Fun fact about me: I hate Cosmopolitan magazine. If you ask me, it's just about the most silly, useless magazine title on the stands these days. Of course, there are a ton of magazines whose pages are filled with trite, recycled articles which hold no actual information or stimulating content. My hatred (not an understatement) of this magazine started in high school when my friends would read Cosmo on our free period and I wondered why the hell I should care about '52 Ways to Please My Man' rather than, say, doing my damn homework, which is what free periods are for. Not only that, but why is the biggest coverline on the front of Cosmo almost always something to do with men? Isn't this a womens' magazine?
As I get older (and remain single), I start to notice more and more of these 'articles' that are obviously geared towards women of my age group, and they're all about getting men to notice you. There are so many reasons why this is wrong. Not the least of which is that it feels like every time an editor slips one of these stories into print or online, we're setting feminism (which is not a dirty word and I hate that some people still think it is) back by years. Women are not here solely to be noticed or recognized by men, nor should we give too much of a damn what they think of what we're wearing or how we've done our makeup.
And this is coming from someone who likes the idea of taking care of another person and being in a healthy relationship. A healthy relationship, to me, will never include a guy who thinks he has any say whatsoever in what clothes I put on my own body. (Taking care of my partner will never include being his maid, catering to his every need or whim, either.)
I frequently (several times a day) check Yahoo.com for news, sports scores, articles, breaking news, etc. Often times there are decent things on there that keep people abreast of what's going on in the world. At this point I'm mostly convinced that if sites like this one didn't exist, a lot of people would know a lot less about current events.
But still, Yahoo always seems to have these ridiculous articles that might as well be titled 'How To Snag A Man, Because You're A Woman And That Is All You Should Want'.
For instance (this is just from today): 10 Beauty Tricks That Make Guys Melt, The 5 Outfits Guys Secretly Hope You'll Wear. Then from there you can click such handy links as: 10 Things He's Thinking When You're Naked, Help! It's Been 6 Months and My Boyfriend Hasn't Changed His Status On Facebook to 'In A Relationship'!, Sex Tip From a Guy: Tickle Him Hello!. In fact, there's a whole section titled 'More About What Men Want'.
If a man is thinking anything other than, "Wow, I'm lucky this beautiful woman chose me," when you're naked, here's a hint: Put your clothes back on and leave. (There are obvious exceptions; I mean, you're naked, so he's bound to have some other thoughts.)
You'll note that a lot of the content here comes from Glamour.com. Apparently it's glamourous to be so self-conscious that instead of doing your makeup how you want, you should check that article and consider what he wants to see.
I'm clearly not against a woman putting effort into her appearance and perhaps taking into consideration what her partner might enjoy, but there's a line between that and dressing for someone.
It really irritates me most of all what these articles make women think. 'Should I care more about how I dress around him?' 'Should I make him change his status on Facebook after x amount of weeks?' (The insinuation that the measure of how serious a relationship is, is whether or not it's on Facebook is just mind-boggling to me. Two words: Grow up. If you're worried about him not being serious enough, suck it up and have a conversation.)
So, great. Magazines and media that make like they're 'empowering' women and encouraging them to be fearless are publishing articles which just create doubt and portray women as being paranoid and/or neurotic when it comes to relationships. Be a fearless woman, except make sure it's okay with your boyfriend, first.
Maybe I'm taking it too seriously, but you know what? It is serious.
Another thing that bothers me about these articles is that they completely disregard the LGBT community. All these articles are about women and men, no substitutions, and I can guarantee these media outlets are missing out on a lot of readership by ignoring such a large group of people. (I remember working for a magazine and one of the feature articles we published was a profile of the home of a lesbian couple. Our editor considered pulling the article before print, worrying about alienating our 'traditional readers'. Things got heated in the boardroom that day.)
I believe that if these magazines want to say they're for women, they should include all women. That includes ones who don't give a shit what any man (or any person) thinks of them. It should include women who like other women; women who don't want babies; women who do want babies; women who want babies but not husbands; women who are married to their work; women of every colour, shape and size; women who don't want to exercise and ones who do; women who love food and drink; women who play and watch sports; women from every economic bracket.
See what I'm getting at here?
Too many magazines and websites are all about 'how to look pretty and get a boyfriend', and I honestly can't think of one example of how that's getting us anywhere.
This post is archived under
feminism
Post a Comment