Last week, Walmart announced it would no longer stock Cosmopolitan magazines in checkout lines, citing a recommendation from a conservative anti-porn group called the National Center on Sexual Exploitation. The group released a statement claiming the removal of the magazine from its present, front-and-center location at Walmart stores is a reflection of #MeToo at work: “This is what real change looks like in our #MeToo culture, and NCOSE is proud to work with a major corporation like Walmart to combat sexually exploitative influences in our society. Women, men, and children are bombarded daily with sexually objectifying and explicit materials, not only online, but in the checkout line at the store,” the group says on its website.
And yet, on the contrary, such a move wholly undermines the most basic function of #MeToo. The movement demands greater representation of women to address the gendered power disparities that have made sexual abuse and exploitation so rampant. Removal of a prominent women’s magazine, which dedicates whole sections to women’s health and career advice, from public, visible places is pretty much the opposite of what #MeToo is calling for.
In either case, NCOSE’s main issue with Cosmo seems to be its candid and unabashed depictions of female sexuality and female perspectives on sex, and this is hardly an isolated incident. Rather, it reflects the overarching trend of censorship and stigmatization of female pleasure in media—a trend that is led by anti-woman entities conflating female sexual empowerment with objectification in order to push their agenda of sexual policing.
What makes Cosmo unique in a media landscape rife with sex, but often bereft of feminist sex, is its focus and prioritization of female pleasure, offering tips, advice, and levels of openness about sex that are a godsend to women in a culture that either stigmatizes or regards their enjoyment of sex as tangential. In 2016, ATTN: reported on the prevalence of the MPAA giving NC-17 ratings to nearly every major film featuring women receiving oral sex, where movies with graphic violence or men receiving oral sex aren’t subjected to the same standards. Many in the industry have noted how NC-17 ratings can be seriously detrimental to a movie’s commercial success, severely limiting representation of female pleasure on-screen.
Movies like Blue Valentine, Charlie Countryman, The Cooler, Boys Don’t Cry, Two Girls and a Guy, and many more films featuring women being eaten out have all received NC-17 ratings from the MPAA. And even in productions that aren’t subject to the same content restrictions and rating systems, imbalanced sexual power dynamics are arguably even more prominent. For example, HBO’s Game of Thrones is famous for nothing if not its rampant nudity, thoughtless rape plotlines, and portrayals of fully naked women alongside fully clothed men.
The commodification of sexual assault and exploitation on the series are even more noticeable alongside the dearth of scenes that portray women in positions of sexual empowerment. A key scene from season 4 that placed female pleasure at the forefront, as Daenerys Targaryen asks Daario Naharis to take off his clothes, immediately cuts off, as the writers declined to show a scene that would have depicted a sexual encounter initiated by a woman in a position of superiority over a man. It should speak volumes that the show has seldom declined an opportunity to make time for scenes in which women are sexually assaulted or treated as objects, but couldn’t do the same for a scene involving female pleasure.
#MeToo has identified greater representation as a key solution to abuse of power and the prevalence of sexual exploitation of women by powerful men. Wider representation of women in positions of institutional leadership would certainly disrupt the “boys’ club” culture and male dominance that enable rampant sexual abuse. But what we also need is a more nuanced understanding of consent, and representation of sex in which women and their bodies are portrayed as more than vehicles for male pleasure. This media norm has had the effect of encouraging the sexual exploitation of women by sending the message that in the act of sex, women are mere objects.
As a publication, Cosmo has flipped the script on this. It features coverage that speaks to the wide range of experiences in women’s lives, from navigating career advancement to how to have good, enjoyable sex and put themselves and their pleasure first.
The debate about the difference between sexual objectification and empowerment for women is not a new one. Speaking of one particular incident, in 2016, the United Nations rescinded its decision to make Wonder Woman an honorary ambassador because of backlash about the character’s sexualized attire. Of course, the debate is a complicated one, and there’s plenty of discussion to be had about why male-produced media aimed at male audiences seldom feature women who aren’t scantily clad, or don’t have patriarchally conceived “perfect” bodies. But all of this goes back to the issue of representation, and the importance of giving more women the decision-making power to determine what is empowering for them as individuals.
Female individuality and the uniqueness of women’s needs and lifestyles are crucial components of Cosmo’s coverage. Relocating the magazine at Walmart locations might not have much of an effect on whether women’s access to the magazine. But the motives that underlie this decision by Walmart show we still have a long way to go in understanding the differences between empowerment and objectification for women, and an equally long way to go in terms of respecting and celebrating female sexuality.
We still exist in a culture in which women are made to feel ashamed not only for having sex, but also for enjoying it. This is the very culture #MeToo is fighting back against, and that’s true no matter the mental gymnastics Walmart and NCOSE go through to contort the movement’s meaning and justify their sexual policing.
(image: Cosmopolitan)
Want more stories like this? Become a subscriber and support the site!
—The Mary Sue has a strict comment policy that forbids, but is not limited to, personal insults toward anyone, hate speech, and trolling.—
