Orethapedia

Cosmopolitan is definitely hitting a rough spot.

Today’s Cosmopolitan Magazine has nothing in common, in look or content, with the original magazine that was created in the late 19th century by a company called Schlicht & Field of New York. Named The Cosmopolitan and first published in 1886, it was a wholesome family/women’s magazine.

Mr. Paul Schlicht assured his readers that his magazine was a “first-class family magazine” and “There will be a department devoted exclusively to the concerns of women, with articles on fashions, on household decoration, on cooking, and the care and management of children, etc…”

In March Walmart pulled it from 5000 shelves nationwide.

The National Center on Sexual Exploitation, a Washington-based nonprofit formerly known as Morality in Media, said it had long singled out Cosmopolitan — as opposed to, say, the National Enquirer or other provocative content available in the checkout line — because the Hearst-owned magazine was “targeting young girls with its advertisements.”

“It’s on Snapchat. It has these brightly-colored pink covers,” Haley Halverson, the center’s vice president of advocacy and outreach, told The Washington Post on Wednesday. “There are Disney stars that appear on it and [articles about] the Jonas Brothers and One Direction. … But at the same time, it’s promoting that its young readership engage in sexting, group sex.”

That was in March. Now comes another proverbial nail.

The following is submitted by Victoria Hearst:

God bless all of you good people who acted to protect America’s children and made Cosmopolitan Magazine (aka Cosmo) cancel its vile plan to put its pornography on Snapchat.

My family’s company, the Hearst Corporation, publishes Cosmopolitan, and is solely responsible for the magazine’s disgusting, pornographic content. 

I have tried to persuade the Board of Directors of Hearst to label Cosmo “Adult Material” so that it cannot be sold to anyone under 18 years of age. They have refused.

Now, the Hearst Corporation has tried to expose your children to their pornography on Snapchat. 

Enough!!! Fight Back!!! Contact the Hearst Corporation and ask them to do the right thing: label Cosmopolitan Magazine “adult material” and tell retailers not to sell it to anyone under 18.

Ms Hearst is not the only voice crying out about the ‘pornagraphying‘ of the magazine.

Recent study results, which were published in an article in the Journal of Communication, titled, “A Meta-Analysis of Pornography Consumption and Actual Acts of Sexual Aggression in General Population Studies,” are certain to add to the debate over the negative impact of porn or implied sexual promiscuity and deviancy.

“Consumption was associated with sexual aggression in the United States and internationally, among males and females, and in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies,” reads the abstract. “Associations were stronger for verbal than physical sexual aggression, although both were significant. The general pattern of results suggested that violent content may be an exacerbating factor.”

Ms. Sue Ellen Browder, famed journalist and writer came forth recently with some shocking admissions about life at Cosmo by saying in a recent interview:

I went to work at Cosmo in the early 1970s, but I noticed there that the sexual revolution and the women’s movement were two radically different movements. Betty Friedan called Cosmoquite obscene and quite horrible. Cosmo was promoting the sexual-revolution agenda — it was good to sleep with a married man; good to take the pill; good, or at least necessary, to have an abortion to get ahead if you became inconveniently pregnant. Our Cosmo philosophy turned all traditional values upside down.

Make sure to read the explosive interview in ‘Confessions of a Cosmo Girl ‘.