understanding of the world around me, as is to be expected of any teenager. Most people change a lot, some quicker than others and some more drastically than others, depending on their starting point and experinces.
They may have been his views, or it may have just been an immature guy talking that way to impress his equally immature friends.
I think your last line is key - depends on their starting point. Given his starting point, he had/has a very long way to go.