Cosmopolitan Magazine

Cosmopolitan Magazine is an object of cultural conflict. It is central to the feminist sex wars, with some feminists expressing the opinion that it is a classic example of patriarchal socialization that monitors and controls womens' sexuality and others considering it emblematic of an increased cultural acceptance of female desire. It is also a centerpiece of the cultural struggle between the Christian far-right and corporate raunch culture, with one side blasting it as pornographic and the other defending it as a product that fills a natural want by the public. In addition, it is considered either an entertaining diversion or a holy book of essential tips on "sex, fashion, and dating" by many ordinary women.

I fall firmly in the middle on the question of whether Cosmopolitan is a progressive or regressive publication, but only in relation to comparable magazines and websites. I find many articles nauseatingly stereotypical, but I am also able to identify places where the magazine's editors have responded to criticism and attempted to modify its content to please readers and critics. I think Cosmopolitan's medium, which is that of a glossy women's interest magazine, limits it. Within these limits, however, Cosmopolitan has moments that make it a little easier to justify as a low-culture guilty pleasure, and possibly as a necessary pop culture counterweight to alternative publications in the same genre.

One of the most ubiquitous and unfortunate aspects of Cosmopolitan is its traditional advertising. The pages are splashed with models, makeup, and expensive clothing. Each advertisement seems to scream out a vision of female beauty the overwhelming majority of women fall short of. No body part is exempt from being judged by appearance in Cosmopolitan, where teeth must be white, bodies must be slender, and busts must be emphasized. This is reinforced by the content of many of the articles. Even articles that present themselves as being tailored to "your body!" and "your shape!" are at best a momentary break from page after page of starving models and at worst a ridiculous example of capitalist co-optation of valid concerns about the magazine's stance on body image. The repeated message of Cosmopolitan's fashion and style section is that in order to be sexually desirable (which is presumably the main motivation for reading a magazine about sex and fashion) women must follow rule after rule and trend after trend. Articles can praise women for their "positive body image" ad nauseum, but as long as the "fashion" element is present, its unlikely Cosmopolitan will be able to successfully subvert any of the low self-esteem they sometimes mention wanting to combat.

Its sexual ethics are a little more liberal. Advertisements for the Plan B pill are a fixture on the magazine's website, and birth control methods are often-mentioned in the magazine's sex articles - this is an improvement over the scare tactics young women receive in most sex ed and religious youth programs. Women are also spoken to as if their sexual desire is valid, and the mere existence of a magazine that thinks women should enjoy sex is sometimes a step forward in and of itself. For example, Cosmopolitan made the unfortunate decision to publish an article from the outrageously sexist AskMen website about "10 Things Men Don't Want to Hear In Bed" (which includes such gems as cautioning women against noting that its their first time, because men will assume they're bad in the sack and saying that women shouldn't ask to cuddle because it's too arousing to men) but also responded with its own list of "10 Things Women Don't Want to Hear In Bed." At least if some men are going to write heavily gendered self-serving relationship rules, Cosmopolitan writes a women's version. If that women's version sometimes relies on making generalizations based on gender, at least it gives women the right to make the same kind of demands AskMen portrays as men's right to demand. It also explicitly opposes some harmful stereotypes of women by saying "when we’re getting it on we want to be treated as your dirty partner in crime, not a newbie" and to use grown-up language when discussing bodily functions because periods are normal and biological, not weird and gross.

In the end, I'm ambivalent about Cosmo as a pop cultural icon. However, I do think it presents an interesting opportunity for criticism. Although much of its content is based on sexist conceptions of how men and women behave, many of these standards tell the women's side of the story. Whether the steps in the right direction Cosmo seems to make ultimately affect the genre or the effects of patriarchal thinking about gender I'm not sure, but I think it is possible for aspects of Cosmo to be subversive in some circumstances.