And of course while I’m composing that post, Chotii is posting one that does indeed contain significant elemements of “Gee, this is like soft-core porn / yeah, like I’d go out in public dressed like ‘arrest me for indecency’, where the heck could you wear these?”
Yep, that sums it up. I don’t read Cosmo. I used to look at Vogue because my stepmother got it. I was looking at the clothes, haute couture as art, not at the models. If I want to look at hot sexy photoshopped girls I’ll look at DH’s Maxim or FHM.
Sorry, I forgot about the second part of your question. If my husband was looking at a Cosmo magazine, I would assume he was looking at the scantily-clad wimmin; my reasoning for this is why would he seriously read something I don’t seriously read?
The second part of my answer is that he probably wouldn’t look at Cosmo for the girlies, because he doesn’t like women with no womanly curves.
This one.
I also left out the second part of the question, so I’ll answer now: Yep, I’d assume the guy was looking at pretty ladies. And probably looking at Cosmo just because of a temporary shortage of Maxim or Playboy.
I know they SAY they’re about sex - I mean, the cover stories are all about sex, but I’ve never to my memory looked at those pictures and said, “Gee, I think she’s sexy.” I do sometimes mourn the fact that (many) mane think such women are sexy, and I know I don’t look that way, and isn’t it too bad? But then I remember my husband likes me the way I am, so I don’t gloom over it. I’m realistic. I actually think that some of those magazines create the concept of “what is sexy” the same way they promote “what is fashionable this season” and if that’s so, that’s very sad. How sad to make hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of young women think there’s something wrong with them if they’re not Twiggy, or whatever body type they weren’t born with, this season. And by so doing, make hundreds of thousands of young men also think the same thing.
You could extend the same argument to the Victoria’s Secret catalogue, by the way. I know those women are supposed to be sexy in those outfits, in those poses, but all I can do is shake my head and say “That would itch, that would come off in 3 minutes and never go on again, I don’t want to condition my husband to only finding me sexy if I wear something like that.” Shrug. I’m sure if you asked my husband, his opinion would differ. 
Is the typical (heh!) SDMB female part of the target audience for these mags?
I mostly don’t read them anymore (there was a period where I did, just as a break from studying), but when I do it’s Marie Claire… so
It’s a combination of:
“Who pays that much for a skirt? Who earns enough money to pay that much for a skirt? Aren’t those women doing something better with their time than reading Marie Claire?”
“Damn, that’s ugly”
“Cute, but not on me, it would never work”
“Another article on accepting your body - full of tall, thin, gorgeous women.” ((My favorite one of these was titled something like “Three women, Three body types” and the three women were Famke Jennsen, Halle Berry, and Rebecca Romjin-Stamos. What three body types were they? Tall, thin with big boobs; tall, thin, with bigger boobs; and not-as-tall, thin, with huge boobs?))
“I’m way too fat. And hideous looking.”
“Yeah, sure, I could do that with my hair… a team of professional makeup artists couldn’t do that with my hair if they had a week. Much less ‘quickly & easily in 10 minutes.’ Liars. I hate my hair.”
“Apparently something awful is happening to women in <insert third world country>”
“What job do you have that wearing zebra striped halter tops is appropriate for work? Whose careers are these?”
“Why am I reading the relationship article? I’m not in a relationship, I’m not likely to be in a relationship (look at the people in the article), and I’m sure this is crap even if I were. Huh, the men interviewed think she’s approchable. I don’t look like that. I couldn’t look like that even if I tried.”
& etc.
Yeah, I know about airbrushing and photoshopping, and the statistics and the impossible standards, and the feminist reasoning, and the realities of advertising…but at the same time, my self-esteem is crap enough that it does re-inforce my general sense of inadequacy. Ah well.
If I saw Dr.J looking through Cosmo or similar, I’d assume he was doing it for the same reason I look through those magazines–to see what ridiculous bit of crap they’re trying to palm off as confidence and insight, and to marvel that there are people who take these things seriously.
I’m glad to see that someone else has noticed what is going on with that woman’s face. Everyone is always gushing about how gorgous she is, but she just looks more and more strained every time I see her. I’m beginning to feel sorry for her, as ludicrous as that sounds.
A few other things going through my mind when reading fashion mags:
“Yeah…right. Jennifer Lopez gets a body like that just by doing 90 minutes of Ashtanga yoga every other day?? Huh, and she claims to ‘eat normally.’ Right - for her that’s probably a carrot and a piece of lettuce per day. Jeez. I wish my ass looked like that.”
Flip.
“Uh, huh. So, Halle Berry is now the spokesperson for curvy, normal women. And she still wears a size, what, 0? ‘Normal’ my ass! Ah, and here she claims that cheeseburgers are her favorite food. I wonder if she’s even had one since she was five years old. My boobs aren’t nearly as nice as hers. I wonder if she’s had work, or if they’re a gift from god or childbirth.”
Flip.
“They’re calling Kate Winslet fat?!? What the… Alicia Silverstone was considered fat? What the hell is this world coming to? I’m a fucking lardass. I need to go work out.”
Flip.
“Okay, so they’re advertising La Mer body cream that costs…$195 per container?!? Who in their right mind would pay more than $10 for body lotion? Who? And you only get two ounces? I don’t care if it was invented by NASA - I damn well better be getting a lifetime supply for $195. I need to put this magazine down - I feel fat, ugly and poor.”
Are you sure that was Marie Claire? I’ve seen them do body image articles, but they use “real” women, most of whom are far from perfect, and usually overweight. They also did a spread recently about different women and how they looked/felt during pregnancy. None of them were typical models.
I’m aware of the high level of sex in the ads, but I’m also aware that they’re there to sell clothing, and I’m usually looking at the fashions, with an occasional foray into (a) ooo, that half-dressed boy in that ad is pretty or (b) in a clothing ad, shouldn’t someone be wearing clothes?
The only aspect of the highly sexed ads in fashion magazines that bothers me is the trend of photographing women to look as if they are about to be or have just been raped. I find those ads deeply creepy in a way that distracts me from whatever they’re wearing.
I’ve noticed that the only time I ever am truly interested in clothes in magazines is when they’re on normal people. I especially like the features where they re-dress normal women in the right colors and styles for their body types or coloring. Usually the clothes in such features are stuff I (and probably most women) would actually be inclined to wear-- no weird colors or bizarre, unflattering shapes. I like it even more when they show lower-cost (sub $100) alternatives to the clothing they used.
Generally, though, I take little interest in the clothing, designers, feminist value, or personal potential embodied in fashion magazines. I’ve never been big on fashion or trends. I’d say I find 60% of the clothing and accessories I see to just not be my style, and maybe 10% I feel should never be worn by anyone anywhere, for any reason.
Sometimes I’ll admire the aesthetic beauty of the models (er, I check them out), but usually I just look at their jewelry, as making jewelry’s my hobby. Honestly, I don’t think I’ve ever had any really sexual thoughts inspired by Cosmo or Glamour. The wimmins are too skinny. I like boobies, and they’re sorely lacking.
Currently I read Shape and Real Simple. I quit buying Cosmo and Glamour when I realised they were aimed at the woman I wasn’t and never wanted to become. I guess the mags I read now are fuddy-duddy at worst and conservative at best, but that’s fine by me. I had enough superficiality and drama in high school, y’know?
If I saw a guy leafing through these mags, I wouldn’t think him a pervert or anything. I’d assume he was curious, or thought he was gaining insight into women or something. And if he was turned on by them, good for him. That just means he can get his thrills without the shame of being a Smutty Magazine Reader. 
Bi 22 y/o woman.
I occasionally read Marie Claire, it’s slightly more intelligent than the norm, and less sex focussed and air-headed than Cosmo.
Mostly for the stuff at the front, I rarely get as far as the fashion pages.
When I do I usually consider the hypocrisy of a magazine that tries to promote issues such as poverty, child labour, exploitation of women and personal acceptance and self-esteem, and then advertises clothes that cost more than the annual wages of most people in the third world on a 6ft, airbrushed, 16 year old with an eating disorder.
Can you tell I’m not a big fashion person?
Most of those fashion shoots disgust me because of the total lack of a social conscience that they display.
Well this summer is shaping up to be full of fill-up-the-time reading at work, so I’ve been reading much more than my usual of Marie Claire, Glamour, Allure, and Vogue. I avoid Cosmo like the plague because I’m sick of the sex articles and find that most of the rest of the content is uninteresting. So I stick to fashion mags, mostly. It would save me money to subscribe, but I reach critical mass after about five magazines and can’t stand to look at them anymore. They pretty consistently make me feel bad about how I look. Plus, I can’t stand the constant articles that celebrate “real women” who have curves, then there are little statements throughout the magazine by the editor and other staffers, “I’m a size 4 and recently had liposuction to report on it, for you the reader!” :rolleyes:
Oh, and all the fashion spreads of women wearing all black, or all white, or all black and white with red shoes must stop.
This comes closest for me. I usually just tune it out. Most of the poses and faces are absurd, not alluring, but I can get past that. I only found it really jarring when looking at bridal magazines. Somehow it seems very odd to portray brides so sexually. I know that when I was looking for a wedding gown, I wanted something beautiful and flattering, but not something necessarily sexy.
You’re right! I checked, it was Glamour.
…the women I meet read COSMO, but never use those sex tips? They run an article every month about how to improve your orgasms…damn! I EWANT to meet women who wnat to achieve a 2-hour orgasm! Who feel comfotable about having sex in an elevator, and drive their boyfriends CRAZY in bed!
WHERE are these women?
Women tend not to use the sex tips in Cosmo because they alternate between being so basic that they’re not even tips at all to being perfectly ludicrous stuff that makes the men reading over your shoulder exclaim, “Wow, it would really piss me off if a woman did that to me.” We’re talking “be willing to get on top once in a while” or “twist his nipples like you’re dialing a radio, he’ll cream his shorts every time, we guarantee it”, with little to no middle ground. That’s why women don’t follow the sex advice in Cosmo
Heh, I used to buy Cosmo every month for several years when I was a teen. I bought it for the sex. Articles about sex. Stories about sex. Advice on sex. Sexy ads. Probably because I couldn’t get away with buying real porn. Now that I can get away with buying real porn, I never buy Cosmos anymore…
I didn’t even think of Cosmo as a fashion magazine, and tended to skip right over the “boring” sections that were all about clothes. I’d never be thin, rich, or pretty enough to wear the clothes anyway, so why did I care?