Cosmo’s At It Again

Yes, you read me correctly. I’m gearing up to rip Cosmo a new one. Again. Sometimes I can’t believe I spent even the $5 on my subscription.

The title of the article in question: “He Didn’t Want to Date Me – He Wanted to Be Me!” complete with a hairy man-leg squeezed into a glittery gold platform pump.

Apparently the girl writing this article (as told by, and whom I will call, Sarah Kennedy) had joined to troll for dick (I’m sorry, this chick just strikes me as a straight up terrible person). She got a message from a supa-sexy Italian man with wavy dark hair. The two met up for drinks at “a cool downtown bar in New York City” (I mean, where else do the beautiful people live?). They had a great night, she was blown away by his manners, and he gave her a nice little peck at the end of their date. Everything seems to be going just fine, right?

They continue to text (their main method of communication), and Chris opens up quite a bit, perhaps even a little too much, showing his trust for Sarah when he tells her he has his nipples pierced and that his father is getting a sex change. Yeah, it’s unfortunate that all of this unfolds over text, but I mean, it is what it is.

Well long story short, Sarah gets blown off by Chris for another date and he tells her that he’s actually out on a date with another man. SHOCKER OF THE YEAR apparently for Ms. Kennedy. She flips out, especially after Chris reveals that he’s actually the one considering getting a sex change.

So why in the world, you may ask, would this transsexual woman interested in men contact a self-proclaimed straight woman for a date? According to Chris, he (I’m using masculine pronouns for now, since that’s how he was referred to in the article, which may or may not be correct according to his preferences. Not that Cosmo would give a shit.) saw Sarah’s profile and immediately fell in love with her style, her dark hair that matched his, and how she did her makeup. Apparently that’s… not ok. In Cosmoland the correct response is “I mean, really? REALLY?” and then turning your phone off.

I’m sorry, if a searching, possibly nervous, transsexual male-to-female individual complimented my style and respected me enough to even want to get advice from me, I would be extremely flattered! Chris put himself out on a major limb revealing all of this to her, and she spit it back in his face. The only thing I happen to sympathize with is Sarah’s statement: “I didn’t join a dating site to find a style twin.” True, quite true, but she also didn’t join a dating site to get messages from douchebags trying to score, which she also undoubtedly received.

Sarah goes so far to as to block Chris from her phone and change her email address. That’s extreme, man.

I’m getting sick and tired of flipping through Cosmo issues, past the beauty and health tricks, and seeing nothing but gender-normative relationship advice (HAHA), problems, and sex tips. Seriously, I’m fed up. For a magazine that advertises itself as and was made famous by open communication about sex, it’s shockingly intolerant. I’m a bit over-sensitive about it I suppose, but reading this article just made me feel gross inside. Ashamed of my generation, the one that pretends to be above such prejudice. Yeah, right. We’ve still got such a long way to go.

Feminist Sexism


I’m not embarrassed to admit that I’m a happy reader of Cosmopolitan magazine. I think that it broke a great deal of ground on openness about female sexuality. I have a year’s subscription that I got for just $5 off Amazon during a sale. I generally enjoy reading Cosmo, but there are certain aspects of the magazine that I just can’t stand. The fact that a great portion of it only caters to straight women is just one of them (come on Cosmo, grow a backbone like Oreo!).

At any rate, I was finishing up reading the July issue (does it irritate anyone else that magazines come out the month before the date they’re labeled for? It’s like new cars that are called the next year’s model), which had Demi Lovato (yeah I’m gonna be honest I didn’t know who she was until now) on the cover in a hideous yellow zipper dress with cutouts, her obvious hair extensions blowing in the breeze. Headlines include “SEX SUN FUN,” “Sex He Craves,” and “Cosmo’s Weird Little Love Rule (It Works!).” I have to flip through four pages of ads before I get to the contents. Let’s turn to page 108, shall we, the “Weird Little Love Rule,” or, why I’m so pissed off right now. All quotes are directly from the article.

“Why He Should Love You – This Much – More Than You Love Him” (This Much in smaller type)

What. The. Fuck.

Excuse me, what did you say? My man should love me more than I love him?

First of all, Cosmo always, and I mean always, assumes that men who are complete assholes are the most attractive to twenty-something-thirty-something women. It’s “a lot easier to fall for the guy who doesn’t acknowledge your existence.” I’m sorry, but I actually enjoy being treated like a human being as opposed to a piece of ass, so stop encouraging us by including the topic in every article. This article apparently needs to assure the readers that a man who loves you more than you love him is still attractive and totally “doable.” Strike one for double sexism.

Secondly, it assures the readers that a man loving you more than you love him is putting the woman in a position of power. It assumes that women think men who are into them are clingy and needy, instead of just falling for them. Even when the article discusses how relationships fluctuate, having less feelings for the other person is considered having “the upper hand.” Like you’re competing with your partner and whoever is more cold-hearted wins. Ever heard of equality in a relationship? Strike two for double sexism.

Also, “experts agree that picking a guy who digs you about 10 percent more than you dig him is smart.” Smart. As in, if we don’t we’re doing it wrong. It must be true because “experts[!]” say so! Strike three for sexism against women, IN A WOMEN’S MAGAZINE!

The last, and perhaps the most frustrating issue I have with this article is that it emphasizes that men who are more into you than you’re into them let you be yourself from the beginning – instead of hiding your true self weeks, months, years before you’re comfortable around him. Did it ever occur to the writer, or the editors, that you should be authentic from the get-go regardless of whether he likes you more or not? If you’re authentic and he doesn’t like you, well sucks for you but at least you didn’t have to waste your time pretending. Strike… four(?) for double sexism again!

If you’ve read the article you may agree with me, you may not. You might feel that I’m oversimplifying it. Yes, it’s true that relationships ebb and flow with time. But authenticity is the most important thing. Cosmo fails in its mission to empower women with some of its articles, like this one, and promotes treating men like cattle. Sex tips are great, health and gynecological information is also awesome in Cosmo. But they should stay away from love because…

Who cares who loves who more in the beginning, the goal is to be happy, healthy, and in-love. It’s not a game. It’s not a competition between men and women. We cannot remove sexism from our society without acknowledging that men and women are EQUAL because they are HUMAN.

Thank you for reading!

%d bloggers like this: