COSMPOLITAN magazine is pretty weird-it always has lots of articles on sex and lovemaking. My question: is it accurate?
It seems like every month has new dir3ections for mind-blowing sex. Ladies: has “Cosmo” provided a lot of useful into to you?
srsly?
what is the difference between sex and lovemaking?
Is the latter more tender and emotional?
No, just more expensive.
And while we’re on that note, what’s up with all the naked and nude ladies in Playboy?
It p0rn for chicks.
Cosmo doesn’t have “new” directions for mind-blowing tricks every month. More like they re-do the same ones every few months with a different spin on the article.
I subscribed to Cosmo for a couple of years - to fool myself into thinking I was learning stuff I could have learned if I had a big sister - and figured out after a short while I had learned everything Cosmo had to say. They were just re-hashing themselves.
I’ve always browsed through my sister and SO’s collection (in a cunning scheme to penetrate the female psyche) and they seem to regurgitate the same material over and over again.
It has makeup tips and articles on other misc feminine topics as well.
Sex sells, and women are buying too I guess.
Because, obviously, Mankind has been doing it wrong since Genesis! Thank goodness we have Chief Editors, PR, Marketeers, and Sponsors to set us straight! Whew!
Even worse…why are such scum-sucking magazines still in business??? I guess there’s a cork-sucker born every minute! 
Yet, paradoxically, we emphatically deny to the end of the earth that Freud was, indeed, wrong about sex being the prime and sole motivator. (Nope, folks, not even money.) The more open-minded Jung argued with Freud, his teacher, that there were alternate motivations tantamount to sex, like money, but Freud wouldn’t hear of it.
The secret to mind-blowing sex is no secret at all. Note: it’s called mind-blowing sex for a reason.
What Zipper said. It isn’t a lot of articles on sex, there’s just a couple that they rehash over and over. Why? Well, somebody buys it. I did back in my younger more naive days.
I remember reading an article (and thank Og this isn’t GD since I don’t have a cite) that says they get some guy to give pointers, and then throw them out. I’ve seen few of these articles when my daughter brings one home, and haven’t been wildly impressed.
On the other hand, I can’t say they’re wrong. But it is more like a magazine giving tips on getting the starving person in your family to say yum at dinner. 
I find that true of many periodicals which cater to a fairly narrow audience. I don’t buy all those WWII magazines anymore because they pretty much can’t tell me anything I don’t already know about the war. Cosmo is kind of more broad-based in its appeal but you get my point.
My theory is this:
It’s the only way the Cosmo writers can get their boyfriends to actually have a conversation about sex.
For the article!
That they’re writing!
It’s going to be the next issue!
Really!
So, tell me, really, what are your fantasies, honey?
I need to know.
My theory is that the content of Cosmo doesn’t change, but that the audience members do. Each individual reader only reads it for a few years, but is then replaced by a new reader.
The advice in those columns isn’t bad, it’s just too vague and generic to be especially helpful.
My theory is that men will get to their happy place from sex every time (OK, it may not be the happiest ever, but it will be a successful evacuation), whereas women have wildly different experiences in that regard. Advice in this area will always be in demand, because for most women, it probably remains an issue for their entire sexual career, just like with most fat people, weight remains an issue for their entire lives.
This is absolutely true. You also want to keep in mind that while Cosmo may ostensibly be aimed at adults, in reality, their actual demographic is 15 - 20 year olds. “Women” who can still be fooled by a teaser like “Sexual positions so new you’ve never heard of them!!!” *Really * now? Someone, just this minute, thought up several *entirely new * sexual positions that somehow occurred to no one in thousands of generations of humanity? I MUST KNOW!!!
My biggest issue with Cosmo’s sex articles, especially given their demographic, is that a disproportionate number of them seem to be not about “how to have the best sex of your life” but "how to provide the best sex of his * life". I’m all for both giving and getting great sex, but like everything else in Cosmo, the sex articles are mostly about reminding women to never, EVER forget that they’re primary goal in life should be getting and keeping a man.
*Oh, and buy stuff. Don’t forget to buy stuff!!! How can anyone *ever * love you if you don’t have the right stuff?
Lovemaking is what a woman does while a man is fucking her.
My feminist leaning bookclub has invited the men on occation - and possibly the most successful co-ed bookclub the book was an issue of Cosmo.
It was interesting. But what was amazingly interesting was that issue had one of the best articles (this was probably 10 years ago) on women under the Taliban that I’ve read. Better than the article in Ms. I’d read earlier.
Like Playboy, its mostly consumerism and sex and shallowness - but like Playboy, on rare occations it can be actually good.
And I really don’t know if Cosmo deserves to be singled out - though I once did. Good Housekeeping gets rid of (most of) the how to thrill him in bed, and has you thrilling him with your mad household management skilz. And all magazines - from Bride to Golf, are really rewriting the same articles over and over again.
(Ten New Ways Improve you Swing, Ten Out of the World (and Out of the Way) Honeymoon Spots Discovered!)