'Cosmopolitan' - soft porn?

from JoeUser Forums

I've read Cosmo on and off since I was a teenager (for those of you who don't know, that's over 20 years).  I used to enjoy it; there were some good articles about (then) current events as well as beauty and fashion hints and ideas.

In the past few years though, Cosmopolitan seems to be all about sex.  From suggested sexual positions to naked men to reader's confessions about the best sex they ever had......it's verging on becoming nothing better than soft porn. 

Take this month's issue, for example.  The cover reads: 'Beyond karma sutra; advanced sex positions', 'His butt, what your guy's bum reveals about his personality', 'The power of pre-sex', 'Guess what he's really thinking in bed', '50 ways to have fun with your man' and 'There's a hottie under here'.  There's the token celebrity on the cover and an article about 'sexy new hair looks' ...but the rest is about carnal actions and boys.  There's even an article inside comparing condom's by brand and type (ribbed, flavored etc).

Perhaps standards have changed since I was in Cosmo's target audience ( according to demographics, I'm still on the high end of that), but I honestly didn't think that things have changed that much.  Is this really what young women are interested in?  Boys, boys, sexual techniques to use with boys, and more boys? 

I'm really disappointed with Cosmo.  If I wanted to see naked men and read about sex, I'd buy a copy of 'Playgirl'. 

I don't think I'm going to be buying Cosmo anymore.  Unless they drastically change their content, they just lost themselves a reader.

 

 

misc
10,757 views 30 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
I'll agree with you, there is too much almost porn out there where it shouldn't be. Sure, I enjoy my porn, but I don't want it in my face all the time either. Unfortunately, sex sells, silly people and their reproductive urges...
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Cosmopolitan is merely the textbook for "Sluts 101".

Unfortunately, sex sells, silly people and their reproductive urges...


Ahh, sex, the ploy for writers and advertisers with no imagination. ;~D
Object Desktop - Get all of our enhancement utilities in one suite
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top

Sure, I enjoy my porn, but I don't want it in my face all the time either

There's a time and a place for everything. 

Cosmopolitan is merely the textbook for "Sluts 101".

It never used to be that way, though....at least, I don't remember it being that way.

Ahh, sex, the ploy for writers and advertisers with no imagination. ;~D

Yeah, I know what you mean.

Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
Karen~

This is fully ironic since I just purchased Cosmo yesterday.

I've thought the same thoughts as you. ANd I don't really know why I buy it, really. It just pisses me off when I read about all those stupid things people do to themselves and each other (see "Confessions"). Maybe I'm trying to prepare myself for when I get married and get to try those sexual positions? Probably not.

But I stand there in front of the magazine rack and its either Cosmo or Good Housekeeping, you know? Or celebrity crap. I'll grab "Woman's World" once in a while too...it's cheap, weekly, and it reminds me of my grandma.

I think I'm with you. No more Cosmo. Keep me accountable!
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top

It just pisses me off when I read about all those stupid things people do to themselves and each other (see "Confessions"). Maybe I'm trying to prepare myself for when I get married and get to try those sexual positions? Probably not.

I think that the 'Confessions' are slightly embellished (and I'm being conservative when I describe them as such), and as for the positions...well, in 11 years of a marriage that has a very healthy physical side to it, I can tell you that we have NEVER read a magazine article about sexual positions and thought to ourselves "ooh, we must try that!".  I just can't imagine anyone, butt-ass naked, with the book/magazine in one hand, telling their partner "no, you've got it wrong - my leg is supposed to go in front of your head, not behind it"

 

But I stand there in front of the magazine rack and its either Cosmo or Good Housekeeping, you know?

Yes, I do know.  Magazine wise, there's very little for younger, intelligent women who aren't obsessed with shopping, make-up, sex or men.  I've started reading a monthly publication called 'Real Simple' it has all kinds of things in it, but mostly it's about (as the title suggests) simple living.  Good Housekeeping is a bit too old for me, Redbook is still a bit too old for me, and I have no interest whatsoever in tabloids like the Star et al.  People is a fave of mine still, just because of the human interest aspect of it.

I think I'm with you. No more Cosmo. Keep me accountable!

I will, as long as you do the same for me!

Baaaaa!

Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
Considering, CosmoGirl is the younger, teen version of Cosmo. It's a step up from that -- once the teen girls outgrow that mag, they can now move on to Cosmo and learn the direct opposite CosmoGirl! has been telling them.

It's the same topics and headlines each month but with a slight change. It's unfortunate women's magazines have become content-free and devoid of any real information or insight.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
OK -- I am going to be honest. I love Cosmo. I have a subscription. Ha ha ha, I'm a dirty, nasty freak . . . I enjoy all those articles.

*runs and hides*
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
I decided the same thing last March. I too had been reading for quite some time (about 10 years or so--not quite 20) and just got sick by the same crap about sex every month. If you notice, it's been on the same article rotations about sex for about the last three years.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
nothing's safe magazine wise. I take mustang monthly, (hmmm muscle cars and half naked women, nope haven't seen that mix.....), country crosstitch, (pretty safe......although, wow, those new purple flosses are kinda exciting............) and runners world.

Last time I read runners world, flipped through equipment........running techniques........insane distance runners (one's trying to go 300 miles at a time).......and wow! Naked people selling male sex supplements. Obviously as a runner, 2 pages of naked people peddeling pills to make you have male multiple orgasms that last insane amounts of time would be beneficial. Right. And maybe an article on the girls of baywatch running marathons topless should go next to it next month..........sigh.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
Maybe we should start a new publication, K...you game?
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
This is a very relevant issue, particularly in these days of HIV and rampant STDs. Recent studies indicate, for instance, that one in four British backpackers will have unprotected sex with a number of different partners throughout their travels around the world. Magazines like Cosmo should be taking a more proactive stance and instead of touting sex as being fun and cool, dealing with these issues properly. I think it is absolutely irresponsible.

There is another disturbing trend and that is the 'sex talk' ads, which are appearing in all sorts of different magazines and newpapers classified pages. It is trashy and disturbing. Who did people call to get their kicks before these services existed? I understand the mags need to generate ad revenue, but...

Cheers,

Maso
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top

cosmo's editorial policy has been fairly consistent for years.  i know for a fact it was looked down upon with disdain by the editorial management of what is likely considered america's most notorious mens magazine during the mid-80s because--to paraphrase--no matter how clinical the images or graphic the text 'we' publish, we dont publish articles telling 'our' readers how to cheat on their partners nor glorify the concept.  


I think that the 'Confessions' are slightly embellished


embellished hell..if they arent all written by the staff or freelancers, ill eat helen gurley brown   umm  i mean her hat

Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
I remember when Cosmo did a lot of articles on women in the work place. They would cover that issue from a variety of angles. It was pretty inteteresting.
I liked the fashion and I must admit to liking the beginning of the year horoscope pull out.

Can't the women of today learn sex the old fashioned way of trial and error. Practice, practice, practice! (That is a joke)
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top

Practice, practice, practice


wheeeeeeeeee

Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
i have a question. im just this one guy, so i dont know anything. id say 75-80 percent of my girlfriends have read cosmo on a semi-regular basis. im not "familiar" with the publication, but i have a "working knowledge" of the content.

but i am surprised at your reactions to the magazine. i imagined that the reason women bought the magazine was so they could:

1)dress like they were older and thinner;

2)find out how sleazy their prom date was compared to other girls' dates;

3)find out whether it was okay to be either afraid of- or interested in- sex;

4)how to know whether or not a guy is a loser.

again, im just this one guy and im no authority. but the magazine does not appear to have changed all that much. it still attempts to appeal to young girls who want to be older and thinner while picking up a side demographic of women who wish they were younger and worrying about looking older and thinner (aka 25-35 yr olds watching real world re-runs). if you watch the tube at all (which i cannot, anymore) you'll see that the market knows the same thing: money is made from such propaganda.

one last thought: if you think you're not buying this magazine for the reasons i suggested, what are you hoping for when you pull it off checkout rack at safeway foods?

TBT
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
I'm really disappointed with Cosmo.


there's too much sex


But that's the kind of mag cosmo has become. (I read it too. It's great!) I don't think many people will complain that there's too much sex in cosmo soon, because it will be expected. We don't complain that there's too much sex in a soft porn mag. Instead, we wouldn't buy it. Cosmo is a soft porn mag. For every traditional cosmo reader they lose, they will gain another two, who will have been brought up with that stuff. Cosmopolitan means sophistication, and a sexy lady pulling a handsome bloke by teasing them in stockings in fantasy scenarios is sophistication in my book. Leave cosmo alone, it's fricken great!
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
this means that Dharma doesn't like sex, lol...
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top

embellished hell..if they arent all written by the staff or freelancers, ill eat helen gurley brown

Eeeeew!  She's the one who said "you can never be too thin or too rich".....well, she's wrong.  SHE is too think...she looks like a skeleton in a wrinkled bag of skin.  Nasty.

And maybe an article on the girls of baywatch running marathons topless should go next to it next month..........sigh.

Topless running is painful for chicks, especially for those of us who have bigger boobs.  Just so you know.

 

OK -- I am going to be honest. I love Cosmo.

Good for you!  If you like it, then by all means read it...it's just not for me.

If you notice, it's been on the same article rotations about sex for about the last three years.

I did, and I have.

Magazines like Cosmo should be taking a more proactive stance and instead of touting sex as being fun and cool, dealing with these issues properly. I think it is absolutely irresponsible.

I do too.  Being a modern, independent woman seems to mean having the ability to pick up men and perform all kinds of sexual tricks as far as Cosmo's concerned.  That, to me, is almost shameful. 

 

I remember when Cosmo did a lot of articles on women in the work place. They would cover that issue from a variety of angles. It was pretty inteteresting.

That's the kind of stuff I remember too.  That was back when being an independant woman meant having a career, your own home, vehicle, posessions etc.  Now being 'independant' seems to mean having a lot of meaningless sex.

if you think you're not buying this magazine for the reasons i suggested, what are you hoping for when you pull it off checkout rack

I'm looking for articles about current events that affect women...there are tons of them, and Cosmo doesn't even touch them anymore.  I'm looking for articles about women's health, about fashion, about finance, politics, ...about a lot of stuff, but not exclusively about sex.

Cosmopolitan means sophistication, and a sexy lady pulling a handsome bloke by teasing them in stockings in fantasy scenarios is sophistication in my book.

Then your definition of sophistication and mine are very, very different.

 

this means that Dharma doesn't like sex, lol...

No, actually Dharma does like sex, in fact Dharma's love life is very healthy and very fulfiling....but as I said, if I wanted to read about sex I'd buy a book or a magazine specifically for that purpose.  I don't like having it shoved in my face under the guise of 'sophistication'.

Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
I buy two magazines on a regular basis. One of those is Self and the other is Cosmo. I buy Self because it has some really good workout tips and inspirational stuff. I buy Cosmo because it is a little raunchy and dirty. However, my Self is now getting a little on the sexy side. "Love your naked self" and "Stress-free sex" can be taken as "improve your Self" and yet, these articles are what I look for in Cosmo, not my fitness mag. I wish they would stay seperated.
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
Then your definition of sophistication and mine are very, very different.


and that's what makes life so rich. I love you really, dharma.
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
if I wanted to read about sex I'd buy a book or a magazine specifically for that purpose. I don't like having it shoved in my face under the guise of 'sophistication'.


Very well said, Dharma.

Practice, practice, practice


I agree with this as well. The more one practices, particular with a willing and able partner(s?), the better one gets at 'delivering the goods'

Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
and that's what makes life so rich. I love you really, dharma.


hope you didn't think I was being sarcastic. It was said in a friendly way. I think you're an intriguing lass dharma.

The cosmo thing was light hearted.
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top
I have to say, if you read only serious stuff, you will go crazy. And in honor of this thread, I just purchased a one year subscription to Cosmopolitan in order to keep the universe in balance. I'm even having it delivered to "Mr. Michael Roberts."



Cheers.
Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top
Going through the checkout line at Wal*Mart the other day, I saw that issue and read aloud, mockingly, the names of article on the front page; I read what you quoted. After being thouroughly disgusted by it all, I simply turned the magazine on the rack around and proceeded to checkout. I always do that. Turn those revolting magazines around. Then all you see is a CoverGirl ad for lipstick.

~Sarah
Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top
not that i believe you for a second, myrrander, but such principle makes me warm in the belly.

cosmo just isnt current events reporting. it seems to me that theyve never sold it that way either, and i have a hard time understanding why people would expect it from a magazine that has the same sexlines, the same almost naked woman on the front every time, the same polls about whether billy blue eyes remembers to put the toilet seat down after prematurely arriving at his inevitably brief outcome and then tries to leave without a goodbye.

there's nothing wrong with this, really. if my girlfriend had a copy, i would skip to THAT poll immediately. i just wouldnt buy cosmo looking for stories of strong women breaking down barriers in society.