JessamyCosmopolitan-saviour, or devil's spawn?
April 5th 2008 04:26
Look, I believe that Cosmopolitan is the bane of female existence. However, I would be somewhat flattered if one day I could write for them (Mia Timpano style, of course, not 'Why high waisted jeans look good on any body shape, exclamation mark!).
Cosmo can be seen as both one of the best things that have happened for women, or one of the worst. And this mostly depends on what page you're on, as I found out when I started seriously reading Cosmo. And yes, seriously reading Cosmo was a task.
But before I start getting stuck into Cosmo, I'll say the 'pleasures' that I derive from this magazine.
I've read Cosmo for years, probably since Year 8. Which I would argue now was probably a bit toooo early for someone to be reading about the benefits of foreplay and the reverse cowgirl position. I remember the first issue I bought had Holly Valance on the front, and there was some article on lesbians, or strip teases in there. My friends and I read it on the way back from a school trip to Melbourne, while two other kids hooked up in the back seat. And this was a Catholic school. Anyway, so I've been a devoted reader, up until about last year.
The pleasures I originally derived from Cosmo were mostly as an information source-as a teenage girl, I was learning a lot of stuff from there. I was a devoted sealed section reader, and I loved the 'real life' sections. So there was what I would argue an educational purpose to my reading.
I would also say that I drew pleasure simply from being a Cosmo reader. There's an image that anyone reading Cosmo must be sassy, smart, sexual (to a degree) and fashion-wise (which I'm not, not really. Unless they include jeans and a t shirt as 'fashion savvy'). So I enjoyed being thought of as these things.
The meanings I derive from Cosmo? Okay, well the meanings I used to draw from Cosmo depended, as I said before, what issue it was, and what page I was on. I believe the magazine is so contradictory, and can be interpreted in so many ways-there's no one real way to look at it. A magazine, as a rule, has a number of different articles, sections, and things to focus on. Overall, I suppose you could say that Cosmo is supposed to empower women, but at the same time things such as body image and the fashion industry are highlighted in so many different ways-it's kind of a 'pick what opinion you want' today thing. So the meanings I derived from Cosmo varied, but here are some of the reoccurring ones:
-I'm not blonde. Most of their models in their fashion shoots are either blonde, or vaguely brunette. Or they were brunette, and dyed their hair blonde. For me, all this rules out is a career in modelling, but it also presents a certain image to blondes, too.
-I should feel empowered after reading this magazine. Mostly, I just feel like I should go to the gym-which is crazy, coz half the time when I read Cosmo, it's now at the gym. But, I should be feel empowered, and one of those mystical Cosmo women that are out there changing the world, one high heeled step at a time.
-I should also, obviously, be hetero, or at least bi, sexual. Cosmo caters to women that are into men, and I would argue, apart from the occasional article on 'Have you ever kissed another woman', there's nothing really there for embracing all women. There's a whole damn section on 'Men', but not much else.
The habits of my trashy magazine addiction? Well, as I mentioned before, I had a tendency to read Cosmo in the gym. I've done this for about three or four years, and it's a combination of a motivation and also something requiring little attention. Recently, I've been trying to break my addiction, and therefore I donated all my old magazines to the gym, so I can just re-read my own magazines-and the boys were thrilled. But in the peak of my addiction, every month I would buy Cosmo, Cleo, Madison, Marie Clare, Jmag, and sometimes Vogue or New Idea. That's almost $40 a month on reading material. I've since managed to go almost cold turkey, and now only read Jmag, Frankie, and sometimes Marie Clare or Madison, but never both. So my habits were very, very bad. And it was a vicious, never ending cycle, because there was always a new issue!!
Okay, nowfor some self criticism. I can't believe I readily ate up some of the crap that was in there. Not to mention the fact that every month there'd be an actress, singer, or a model on the front cover. Whatever happened to other inspiring women? The Australian of the Year, Tanya Major, got a brief mention in one of their articles, but she never scored the front cover. Also, the women on the front tend to all have a similar body type. Occasionally, they'll feature someone like America Ferrara, or Beyonce, to highlight that Cosmo has a 'body love' policy-but then they feature the same skinny models in their photoshoots. And then, also occasionally, drop in one woman who's a size or two bigger, in order to reinforce their 'Body Love' point. But I readily ate some of this up, and read the magazine religiously. There are so many different images presented with Cosmo, but it's only variations on the same theme.
All in all, I now cannot go near a magazine such as Cosmo without twitching. Thoughts?
| 81 |
| Vote |
Shared on
Subscribe to this blog
