"The REAL Reason He Never Texted" – page 136

A few weeks ago, I was feeling kind of blue, and so my husband took the boys for an outing and came home with snacks and a magazine for me. Cosmopolitan magazine.

Husband: Isn’t that the magazine you always read at the hair salon?

Me: No, that’s People.

Husband: Well, same thing.

No, husband, it is not the same thing, but I will tell you this: Cosmopolitan is much, much more entertaining. For one thing, I never know who anyone is in People unless said “celebrity” is a) a member of the British royal family, or b) is featured in an article entitled “Still Sexy at Fifty!” or similar. Not that I know who any “celebrity” is in Cosmopolitan, either – the cover showcases someone named Demi Lovato and advertises her shocking interview – but fortunately, Cosmopolitan has not changed its format much since I last purchased a copy circa 1994. BEST.SEX.EVER. 42 New Tips! So says the front cover, which is probably what all the cover stories are, and have been since the magazine’s inception.

As an aside, does anyone else find it alarming that we have before us a whole generation of young women who were (possibly) named after Demi Moore? I feel like I’m about one hundred years old looking at this magazine, but of course I’m not the key demographic here. Most of the stories have something to do with back to school fashions, new looks on campus, and this:

I practically had a hilarity overload reading this. Ah, to be young again and want to have sex inside the field-hockey net at the football stadium. Or to hook up with your TA. For the record, neither of those things happened to me – certainly not the TA – I was in economics, after all. I did, however, “work it at the library”, not in order to hook up but I did always wear cute outfits and makeup when I studied. What. I put on nice clothes to go to the grocery store; I’m like an old lady getting dressed up for a nice outing.

There are lots of style tips and advertisements in Cosmo that I found simultaneously alarming and also cute. Here’s an ad for Jordache jeans. Jordache jeans! Who didn’t wear Jordache jeans exactly like this in the eighties?

Actually, I do wear jeans like this. Not Jordache, but similar in style. I can’t tell if this is alarming (mutton dressed as lamb) or if I’m actually young and hip. I’m leaning toward the former. More alarming is the apparent comeback of the hot style of 1987 – rolled up jeans.

Unrelated to “things I wore in junior high” is this monstrosity of an idea – tailored sweatpants.

It DOES look comfortable, but not sure if it looks “chic”. What do I know, though? I thought ALL of this was kind of “skanky”, as opposed to “sexy”:

I also gave this article the side-eye:

Sex on the First Date: article concludes that, like the rule “no white after Labour Day”, “Don’t have sex on the first date” is considered to be an outdated one. Wait, what? First of all, no white after Labour Day is a very good rule. Let’s keep that one, mmmkay? Also? Now, I haven’t been on the dating scene since my husband and I “hooked up” in 1998, but I’m not sure sex on the first date as a faux pas should be equated with wearing white pants. But then again, I’m pretty sure I am not the target demographic here.

HOW CUTE IS THIS GIRL? “I’ve been going on roller coasters and riding my bike.” She’s adorable! Or cray-cray adorbs, as all the kids are saying these days.

Well, I wasn’t the exciting one…

In any case, I’m planning on bypassing the People magazine the next time I’m at the salon, and taking this instead, because I’m thinking of changing my haircolour.

What do you think?