COLUMN: "Scotch on the Rocks"

From Debra Pickett's "Studs In Strange Places," Spring '92. In case you haven't yet had a chance to pick it up, the April issue of Cosmopolitan magazine is available at your local newsstand. You can spot it by checking out the cover photo of a large breasted woman in a silver bikini top, a lot of makeup and little else. "Daniela," the "Cosmo girl" in question, tells us in her auto-bio sliver that she is not a fan of air travel since, she says, "I bloat up, [and] my skin gets dry." But, fear not, bitter feminists. While Daniela may not be the voice you'd chose for the modern women's movement, the editor of Cosmo is a feminist. So the bimbo on the cover is okay. In fact, any degradation of women is acceptable as long as you call yourself a feminist while you're doing it. Helen Gurley Brown, editor and long-time Cosmo girl herself, writes that, in her magazine, she focuses on "all worlds, dealing each month with money, travel, health, diet, celebrities, movies, books, beauty, fashion, food, decorating and fiction." By the way, the emphasis on "all" is hers, not mine. I personally had not realized that technology, science, politics, fine arts and philosophy were not counted among all worlds. Perhaps it was an oversight on Brown's part. After all, she writes, "Cosmo is a feminist magazine." Why, then, the cover model? "A Cosmo woman likes being a sex object as long as she is also the object of respect and appreciated for other attributes." I guess I'll never be a real Cosmo woman, since I've never actually found much enjoyment in being an object of any sort. I probably don't have the tits for it, anyway. I think that what Helen Gurley Brown and her followers have been missing is that being a woman does not excuse you from sexist behavior. Just as being a man does not preclude one from being a supporter of feminism, being a women does not preclude one from being a supporter of sexism. The degradation of women is simply not acceptable . . . no matter who is doing the degrading and what they call themselves. Which brings me to the subject matter in this month's Cosmo. Once I got past the free sample of anti-wrinkle cream and the erotic perfume ads -- is this for men, too? Or am I supposed to be excited by scantily clad anorexic chicks? -- I found that the "articles" in Cosmo were just as loathsome as the ads, which is quite a feat. Sure there were ads that pushed "natural" makeup that one can wear "all the time" and explained how fuller lashes would improve the quality of a woman's life, but there were articles -- oh, there were articles -- that were far worse than any demeaning sales tactic. Cosmo, being a feminist magazine, has an "Agony" column, in which we over-emotional, teary, whiny womenfolk get to vent our many traumas. The first letter was from a woman who wrote: "I've never reached orgasm with my lover, although I've always pretended to for his sake." The answer to her "agony" begins: "There are still women around who advocate faking orgasm . . . " It makes me wonder. Who are the women in charge of the fake orgasm advocacy movement? I can just picture them writhing around and moaning in the middle of some street, demonstrating for their cause. Of course, the Cosmo girl has a job -- she is, after all, thoroughly modern -- and so, this month's Cosmo featured "25 Ways to Safeguard Your Job in the Recession." The "layout" -- if you'll pardon the pun -- included a picture of a woman wearing a low-cut jacket and miniskirt, her long, bare legs propped up on a desk. Gem of advice #5 reads, "Always say yes." If only Anita Hill had been a Cosmo girl. When she comes home from work, the Cosmo girl is, of course, swept off her feet by her lover, the modern man. In revealing "10 Myths About Modern Men," Cosmo tells us that it is a myth -- #2 in fact -- that modern men are breast-obsessed. This statement is followed by the article on "How to Glorify Your Bosom," which suggests taping one's breasts together to make them appear larger. If modern men aren't obsessive about breasts, maybe Cosmo means to tell us that modern women should be. Or maybe masking tape on your flesh is a part of feminism I've been missing. I find it disgusting that Helen Gurley Brown can edit a "feminist" magazine that perpetuates almost every notion that the modern feminist movement has rejected. In calling herself a feminist, Brown insults every woman who has ever worked to end sexism. In taking the name of feminism, but none of its principles, she gives people an excuse not to change. By allowing sexism to be called feminism, she allows exploitation to continue in the name of womanhood. I've heard too many young women say, "Well, I support women's rights and all that but I'm not militant or anything." They scamper about, all cuteness and "feminity" -- and nobody's threatened because God forbid someone gets angry. God forbid one of us is pissed off about the structural male chauvinism that still exists in this country that keeps us from political and economic success. If we got angry, the men might run away -- see the April article on "Getting Him to Commit." If we decided that taping our breasts together and faking our orgasms were just plain stupid ideas, we might not be treated as sex objects anymore. And then we wouldn't be Cosmo girls. · Debra Pickett is a freshman English major from Franklin Township, New Jersey. Studs in Strange Places appears alternate Mondays.