A question for guys: Would you ever get Cosmo for your girlfriend?

[LucyDuke]

You're not saying this flat out, but you don't seem to be acknolaging the fact that the articles are actully written by people who want to help.

Yes, the articles are written by people who want to help. I acknowledge that. People who are concerned with, for consistency's sake, eyeshadow and dieting. People who want to help women select the right eyeshadow and be successful in their diets. Now, I don't have any problem with that. The problem I have is when those become someone's biggest priorities, and these magazines showcase a lifestyle where the biggest concerns are eyeshadow and dieting. Yes, these people want to help. Their help is shallow and misguided.

Women who lack confidence can't use a magizine a scapegoat, they have to get over their problem on their own.

First of all, I agree that they have to get over their problem on their own, because there isn't much help to be had. Narz had a very good point.

Nobody (that matters) is using a magazine as a scapegoat. Not even 13-year-old Lucy. The magazine does not exist in a vacuum, and it does not publish itself. The magazine on its own is just a magazine.

The problem is the greater culture of airbrushed bikini women and hairstyled shampoo commercials. Yes, it is a culture. There's no pressure on you, young teenage boy, to fit in a size 6 dress or to have pedicure-perfect toenails, so you might not notice it. But it's there, and even those of us who can see it for the bullspit it is can feel the pressure. If I feel comfortable and sexy without hair gel and mascara, it's hard to make money off of me. I need to be convinced that if I don't have this season's hot new look, I'm going to be shunned in public, men aren't going to want me, women are going to laugh at me, and children aren't going to respect me. I'm supposed to think I'm worthless without expensive jeans. That's what the marketing machines for the cosmetics, haircare, fashion, so-on industries are pounding down our throats every time we walk out the front door. You know who pays Cosmo's bills, right? They don't exactly advertise Chevrolets and Cheerios.

The problem isn't that women wear makeup. The problem is that women are made to feel like they have to wear makeup. And whether you see it or not, Cosmo reinforces just that. Every person in that magazine is photoshopped and that is presented as the standard - a standard even Cindy Crawford says she can't live up to.

Now, again, if you want a girlfriend whose biggest priority is looking like a magazine bimbo with $30 lip gloss and "driving him wild in bed with 23 ultra-secret sex techniques he'd never tell you", well, I guess it would be wise to buy a copy of Cosmo for your live-action blow-up-doll. But when you grow up and want to find a real woman who gets pimples and wakes up with bed hair and knows how to give a blow-job without consulting step-by-step instructions, be careful you don't drive her off with Cosmopolitan porn-sex expectations.

 

[frob2900]

Yes, the articles are written by people who want to help. I acknowledge that. People who are concerned with, for consistency's sake, eyeshadow and dieting. People who want to help women select the right eyeshadow and be successful in their diets. Now, I don't have any problem with that. The problem I have is when those become someone's biggest priorities, and these magazines showcase a lifestyle where the biggest concerns are eyeshadow and dieting. Yes, these people want to help. Their help is shallow and misguided.

Taken for what it is: Harmless fun, I can't see why Cosmo is any worse than any other lifestyle magazine. It's just that taking a particular lifestyle too seriously, whatever the lifestyle, is misguided.

 

[LucyDuke]

So who can, if they can't talk to friends about it?

Perhaps they need to solve their own problems. Sex tips in Cosmo aren't a solution for anything.

Who do you think writes these magazines?!?!

Do you honestly believe that the women who write the articles don't genuinely believe that they are helping women overcome real, legitimate problems?

No. Where are you getting this?

People who read Cosmo...

That does not follow.

And if, as you are saying, the writers hold eyeshadow and dieting as "priorities in life", don't you think that they believe these to be real issues affecting the lives of their readership?

Incidentally, why do you think there is such a wide variety of magazines available? Is it possible that a journalist writes what they want to write, and then finds a publication that fits their individual passions?

Who says that they are "priorities"? Maybe they're just part of their lives. Maybe wearing eyeshadow is an accessory. Maybe dieting to fit into dresses you used to fit into when you were 18 makes you feel good about yourself. Maybe they do it because they take pride in their appearance. Why do you assume that people who do follow fashion are necessarily shallow, vacuous people? What's the difference between an artist and a fashion designer? What's the difference between someone who appreciates good art and someone who appreciates good design?

These things aren't bad things. I'm not saying they are bad things. I'm saying that presenting them as essential - which Cosmo does - is dangerous. It harms the very people it purports to help.

Yes, what's the difference?

I'm at a loss for words. I guess I'm just not the right person to explain the difference between treating sick people and giving shampoo tips.

You seem unwilling to compare the fundamentals, perhaps because you're too wrapped up in the perceived "triviality" of what's written in Cosmo. Try not to consider what's actually being said by the magazine, and treat it as generic "advice". Why is that advice fundamentally different to advice given by anyone else? You said that it was because they made money from it (this was the thrust of the post I quoted) -- but no advice is free.

They're not making money from the advice itself. They're a vehicle for advertising. They make the most money when women see themselves as objects that need to be waxed and painted and dressed just so. Naturally, they're going to set the stage to make as much money as they can, at the expense of the confidence and self-respect of those women.

 

[LucyDuke]

Taken for what it is: Harmless fun, I can't see why Cosmo is any worse than any other lifestyle magazine. It's just that taking a particular lifestyle too seriously, whatever the lifestyle, is misguided.

I agree! If it can be harmless fun, well, it's harmless. What I'm objecting about is that too many women take this stuff far too seriously. It's not just the magazine's fault, there's a lot more to it than just that. But it is taken too seriously, and that has been very harmful.

 

[Mise]

Well, no-one I know who reads Cosmo feel that way. They're fairly intelligent, and really do read it for the tips. They genuinely like dressing up and looking good, and they follow fashion. They don't see it as "essential", though. I don't know, maybe that's not normal...

 

[LucyDuke]

Well, no-one I know who reads Cosmo feel that way. They're fairly intelligent, and really do read it for the tips. They genuinely like dressing up and looking good, and they follow fashion. They don't see it as "essential", though. Maybe that's not normal...

It's more about a greater culture than about any individual person or magazine. If you hear something enough times, you start believing it.

But I'm glad your friends haven't been convinced.

 

[Colonel]

I don't know, maybe, one of my x-girl friends used to read it all the time and when I asked she said there was advice about sex in there, so I'm all for woman trying to perfect sex

 

[frob2900]

I don't know, maybe, one of my x-girl friends used to read it all the time and when I asked she said there was advice about sex in there, so I'm all for woman trying to perfect sex

Indeed

Off-topic: Shouldn't you change your user name to "Airman Basic"? I think "Colonel" is a bit presumptous

 

[Colonel]

I would but, I pretty sure there is a rule against changeing a commonly known and accepted nick, something about creating confusion within the forums. Plus I intend to get that rank so my nick is more like a goal

anyway back on topic, I believe I will go buy a copy of this crap after I go ask this girl out in the next week. Then give it to her a couple days later

 

[mrt144]

Anyone that ever glances at the magizine rack in any store knows Cosmopolitin's biggest purpose is to help women please men, so my question for all the straight guys here is: if your girlfriend wasn't already subscribed, would you get her Cosmopolitin Magizines? You don't have to give them to her directly, you could just leave them somewhere she could find them. For the sake of argument, let's assume you're over the age of 20.


I without a doubt, would.

no. not only is it SSDM (same . .. .. .. . different month) it also makes women more stupid (consumerist sex objects). not only is there tons of mundane . .. .. .. . about sex (and it isnt really about pleasing you, because of the ridiculous stuff they suggest. If they were really about pleasing men theyd do 20 pages of oral sex tips and 20 pages of anal sex preperation. and perhaps ways to get your best friend to have a threesome with him.) theres tons of adverts in it which means shes spending money on herself for products she doesnt need than on stuff for both of us, like food, beer, and ballgames.

 

[Eukaryote]

If they were really about pleasing men theyd do 20 pages of oral sex tips and 20 pages of anal sex preperation. and perhaps ways to get your best friend to have a threesome with him.)

Just because your prefrences are that sterotipical doesn't mean mine are.

 

[Masquerouge]

I agree with LucyDuke, BTW. I read a lot of women's magazines, mostly because I find them fascinating, and a sure hint that it's all about making you feel insecure so that you'll buy something is the sheer amount of ads. at least half of the magazine is ads. The first 5 pages are ads. It's insane.
"Curiously", there's nowhere near that amount of ads in men's magazines.

 

[Ansar]

Masque: Simply because us men are not as foolish to fall into those silly traps for the mindless.

 

[mrt144]

Just because your prefrences are that sterotipical doesn't mean mine are.

no, yours involve womanly, fanciful, blindfolding. and sensual touching with strawberries or ice cubes. cosmo pushes no boundries with sex. it's the same crap, different month. and nothing you havent done before.

 

[frob2900]

no, yours involve womanly, fanciful, blindfolding. and sensual touching with strawberries or ice cubes. cosmo pushes no boundries with sex. it's the same crap, different month. and nothing you havent done before.

Don't forget the candlelight and/or other "mood lighting"!

 

[mrt144]

Don't forget the candlelight and/or other "mood lighting"!

yeah, cause the guy will get all hot about that!

 

[frob2900]

yeah, cause the guy will get all hot about that!

Perhaps if the lighting is a bunch of 150W spotlights!

 

[Colonel]

no, yours involve womanly, fanciful, blindfolding. and sensual touching with strawberries or ice cubes. cosmo pushes no boundries with sex. it's the same crap, different month. and nothing you havent done before.

Why can't we have both, I mean I like it when I had a girl with me who wanted all the candle and all that crap especially cherries but at the same time I had the Cardinal game playing with no sound

 

[Eukaryote]

The problem is the greater culture of airbrushed bikini women and hairstyled shampoo commercials. Yes, it is a culture. There's no pressure on you, young teenage boy, to fit in a size 6 dress or to have pedicure-perfect toenails, so you might not notice it. But it's there, and even those of us who can see it for the bullspit it is can feel the pressure. If I feel comfortable and sexy without hair gel and mascara, it's hard to make money off of me. I need to be convinced that if I don't have this season's hot new look, I'm going to be shunned in public, men aren't going to want me, women are going to laugh at me, and children aren't going to respect me. I'm supposed to think I'm worthless without expensive jeans. That's what the marketing machines for the cosmetics, haircare, fashion, so-on industries are pounding down our throats every time we walk out the front door. You know who pays Cosmo's bills, right? They don't exactly advertise Chevrolets and Cheerios.

The problem isn't that women wear makeup. The problem is that women are made to feel like they have to wear makeup. And whether you see it or not, Cosmo reinforces just that. Every person in that magazine is photoshopped and that is presented as the standard - a standard even Cindy Crawford says she can't live up to.

Now, again, if you want a girlfriend whose biggest priority is looking like a magazine bimbo with $30 lip gloss and "driving him wild in bed with 23 ultra-secret sex techniques he'd never tell you", well, I guess it would be wise to buy a copy of Cosmo for your live-action blow-up-doll. But when you grow up and want to find a real woman who gets pimples and wakes up with bed hair and knows how to give a blow-job without consulting step-by-step instructions, be careful you don't drive her off with Cosmopolitan porn-sex expectations.

Wait, so on top of all the screwed up things and paranoia I already know about, if I get a girl a Cosmo she didn't ask for she'll think "He thinks I'm ugly and a bad lover," as opposed to "He thinks I could improve at sex."

Wow, that sucks.

 

[Gogf]

I think we're getting away from the premise of this thread. The thread is not about approving of Cosmo, or buying Cosmo when our girlfriends ask for it. The thread is about buying the magazine for girls so that they can learn "to please men." Putting aside the fact that most of what the magazine contains is almost certainly wrong, I simply can't imagine doing that to someone. It's not only incredibly insulting, but needy and pathetically timid. If Cosmo gives such good advice, why not read it yourself and then just talk to the girl? Don't you think you have more credibility than a women's magazine filled with nonsense columns?

Drool's suggestion that you could, if for some insane reason you wanted to, buy the magazine and "leave them somewhere she could find them" is also thoroughly absurd: it's not particularly common for women's magazines to be lying around in men's houses.

The entire premise to the thread is completely immature.