You are here: UK Essays » Essays » Media » Sex Cosmopolitan Magazines

Cookie Information

Privacy Information

Free Essays - Media Essays

Sex Cosmopolitan Magazines

Results and Analysis

Sex and Relationships

A semiotic analysis of the articles that were randomly picked from the three magazines found that a great emphasis is put on sex, and the quality of sex readers are getting. For example, Cosmopolitan’s article ‘The Ultimate Objects of your Desire’ (Appendix X), presents a poll of the top ten ‘sexiest men at work’. Ten women are asked to share their own personal sexual experiences about men with specific jobs. All ten experiences are presented in a purely sexual way, commenting only on how good the sex was with that particular man.

The importance that is placed on finding and enjoying good sex is something that is present within all three magazines. Both Company and Glamour have similar articles; Company’s ‘Have Holiday Sex Everyday!’ (Appendix X) encourages readers to seek out their ‘best ever sex’, and Glamour’s article ‘What Kind of Sex are You Having?’ (Appendix X) is solely concerned with the reader’s sex life.

The overstated emphasis that is put on sex within all three magazines supports McRobbie’s (1996, p.177) argument that sex ‘sets the tone, defines the pace, and shapes the whole environment’ of women’s magazines.

Structured interviews held with writers from each magazine however highlighted an opposition to this interpretation. Each interviewee stressed the importance of other topics within the magazine including politics and careers. Features director at Cosmopolitan, Andreina Cordani said: ‘just as most women don't see sex as the be-all and end-all in life, neither do we.’ This is further supported by features within each magazine that are focused on other issues including careers (Appendix X), and politics (Appendix X).

These subjects are treated seriously and responsibly, and provide readers with advice on various issues including tips on how to climb the career ladder, and how to successfully campaign politically. Although largely outnumbered by content about sex, the inclusion of other serious issues indicate that magazines can, in some areas, provide ‘half a feminist message’ to women that would not otherwise receive it (McRobbie, 1994, p. 163).

The treatment of sex when it does come up is open and direct, if at times somewhat explicit. One night stands and casual sex are trivialised, and almost celebrated in some cases: ‘when the chemistry’s right, a one-night stand can turn into one of the best sex sessions of your life’ (Company, August 2007, Appendix X). Later on in the same article the writer describes the ‘buzz’ a woman gets from a ‘meaningless sexual experience’.

Cosmopolitan is similar in its delight for casual sex with nine out of ten sexual experiences described in one article (Appendix X) as one-off sexual encounters. Another article ‘My Damsel in Distress Gave me a Raunchy Relay Romp’ (Appendix X) gives the description of a one-off sexual encounter between a man and a woman at the side of a road. It is written from the perspective of the man in an exciting and almost bragging way that assumes readers will be impressed by the story, and wanting of a similar experience themselves.

Words such as ‘romp’, ‘shagging’, and ‘humping’ are used to describe sex and sexual acts in all three magazines, which support McRobbie’s (1996, p.192) suggestion that the sexual tone within women’s magazines has become ‘strong’ and ‘frank’.

The findings support Giddens (1992, p.1-2) argument that the assured and uninhibited sexual tone within the three magazines represent a new democratic form of intimacy. Sexuality is released from a heterosexual, monogamous hegemony and replaced with a ‘sexual pluarlism’ that is characterised by individual choice. He argues the ideological focus has shifted from romantic love to sexuality.

The decline of ideologies in romantic love to be replaced by sexuality is also demonstrated by the treatment of men within each magazine. Men are spoken about in terms of how attractive their body is and how well they perform in bed; ‘I could tell just by looking at him that he had a great body. When we got back to my flat, I found out he knew exactly how to use it, too’ (Cosmopolitan, March 2007, Appendix X).

This treatment of men within the sexual features of the magazines is a common theme that runs throughout all three. In Company’s article ‘Boyzilian’ (Appendix X), men are referred to as ‘geezers’, and how men’s penises should look is the main topic of discussion. Glamour’s article ’15 Things we Love about Men’ (Appendix X) features six characteristics of men that are purely to do with how they look.

Although there is an emphasis put on one-night stands, and random sexual encounters, relationships are referred to within the features. Admittedly they are often only talked about in the context of sex and how good that particular boyfriend is in bed. However, when they are mentioned they are mostly presented in a positive way. For example an article in Company (Appendix X) describes having a boyfriend as ‘lovely’ and explains sex with that person as ‘tender and loving, with the added, painful knowledge of how sad it would be to ever let this go’. And although relationships are rarely mentioned within the articles analysed for Cosmopolitan, the article ‘What Goes Through Men’s Minds on a First Date?’ assumes women will be having dates and possibly seeking a relationship.

Whilst the majority of relationships are presented in a positive light, it is assumed that readers will have numerous relationships and sexual partners, before ultimately finding their very own ‘Mr right’. An article in Company entitled ‘Eeny, Meeny, Miny, Moe!’ (Appendix X) features a reader choosing between two men whom she had dates with. The introduction says: ‘if we only go for one type of man, could we be missing out on the right man?’ The assumption is made that women are actively seeking out the ‘right’ man.

Casual sex, whilst celebrated in some instances, is presented differently once women reach a certain stage in life: ‘if you’re still looking for Mr Right, single person sex in your 30s can be a bit of an emotional minefield… after decades of mating and dating, you just want the happy ending’ (Glamour, February 2007, Appendix X). The glorification of casual sex in one instance contrasted with the negative portrayal of it in a different circumstance supports Bignell’s (1997, p.56-57) argument that women’s magazines do not promote one ideological position for their readers, and instead ‘the discourses are mixed, sometimes contradictory’.

The insinuation that finding ‘Mr Right’ ultimately leads readers towards their goal of a happy ending is explained by Farvid and Braun’s (2006, p.296) suggestion that women’s magazines reinforce an attitude that believes men are the route to happiness which legitimises and reinforces patriarchal domination. As Durham (1995, p.9) explains, women are urged to ‘shed traditional roles and establish their independence’ whilst being reminded ‘of the overarching imperative of finding a man’.

This is further supported by the emphasis that is put on how to please a man, and the importance of what men think about women which is an overriding theme that runs throughout all three. Each magazine has at least one feature that asks men for their opinions on a range of subjects. For example, Glamour’s feature ‘What Men Really Want’ (Appendix X) asks 50 men what their ‘fantasy partner’ is like, and presents the information in a range of categories including: face, body, style, and personality. Similarly, ’22 Nosy Questions Answered by Real Men’ (Appendix X) asks hundreds of men a range of different questions about sex, infidelity, money, and children. One question asks: ‘Whose clothing style would you most like your girlfriend to emulate?’, and presents four women with a percentage next to them indicating how the men answered.

By the mere presence of this information within each magazine, it is assumed that it is important for readers to know and understand what men like and want in a woman. Gadsden (2000, p.51) argues that the inclusion of ‘real’ men’s views offer access to the ‘truth(s)’ of men’s experiences to a ‘naïve’ female readership. Women therefore are situated as unknowing and in need of input from men in order to fulfil their lives. This supports Durham’s (1997, p.9) argument that although many articles emphasise women’s freedom and determination in seeking out sexual partners, the construction of that sexuality ultimately involves ‘submitting to male desire’.

Gender Representation

The results from the qualitative content analysis show that when men and women are pictured together, men are almost three times (21.8%) more likely to be presented in a functional role than women are (8.2%), (Figure 1). Company magazine recorded the lowest result, with only 2.1% of the pictures analysed showing women performing a function when men were portrayed as decorative. These results support Krassas et al’s (2001) study of Cosmopolitan which found that men were 14% more likely to be portrayed as functional compared to women. The results also indicate that Goffman’s (1979, p.32-35) suggestion that males are more functional within pictures, is correct in this instance.

Figure 1: Function Ranking

Structured Interviews with feature writers from each magazine indicate that within features, writers strive to present an equal portrayal of males and females. However, answers indicate that in some circumstances women may be portrayed as more powerful than men. For example, Cosmopolitan Features Director Andreina Cordani said: ‘women are presented as independent, confident and with the ability to demand what they want from life.’ This ‘demanding’ what they want from life presumably includes men, which places them as passive objects to be chosen by women. Company magazine’s Senior Feature Writer, Katie Mulloy however, admitted that in certain features gender is stereotyped: ‘Sometimes, in terms of features which are to do with marriage and/or children, it is much clearer and more straight-forward to present a generally accepted view of what it means to be a man or a woman.’ Both the content analysis and these findings suggest that women’s magazines continue to portray a stereotyped image of women as argued by Kang (1997, p.984).

Findings from a semiotic analysis of the magazines support this conclusion. Cosmopolitan’s article ‘My Damsel in Distress Gave Me a Raunchy Relay Romp’ (Appendix X) is just one example of the presentation of gender stereotypes that is evident within all three magazines. Immediately the title wording ‘damsel in distress’ implies the woman within the feature is vulnerable and reliant on the male to ‘rescue’ her. The roadside-recovery man, Carl, who is telling the story, explains: ‘Then there are the lone woman drivers.

We’re trained to prioritise them and make them feel at ease. Waiting at the side of the road is a vulnerable position to be in’. This immediately places women in a subordinate and helpless role. Carl then explains how he helps change the woman’s tyre and is rewarded with sex. This portrayal not only presents women as weak and inferior to men in a technical sense, but also places women in the role of a sex object. Similar articles within Company and Glamour place women in submissive roles to men, and suggest it is a woman’s duty to look good for men.

The presentation of gender within the magazines that has been highlighted, support Durham’s (1995, p.18) view that despite claiming to present a ‘woman-centred world view’, women’s magazines ‘conform to rigid and traditional norms’.

however, shows that in 17.7% of the pictures, men and women were portrayed as equally functional. Within Glamour magazine 30.6% of the images portrayed women in equally functioning roles which was 8.1% more than the portrayal of functional men to decorative women. Therefore, whilst images of men in a functional role may be more common than women in the same role, there is certainly still some representation of them in a role that is equal to men.

Also shows that in 52.3% of all pictures men and women were portrayed as equally decorative, when decorative was coded as having no other function other than to look attractive. This figure was as high as 76.3% within Company magazine. The results support previous findings by Krassas et al (2001), which found that in Cosmopolitan 52.6% of images showed men and women in equally decorative poses.

Whilst previous results from the content analysis have indicated women are more likely to be portrayed as decorative and men as functional, Krassas et al (2001, p.760) suggests that such a high result in a category that codes men and women as equally decorative, indicates that since the sexual revolution both sexes are equally likely to be portrayed as objects with no function.

Within all three magazines men and women are pictured equally in the frame in 53.3% of images (figure 2). The percentage of women in pictures that were higher or bigger in the frame (23.1%) is almost equal to the percentage of men in the same position (23.3%), with only a 0.02% difference. Each individual magazine did not fluctuate greatly from these results, aside from Glamour which recorded that 67.3% of the images portrayed men and women as equal within the frame. Goffman (1979)

Argued that height within a frame indicated social weight, power and dominance, and that men will almost always be positioned higher than women. The results from the content analysis suggest otherwise however, and alternatively indicate that men and women are presented with equal social power and dominance. Cosmopolitan was the only magazine that had a higher percentage of men that were bigger in the frame, and this was marginal to the percentage of women that were bigger.

In his study of ‘gender display’, Goffman (1979, p. 57) argued that women more often than men are ‘removed psychologically from the situation at large, leaving them unoriented in it, and presumably, therefore, dependent on the protectiveness and goodwill of others’, he named this ‘licensed withdrawal’. Five gestures were measured to indicate the percentage of licensed withdrawal among male and females within the magazines.

The results support Goffman’s (1979) argument, with 15.1% of pictures showing women as withdrawn in an image, compared to 12.3% of images presenting men in the same way. Glamour magazine recorded the highest result of withdrawn women with 20.4%, compared to only 14.3% of men. When analysing the magazines together, the highest result came from the equally withdrawn category which showed that 43.5% of images presented both men and women as psychologically removed from the situation. An explanation for this result may be the amount of sexual coverage that each magazine featured which often presented both men and women looking at each other rather than looking directly into the camera.

Although there is clearly evidence to suggest the images and features within all three magazines represent traditional gender representations, the data also indicates that men and women are, in some respects, portrayed as equal. As Klassen et al (1993, p.36) predicted, ‘equality portrayals’ are continually rising. This reading of the results supports McRobbie’s (1994, p.163) argument that whilst feminist readings of magazines have concentrated on the ‘seamless text of oppressive meanings held together by ideology’, they have failed to notice ‘the disruptions and inconsistencies and spaces for negotiation within the magazines’. Earlier work by Winship (1987) also dismissed the idea that women’s magazines are only about patriarchal oppression, and instead highlighted their appeal to women and their potential for change.

The results indicate that while magazines do present men and women equally in a very limited sense and show a slight ‘commitment to the equality of men and women’ (Tyler, 2004, P.96), the majority of the content supports findings from a number of studies that argue the ideological underpinnings of women’s magazines conform to ‘dominant social norms’ in the construction of gender.

Nudity and Objectification

Cosmopolitan was coded as the magazine most likely to objectify men and show male nudity with 60.7%) of its pictures of men either fully or partially exposing a sexual part of their body. Objectification was defined as partial or full exposure of any sexually suggestive body parts. Sexually suggestive body parts were coded as: chest, buttocks, pubic hair, and genitals.

Glamour’s data for objectification of men, though still disproportionately high, is more than halved in comparison to Cosmopolitan, with 29.8% of images featuring men displaying them in an objectified manner. The male objectification within Company only differs slightly to that of Glamour with male objectification portrayed within 21.3% of images of men.

Whilst Cosmopolitan’s result of objectification of men is surprisingly high in comparison to Glamour and Company, it is sold to consumers as a magazine that is both liberated and open-minded in its treatment of sex and men, and much of the work carried out on women’s magazines has focused on Cosmopolitan. Davis (1990, p.5) argues its launch in America during the sexual revolution constructed the magazine as ‘sexually liberated’, and using the rhetoric of the revolution it presented sexuality as ‘self-motivated, driven, active, unattached, demanding, free’.

In isolation of Cosmopolitan’s findings, both Company and Glamour show a high result of images that objectify men, when in comparison to previous results. In his comparative study of Cosmopolitan and Playboy, Krassas et al (2001, p.757) found that men were depicted as sex objects in 15.3% of all photos within Cosmopolitan. Glamour’s result of objectification is a 14.5% increase on this figure, and Company’s is 6%.

Structured interviews with feature writers from each magazine support the content analysis findings. All three writers agreed that nudity was an important factor when deciding what images should go into the magazine. Katie Mulloy, senior feature writer for Company said: ‘I think it is inevitable that nudity will become a factor in selection within certain features. It is important to keep our readers engaged with the material, and this means including pictures that are relevant to the feature.’

When asked if the images within each magazine objectified either sex, both Cosmopolitan and Glamour said no. It could be argued that this is due to the negative connotations objectification of either sex could carry for the magazines. Katie Mulloy however said: ‘I believe that men’s bodies are put on display for the viewing pleasure of women within Company and the majority of other women’s magazines ’.

A semiotic analysis of images that accompany features about men and sex, show men in provocative poses often naked or semi-naked. Glamour’s picture of David Beckham (Appendix X) is just one example of this; he is depersonalised by the shadowing of part of his face which signals that his body is the main area of focus and presents him as an object of sexual desire. His body is reclining, with his chest fully on show and his legs parted. The setting is that of a bed which represents a place of sexual activity. Similarly, Cosmopolitan’s feature ‘Real Men Strip Off’ (Appendix X) is based solely on 30 men who pose naked for no other reason than to be viewed by readers.

The language used to describe men’s genitals such as ‘weiner’, ‘nob’, ‘cock’, and ‘dong’ were all used within all three magazines. These terms portray a sexually aggressive attitude to sex and men’s bodies, which present men in a way that is purely sexual.

The objectification of men, and the language used to describe men and their bodies within all three magazines, supports Ticknell et al’s (2003, p.54) theory that as women’s magazine have become more sexually aggressive, the availability of men’s bodies as sexual objects has become ‘central to this emergent discourse’.

The exclusion of any exposure of male genitalia within each magazine, and only partial exposure of pubic hair within Cosmopolitan oppose suggestions that women’s magazines have become like men’s in their representation of nudity and objectification of the body (Davis, 1990, p.5).

Whilst men’s bodies are clearly objectified within the images of all three magazines, content analysis of images of men and women together indicated that in 52.6% of pictures, men and women were equally decorative within the frame. Whilst the category ‘decorative’ was not exclusively defined as objectified, the result indicates to some extent that women are presented in a similar way within the magazines.

This supports findings by Krassas et al (2001, p.760) which indicated that whilst sexualised images of men became more frequent in women’s magazines after the sexual revolution, portrayals of women as sexual objects also increased. Women’s magazines therefore, whilst recognising women as sexual, have not abandoned the view that women are commodities that are designed to attract and be sexually available to men (Farvid and Braun, 2006, p.307).

These results, when looked at in context with the previous findings that suggest traditional gender roles are portrayed, support Machin and Thornborrow’s (2003, 455) argument that although women’s magazines do use sex to represent women as daring and independent, the main ideological focus of the magazines is still based on traditional gender roles. The results also support their argument that women’s magazines create a ‘fantasy world’, which ‘allow a particular kind of agency, mainly sex to signify power’ (p.453).

The use of images within all three magazines that show the availability of men’s bodies in a mainstream context, supports Moore’s (1988, p.47) argument that ‘erotic spectacles have crossed gender boundaries’. The use of nudity and objectification of men also support Mackinnon’s (1997, p.190) argument that women’s magazines present a ‘strong encouragement to a female gaze’.

Sign up and be the first to receive our latest offers: