By Maria Padhila
This past week marked the death, at age 90, of an icon that points out so many of the contradictions in women’s sexual expression. I’ve been calling Helen Gurley Brown, editor and founder of the modern version of Cosmopolitan magazine and author of Sex and the Single Girl and several other books, a feminist for about 30 years now, and that never fails to get at least a raised eyebrow.
What is it that people don’t like about what Brown did, said and advocated? Her detractors have some legitimate points. Many look at her accomplishments and wonder: This is progress? Really?
• She objectified males by using them as centerfolds and by making sometimes bizarre assumptions about what ‘men’ want.
• She and her magazine issued inane and repetitive ‘advice’ about sex, much of which centers on pleasing men.
• She and her magazine gave career advice that was more focused on looking the part than negotiating for real power. Real power doesn’t mean showing cleavage, right?
• The whole philosophy of her books, career and magazine (whose images were about as closely held as the Mars candy company) were bent on gaming the system through feminine wiles, not changing the system.
• Her products presented an image of only one kind of female beauty — made up, cat-eyed, big-busted, slender everywhere else. It’s the kind of beauty only your small disposable income can buy.
Why do I call her a feminist? Here are a few reasons: