Promiscuity does NOT equal independence.

from JoeUser Forums

In my last article I talked about 'Cosmopolitan' magazine being nothing better than soft core pornography because of all of it's sexual content.

That article and the subsequent responses got me thinking about what it used to mean to be an 'independent' woman - and what it seems to mean today.

When I was in my teens and early twenties, being an independent or career woman was still a big deal.  Women were still facing the 'glass ceiling' in the corporate world - they would get so far up the ladder, then would be passed up for their male counterparts.  If a woman made her own way in the world, sans assistance from a man, it was either assumed that she was a lesbian or that she was somehow deficient in personality or looks.  Women were, as far as my parent's generation was concerned, destined to have a job only until they got married and had kids.  Having a house, a car, a successful career AND being a single female was something that still raised a few eyebrows.

But somewhere down the line, the definition of being an 'independent' woman changed.  It's not all about professions and houses any more....it seems to be about sex.  The freedom to have as much sex, in as many different positions, with as many men as you can seems to be the new standard.  Cosmo, the magazine that used to be the flagship publication for independent women, no longer prints articles about single women and mortgage rates....it's articles over the past 3 years or so have become more sexually oriented.  TV hasn't helped much either - the advent of shows like 'Sex In The City' have made it fashionable to be promiscuous.  Young women emulate what they see in the media....and Carrie and her pals got their fair share (and then some) of men.  And all this in an age where AIDS and Hepatitis C are running rampant.  The message seems to be that as long as you use protection, it's okay.

It saddens and disappoints me...and if it has ME feeling that way, I can only imagine how it makes the generations of women before my time feel - those who burned their bras in the streets and protested for equal rights for women.  Is this really what they had in mind?  Did they fight so that their children's children could indisctiminately sleep with multiple partners, so they could, to be blunt, whore around with whoever they felt like?

Promiscuity does NOT equal independence.  We, as a society, need to make sure our daughters (and sons) know this. 

 

misc
31,494 views 87 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
I concur.

I read Cosmo when I was in high school--I wanted to be one of those career women with fabulous nightlifes and all the men...but then I woke up and realized (1) I was in Idaho and not New York; (2) I'd rather have my husband at night than have to pretty up and get drunk to find someone who'd sleep with me, then kick me out; and (3) the magazine publishes the most selfish, egocentric material I've ever seen or read and the people inside it are not the type I could ever be friends with.

Just goes to show that in spite of my GPA, I wasn't so smart in high school. Glad my sense showed up some time in college.

-A.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top

the magazine publishes the most selfish, egocentric material I've ever seen or read


You are absolutely, 100% correct about that.  I re-read this month's edition today, trying to find some redeeming qualities within....and found very, very few.


 


 

The Political Machine 2024
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
Karen...you get another amen!

I guess I've never really realized it, but I think I've fooled myself into thinking that I'm getting "sex tips" for when I get married from Cosmo. The truth is, it's so sexified that it really just makes me feel bad about my lifestyle choices.

I've made the choice not to have sex until I'm married, and Cosmo makes me feel like a freak because I've made that choice. I read articles about kids 10 years younger than me in these huge adult relationships and it just makes me sad I guess.

I'm still thinking we should come up with our own publication...

Moo
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
Ang...you get an amen, too. Cosmo caters very much to the "me me me me me me ME!" generation. There's not a whole lot in there about helping one's fellow person...in fact...there's NOTHING about that as far as I can see.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
Oopies. The Ziggystyles posts were by me...we need to work on this signing out thing when we switch computers for the night.

Mooooooo
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
Okay Ladies, a question: just how much did magazines like Cosmo really teach you about sex? I seen groups of 16 year old girls giggling over articles on buses etc., but don't imagine they're actually taking the articles practicing the suggested techniques. Or perhaps I'm being niave.

My 'formal' sex education included High School Biology, a number of well-thumbed copies of Penthouse circa 1977 and a 'blue' movie while at a senior high school camp. While I thought I knew what to do, when it came to the actual act, I had no idea. Sure, nerves played a big part in my state and if my first time had been with someone my own age, I think I would have failed miserably. As it was, I lost my virginity to an older woman (I was just 20 years old and she was a divorced 29 year old). I consider myself lucky to have had such a patient, caring and, erm, inventive teacher.

Cheers,

Maso
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
it makes me think of some shallow manual for a sorority in a waspy, carefully sheltered college. it seems to gives advice in the magazine how to feel 21 forever, complete with exercise tips, botox reviews, and oblivion with how the world really operates. one of the worst parts is that it makes the readers assume that all men are the stereotypical fratboy.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
I couldn't buy the last issue because it had Ashley Simpson on the cover but Cosmo definately isn't me anymore. Maybe because I am a 30 something married, mom with three boys. Cosmo is not reality for anyone I know including those who are young and successful and living in major metropolitan areas. I read some of those sex with random stranger stories and think who are these people and don't they feel bad the next day. I guess I can understand some young guy bragging to his friends about his conquests but grown woman - I don't get it.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
Okay Ladies, a question: just how much did magazines like Cosmo really teach you about sex? I seen groups of 16 year old girls giggling over articles on buses etc., but don't imagine they're actually taking the articles practicing the suggested techniques. Or perhaps I'm being niave.


yeah, I admit I used to read my friends' copies in high school, and um, well, the advice wasn't half bad, but as I got older and more experienced, I realized that sex advice in that mag is only insightful for women who have no idea how male anatomy works or who don't care enough about their partners to ask them what they like... every guy is different and the magazine pigonholes men out of convenience to give end-all, be-all sex advice that makes girls/women feel competitive because they think that a woman who reads that magazine has more of a sexual edge than one that doesn't.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top

ladies?? 

yall are talking about the same cosmo that once featured a burt reynolds nude centerfold?   the same cosmo that's been lampooned (and not just by the lampoon, may it rest in peace) at least a dozen times since the 70s for it's 'cum on' cover lines (How to Have even MORE Orgasms....Sex With TWO Guys (Without Either One Catching On!)...What HE Wants (but Won't Tell YOU!)...Sleeping Your Way to a BETTER Job...etc) arranged with formulaic precision around a model typically showing more skin than was concealed? 

here's a link to the cover for cosmo's july 1979 issue: Link    btw, the spanish edition which i see frequently at el mercado grande while grocery shopping is even sleazier

Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
Did they fight so that their children's children could indisctiminately sleep with multiple partners, so they could, to be blunt, whore around with whoever they felt like?Promiscuity does NOT equal independence. We, as a society, need to make sure our daughters (and sons) know this.


This really hits home with me after a conversation I had last week with a 13 year old girl who is pregnant. I wish more of our youth would learn that sex and promiscuity is not the answer to everything, and it has serious consequences.

btw, the boyfriend, who is 17, knew that the condom had broken before entry, and not only didn't he stop to put on a new one, he didn't even bother to tell her until after. And now he's mad at her for being pregnant. The guys need to learn too.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top

As Much as I hate to say it, I think the turning point came when Bill Clinton declared that oral sex was not sex or cheating.  It gave teenagers an open license to do it, knowing that if the president said it was so, it must be so.

It is going to take a lot of years to clean up his mess with Girls (and Guys) psyches.

Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top

The truth is, it's so sexified that it really just makes me feel bad about my lifestyle choices.

Me too, and I'm married!

Ladies, a question: just how much did magazines like Cosmo really teach you about sex? I seen groups of 16 year old girls giggling over articles on buses etc., but don't imagine they're actually taking the articles practicing the suggested techniques. Or perhaps I'm being niave

Cosmo hasn't taught me anything about sex...and whilst I doubt that the girls your speak of were actually going to try and use any of the techniques described, it is sending out the message that it's okay to sleep around, that it's okay to have  multiple partners, that sex can be just an act of convienience.

 

it makes me think of some shallow manual for a sorority in a waspy, carefully sheltered college

I know what you mean....

Cosmo definately isn't me anymore. Maybe because I am a 30 something married, mom with three boys

Even was I was in my early 30's I still found something of interest in Cosmo, whether it was fashion of beauty or whatever...but recently, I can't find anything that interests me.

the magazine pigonholes men out of convenience to give end-all, be-all sex advice that makes girls/women feel competitive because they think that a woman who reads that magazine has more of a sexual edge than one that doesn't.

You're hit the nail on the head there.

  

ladies??

Kingbee, I went and looked at the link for the '79 Cosmo, and out of the 8 or so articles on the cover, 2 or 3 were sexually oriented.  On this month's cover, there are 2 that are NOT sexually oriented.  It seems that we have gone from having the token couple of articles about sex to having the token couple of articles that are NOT about sex.

 

I wish more of our youth would learn that sex and promiscuity is not the answer to everything, and it has serious consequences.

You didn't see Carrie getting an STD, did you?  You didn't see her get pregnant and have no way of raising that child.  As far as the media is concerned, there are no consequences for promiscuity, and that has to change. 

Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top

Kingbee, I went and looked at the link for the '79 Cosmo, and out of the 8 or so articles on the cover, 2 or 3 were sexually oriented


ill try to find a 79 cover for penthouse and i'm willing to wager--drawing on my intensive study of such things hahaha--it's considerably tamer than the one i linked (i was rushed so i grabbed the first one i found). 

Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top

As Much as I hate to say it, I think the turning point came when Bill Clinton declared that oral sex was not sex or cheating. It gave teenagers an open license to do it, knowing that if the president said it was so, it must be so.
It is going to take a lot of years to clean up his mess with Girls (and Guys) psyches


whatever differences exist between us--even those obviously attributable to your considerably skewed perceptions of life in the 21st century--i was saddened beyond my meager ability to convey my emotions upon discovering the above-quoted comment which is clearly nothing less than a manifestation of early onset dementia.  

if im reading you correctly, it appears youre seriously expecting us to believe the youth of america have done something no younger generation has ever even considered (that would be going back to the dawn of time)..namely theyve willingly been influenced by a person who not only attained the advanced age of 'over 40' but also occupied the top political office of this country,  and wore a suit n shit?   aint no way.

if that's truly the case--and the ambient temperature of hell isnt hovering at 0 centigrade--bill clinton is undisputedly the most powerful leader of all time.


(oh...and the 'clean up the mess' thing may be a bit too overt but also way too funny )

Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
Excellent blog, dharma.

Looks like you got the blog bug back.
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
whatever differences exist between us--even those obviously attributable to your considerably skewed perceptions of life in the 21st century--i was saddened beyond my meager ability to convey my emotions upon discovering the above-quoted comment which is clearly nothing less than a manifestation of early onset dementia. if im reading you correctly, it appears youre seriously expecting us to believe the youth of america have done something no younger generation has ever even considered (that would be going back to the dawn of time)..namely theyve willingly been influenced by a person who not only attained the advanced age of 'over 40' but also occupied the top political office of this country, and wore a suit n shit? aint no way.


Hilarious!!! ;~D

Your use of humor to make your point aside, I would side with you on this one, but, in working with youth in different capacities, I would have to say that Dr. Guy has more of a point than you'd want to admit here.

While teens have never been the most abstinent of humans, there has almost been an oral sexual revolution over the last decade. Kids, even as young as elementary ages are being caught engaging in oral sex with alarming regularity. Terms like "pulling a Monica", "Going Presidential" among others make it clear that Prs. Clinton's exploits has had its affect.

The worst is, while I haven't heard this one for awhile, the line, "it isn't really sex" was an often used justification for a long time.

Face it, Prs. Clinton's attempt to downplay his own actions set a precedence in our culture. Just because you'd rather not accept it, doesn't change a thing.
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
Great follow up to the Cosmo: Soft core Porn, Dharma!!

Apparently, to most people, "independence" means being more like everybody else than anybody else!!! ;~D
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
Dr. Guy -- You are an idiot. Promiscuity and ideas about it didn't start with Bill Clinton. I really think you've you must have been chemically or surgically lobotomized at some point in your life. Please, keep your vitriolic hatred to the political forums instead of "blah-ing" all over everywhere else.

Now for the rest of the post. Dharma >> It's an interesting idea. Promiscuity certainly doesn't equal independance, but I think the real issue here is the rebelling by many women against "slut" stereotypes that come with growing up and being a young woman. Men like to say "slut," and even worse, there are a goodly number of sanctimonious (pardon the word here) bitches who don't hesitate in calling a girl a slut for what they don't consider "acceptable" behavior.

Does that mean screw around as much as possible? No. It does, however, mean that society still paints women into a corner when it comes to sex. No sex? You're frigid, or uptight, or a dyke. Too much? You're a whore, slut, or tramp. No matter the strides women have made conquering the corporate world, the working-mom world, the rock n' roll world, whatever, the sexual sphere is still the #1 area of inequality between men and women.

Magazines like Cosmo are fluff garbage anyway, and it's always been the "how to get a man and keep him" artcles that piss me off the most. Telling people how to have better sex isn't so bad, but telling women they need a man to be complete is utter garbage.

To paraphrase Martin Luther King Jr. (and apologies to him) -- "Let us judge women not by the names on their sexual resumes, but by the content of their character."

Cheers.
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
In my life I have noticed that with all change,, the pendulem {sp?] has to swing a long way before it centers itself,, When I left the united states in 1964 and came back in 1966 I arrived in the middle of the sexual revolution.. everyone was runng amok and having as much sex, drugs, rock and roll as possible,, this was a huge swing from the 50s and early 60s soon it got more centered. the same will happen with women and their explosion of sexuality. For many years any woman that had sex out of wedlock was , a fallen women, slut, whore, etc, etc, after gaining some equality with men, women ran amok, now serious thinking women are comming to their senses and realizing that there is such a thing as going overboard.
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: Dr. GuyPosted: Tuesday, February 01, 2005As Much as I hate to say it, I think the turning point came when Bill Clinton declared that oral sex was not sex or cheating. It gave teenagers an open license to do it, knowing that if the president said it was so, it must be so.It is going to take a lot of years to clean up his mess with Girls (and Guys) psyches.


I have to disagree doc, started in the 60s with the sinple act of bra burning.
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: Dr. GuyPosted: Tuesday, February 01, 2005As Much as I hate to say it, I think the turning point came when Bill Clinton declared that oral sex was not sex or cheating. It gave teenagers an open license to do it, knowing that if the president said it was so, it must be so.It is going to take a lot of years to clean up his mess with Girls (and Guys) psyches.


I have to disagree doc, started in the 60s with the simple act of bra burning.
Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top
I wish more of our youth would learn that sex and promiscuity is not the answer to everything, and it has serious consequences.

You didn't see Carrie getting an STD, did you? You didn't see her get pregnant and have no way of raising that child. As far as the media is concerned, there are no consequences for promiscuity, and that has to change


Carrie wasn't some teenager--she was in her thirties. Women now have the option of having two completely different lifestyles--you can settle down and get married, or you can remain single.

For all the times I heard stay-at-home moms talk about how they don't get the respect they deserve, and "why is everyone judging us?"--I'm going to say the same for us late-twenty, early thirty single independent women--stop judging us! What I do or do not do in the privacy of my bedroom is no one's business. If you don't like Sex in the City--don't watch it. If you don't like Cosmo--don't read it. But do not pretend that these two items are bring about the downfall of youth. Kids have irresponsible sex because their parents did a poor job in the sex education field, not because they watched Carrie get it on with Mr. Big.

It has always been ok for men to to be players--but when girls do it, it's some how unacceptable?

I don't think that adults ttoday are having any more or less sex than previous generations, they just talk about it more.