FYI, gams, Maxim and Cosmo are owned by the same company and they frequently work together.

I've enjoyed reading Maxim (before the redesign, I hate the machismo now), but I've never liked reading Cosmo. But the *writers* you speak of? They play both magazines, sometimes.

It's the filter of the 'concept' behind the magazine. The differences are only there because some honcho thinks they should be.

I'm with chinook on this one.

I hate both Maxim and Cosmo. Really. Maxim makes me embarrassed to be a male.

The only "perspective" you can get out of a men's or women's magazine is the perspective of the publisher. These magazines are filled with nothing but shallow, personality-ethic drivel. Save yourself a few brain cells and stop reading them altogether. If you avoid them completely and 90% of television, I think you'll find yourself with more perspective than you'll know what to do with.

It is scientifically proven that males and females use specific parts of the brain more for different activites than the opposite sex therefore they act a certain way.

women like to see what to dress in to look good, men are looking at the women

I've never owned or read a mens magazine, but from thumbing through them in the checkout they seem to be of 2 veins, soft porn with advice gleaned from "that cool guy" everyone knows who gets laid all the time but never has a girlfriend, or pseudo health magazines with mild political and social commentary. My wife however had a subscription to Cosmo for about 4 years and I read it cover to cover occasionally. I used to call it her "self depreciating" women's magazine, because it seemed to be completely designed (from ads to articles) to make women feel like s**t and want to buy crap. I always wondered what pool of gay and or metrosexual magazine staffers they polled when it came to mens "wants, needs, desires, and fantasies in the bedroom". While I never actually computed their fallacy quotient I'd say that for me 90% of their advice was false. Cosmo for a while had totally decided that the ultimate unspoken want of all red blooded heterosexual men was prostate stimulation it was ALWAYS the ultimate no-no turn on. I'm wondering how many poor unsuspecting middle aged man got a surprise fake finger nailed finger in their bum right before they "got there" and how many were subsequently rushed to the emergency room and or rendered impotent. I always found womens magazines totally hilarious.

So far as the dominant passive thing. I live a very passive life. I am dominant in 2 areas, my job (where a certain amount of tactful and gentle take chargedness is necessary) and in the kitchen, I will order ANYONE (including my own mother) out of the kitchen when I am cooking. In all else I'm pretty happily passive and I have no desire to learn to be "more dominant".

If you think other magazines like "Psychology Today" or "The Economist" are different you are mistaken. The quality of journalism took a deep dive in the last decade. The best parts are usually the readers' comments. When a pissed up pro takes the effort to correct at least the worst mistakes of a modern journalist, that results mostly in the best articles to read in any magazine.

I like where you're going with this...

Thats cool. If a journalist messes up an article for one it might still be good for the other :)

Errmmmmmm, you forgot about the
"not exactly total hardcore, but DEFINITELY not soft porn", i.e. Hustler, and then the "completely hard core gloves off nothing but pur pr0n" types.

Timetells likes Cosmo... I read it sometimes but agree that it's very superficial and about how to be more attractive in whatever way to whomever. Dunno about the men's mags, haven't seen one since husband #1, many moons ago.

Mens are mens and womens are only for Mens.....................:)

means there is no identity for women without a men

(post deleted by OP.)

Post deleted by OP.

*stands up and claps*

ignore this post, i've thought better of expressing this sentiment.

*jazz hands!*

You wouldn't call it narcissism. Since the dawn of time men and women have tried to understand each other, it only makes sense that certain ideas and such would develop and certain people would try to give advice about the opposite gender. I don't think it is any bit more self absorbed than giving your kids advice about the real world. You may not know everything, and much of what you say will be a broad generalization, but that is how we try to inform one another when we don't have real answers.

I consider that women much more sexually.

As does society

nice website