Debunking Cosmo and Similar Women’s Magazines

A public service for women who desire dating quality men: From a man who does not seek a Cosmo woman
By NonCosmoGuy

In today’s world, dating seems utterly daunting. I think I finally figured out why. Recently, I decided to go to the source many women turn to for dating advice – Cosmopolitan and similar women’s magazines. Why I didn’t try this sooner is beyond me. I never gave such magazines any credence. Then, a woman told me she spends tons of time reading Cosmo. So, I decided to peruse Cosmo’s online website and attempt to ascertain if Cosmo was doling out bad information. As a guy, my analysis is that Cosmo is giving out some bad information. Unfortunately, women seem to be taking it to heart. This, I believe, is why dating is so daunting in today’s world. So, women, I urge you to stop taking the advice of Cosmopolitan and similar women’s magazines.

Once on the Cosmopolitan website, I found myself reading an article titled, “How to Get Hit On All the Time.” The alleged goal of the article is to help women be irresistible to men without saying a word. I take umbrage with aspects of the article. The article unequivocally states, “Yes, men find heels sexy.” It is in no way true that all men find heels sexy. To me, a woman wearing long heels is sending three messages about herself – she’s impractical, insecure and materialistic. All three traits are turn-offs. There is nothing practical about balancing on a pair of 4 inch heels all night. When I see you teetering on those stilettos, I wonder what other impractical decisions you make. I also wonder why you feel the need to wear such obtrusive footwear. It is only natural that I come to one of two conclusions – either you are insecure with your height or you are materialistic. Both traits are turn-offs and will encourage me to avoid you.

In a very short period of time while perusing the Cosmopolitan website, I came across two articles that claimed a stunning fact. “How to Attract Better Guys” and “7 Signs He’ll Never Marry You” both claimed that romance early on is a bad thing. The former article claimed romantic dates were a form of over-compensation, while the latter article suggested romantic dates indicate the man is trying to hide the woman. I could see how a jaded woman could come to such conclusions, but to rule out guys simply because they try to romance you is the exact opposite of what I would suggest. The articles in question were written by women (Molly Fahner and Niki Evans) whom I have no knowledge of, being brand new to Cosmo. However, to this man, they sound like jaded interpretations on dating.

I decided to do a little bit of research into the aforementioned authors and found that the Niki Evans article is also posted on MSN titled “7 Surprising Signs He’ll Never Marry You.” It appears I am not the only man that has issues with the article. The comments attached to article suggest the article encourages women to “jump to conclusions,” instills fear in women and encourages them to “overanalyze every little detail of what the guy does.” Other comments called the article “incorrect,” “stupid” and “trash.” One man displayed his dissatisfaction by saying, “These kinds of articles really frustrate me.” Another man who encouraged seeking the truth and asking questions (as opposed to making assumptions) said, “This drivel packed article needs to be jammed into the bowels of magazines like Cosmo and not cluttering up the web.” Since Cosmo is where I originally found the article, I suppose that is a fitting end comment to this article, as well as a great segue. It is for these men – and the women who are unduly influenced by such lowbrow articles – that I am debunking Cosmo, similar magazines and, apparently, in this case, MSN. I fear that if I must debunk the entire World Wide Web, my job may be a lot more difficult than I first imagined.

My Perspective on Charlie Sheen Does a 180

I previously supported Charlie Sheen and his Sheenisms. I laughed as he mocked the media and broke free from corporate control. I even applied to be his winning intern and wrote an article titled, “Top Ten Reasons Charlie Sheen Should Hire Me To Be His Winning Intern.” In the article, I called myself bi-Sheen. If that’s not the sign of a supporter, then I don’t know what is.

However, today I learned of Charlie Sheen’s attempt to trademark 22 catchphrases. The thing that really bugs me is his attempt to trademark common words and phrases that no one has any right to own. Period. So, I’ve written an article explaining that “I Rescind My Support of Charlie Sheen.”

Find Writing Prompts Wherever You Can!

Anything can be a writing prompt. Just look at your shoe. There’s probably something interesting stuck to the bottom of your shoe. That can be your writing prompt for the day. Today, I found two writing prompts on two different forums, each leading to one idea. One prompt was a thread about underage facebook usage, while the other was actually a blog post now that I think about it, but it was linked to from a writing forum. The latter merely said, “Just start writing.” It said I could even plagiarize the first line if I had to, as long as it got me writing and assuming I later deleted the plagiarized line. Plagiarism is bad folks, unless it’s used as a writing prompt and, subsequently, deleted.

Anyway, what I’m saying is, anything can be a writing prompt. So, let that homeless man that begged you for money today be your writing prompt. Or, let the glass you stepped on, cutting your foot, be your writing prompt. Because, the important thing is not where or how you start, but that you actually start. Because (wow, I can’t believe I’m starting two sentences in a row with the word “because”) once you get started, it is easier to keep going. Creativity can not flow as well if you don’t turn the faucet on first.

When I began writing today, I had no clue what I was going to write. I ended up writing a short story. And, to be perfectly honest, I think it is cute and adorable. It also comes from personal experience, to a degree. This is another helpful point – it is often easier to write what you know. I know it’s a cliche, but it’s a cliche becasue it’s true. Take that fact and embrace it. Trust me. It’ll work.

Now, if you still don’t know what to write about try banana goat pie. Why? I don’t know, other than the fact that it was the first silly thing to pop to mind. Best of luck. Remember: keep on writing. Because I said so (and because I just started another sentence with the word “because”). Now, I’m off to see what’s attached to the bottom of my shoe.

Truthiness to the Rescue

Editor’s Note: I am not against Yahoo, I am merely for truth.

The vast majority of the sports world is familiar with Peter King’s recent gaffe involving an interview with Roger Goodell. The full story is available in this week’s “Sports Illustrated.” We all know, Peter King made an error by adding “[Steelers]” when NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell was NOT referring to just Pittsburgh Steelers players.

A couple days ago, I posted about Yahoo Sports running with the Dan Wetzel article “Goodell unfairly rats out Steelers over Big Ben,” in spite of the fact that Peter King retracted and corrected his error. As I said before, I think Peter King handled the situation rather well, given the circumstances.

Yahoo since amended the aforementioned article with an Editor’s Note. The note states, “Editor’s note: Sports Illustrated writer Peter King issued a clarification on a quote attributed to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell regarding Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger.” However, the content, tone and message of the article “Goodell unfairly rats out Steelers over Big Ben” remains the same. In other words, it still bashes NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell for throwing the [Steelers] under the bus. But, I ask you, if the commish never said [Steelers] (as SI’s Peter King points out) why are Yahoo Sports and Dan Wetzel still trying to throw Goodell under the bus?

In my opinion, an editor’s note is the lazy way out. The article should be amended or removed. I feel like I’m learning the true colors of the players in this game and, in this regard, Yahoo’s actions have disappointed me.

Happy Black History Month

Happy Black History Month everyone.

In other news, Yahooo is still running (as of 2:30 pm est) with their article “Goodell unfairly rats out Steelers over Big Ben” by Dan Wetzel, in spite of the fact that Peter King issued a clarification statement (at 10:23 pm last night) about what Goodell actually said.
For the real and latest story, read Peter King’s “Mailbag: Answering questions on Goodell/Roethlisberger clarification.” I think Peter King has handled his error quite well. Unfortunately, certain others fail to see they’ve even made an error.

The author of this post has a slight conflict of interest, in that said author might be shooting said self in the foot by posting this. However, the truth is not always fun.

Stalker, Stalker, Stalker!

I’m taking it old school now; all the way back to August 29th, 2008. Yes, I’m going that far back for this piece I wrote about stalkers:

Why You – As a Writer – Need a Stalker

Notes From a Writer Seeking a Stalker

Stalkers are typically frowned upon. Both in terms of being a stalker and having a stalker. I agree that being a stalker does not pay dividends. However, as an Associated Content Writer – or writer for other internet sites – you need a stalker. You may ask, “Why would I need a stalker, let alone put up with one?” Well, putting up with a stalker is not really a choice. A stalker is typically persistent and determined. Stalkers can potentially be slowed down by restraining orders, but a true stalker will find a way to circumvent a restraining order. In the internet age – which I seem to discuss ad nauseam – stalkers can be beneficial, even if simultaneously abhorrent.

As a writer, there is a good chance you have a blog. A stalker will provide hits to your blog on a daily basis. After all, it is a stalker – stalking is what they do. Furthermore, a stalker may post comments, which, more often than not, lead to heated discussions. Why settle for boring discussions when you can have heated stalker discussions? These comment discussions will lead to increased traffic on the blog – in addition to the increased traffic the stalker provides on a daily basis. Increased internet traffic potentially leads to additional stalkers. Why restrict yourself to one stalker when you can let the work of many stalkers exponentially benefit you and your writing? Read More >

On Writing (And Blogging… But Mostly Writing)

I don’t feel like I have anything worth saying.  Granted, I’ve written humorous stuff in my day, but the type of writing that really gets me going as been different, not humorous.  Don’t get me wrong, I like the humorous stuff – it all has it’s place.  However, when you’re trying to write a meaningful psychological drama and you feel like you have nothing worth saying – writing – it cramps your style.  So, my style is utterly cramped right now.

I’ve done a lot of questioning about writing lately… and a lot of non-writing.  One of the main things that keeps going through my head over and over is: “What do I have to say that is worth reading or watching (given a script).”  The other is: “Is this ever gonna work out?”  And, “What am I doing?”  Where am I going?  I don’t know.

The one thing I know is – as my writing goes, so goes my blog.  Neither has really gone anywhere lately.

It’s About Time (Not About Clocks)

MJ raised a valid question when she asked “Are you still alive in there?” in the comment section of my last blog post.  (My las blog post was over a week ago.)  I think this is a good question for multiple reasons.

First, if a blogger were to die, how would blog readers know?  The blogger would, obviously, not blog about dying (or would they?).  Second, I find interesting the phrase “in there” which undoubtedly refers to “in the computer” or “in the internet.”  I just find that interesting – the concept that bloggers exist within a piece of technology, or a web of it, for that matter.

What’s the point?  I don’t know.  To let you know I’m alive, I guess.  So yeah, I’m alive.  Then again, if I was kidnapped, perhaps my kidnapper could be posting this blog to keep y’all unawares.  Hmm.  The possibilities seem endless – I blame MJ. 

So, what have I been doing?  Writing informative, educational, humorous and possibly deceptively misleading titled articles, like this one: “What is Cornhole?  And How Does it Involve a Woody?“

As Promised…

Awhile back, there was a little brew ha ha relating to copying written words.  Much of the aftermath was documented in the Michael Phelps is Six for Six commenting section.  I think all the information is availabe there if you’re interested.  Anyway, I said I would write an article, inspired by the incident.  Well, I followed through… although this posting is later than anticipated.  Without further ado (or side notes to self) …

United States Copyright Law: Fair Use, Copyright Infringement and Plagiarism
Are You Breaking the Law on an Internet Forum or Message Board?
View more »

A Little Something To Entertain You On This Long Holiday Weekend – You Might Learn Something Too

Why You – as a Writer – Need a Stalker
Notes From a Writer Seeking a Stalker
View more »