Here’s a nice “article” taken from Double Viking (linked through from Digg) That exemplifies the rubbish magazines like Cosmopolitan spits out. The author says it best:

Cosmopolitan Magazine has become a bible for the martini swilling, fashion conscious, and orgasm starved female. While this magazine has been helpful to women by aiding them in achieving the perfect bikini wax, it has regularly clouded their minds about men. In fact, I would say that Cosmopolitan has done more damage to men than Barry Bonds has done to baseball.

I Wholeheartedly agree with this, as does my GF. She even pointed out that the regular features like Understanding His Baffling Behavior say the same goddamn thing differently over and over again, and makes it seem like they have some new juicy information on the male psyche when in fact it’s the same old garbage recycled.

I’ve repasted verbatim the contents of the Double Viking article to save you the jump and included some of my input where applicable.

Why do guys always sit with their legs splayed?

Cosmos reasoning: “Women are taught to keep their legs together as a way of not inviting sex,” says Helen Fisher, PhD, author of The First Sex: The Natural Talents of Women and How They Are Changing the World (Ballantine, 2000). “In contrast, a man is saying, ‘Come and get it.’”

My reasoning: It is a comfort factor, are we supposed to sit there with our legs crossed or tightly put together with our hands placed upon our knees? That isn’t comfortable, it has nothing to do with us saying, “Come and get it.” Although, if you want to come over and drop to your knees we wouldn’t complain… I’m just sayin’.

Carlo’s input: It has always been about comfort for us, we really don’t care if a woman is aroused when they see our crotch area or not… I’d be a bonus if they were, but that’s not the reason why we do it.

Cosmo did point out the reason why females are like that; the only fault they had here was applying that same logic to us males. Just because us males tend to look at you the way you fear when you do have your crotches exposed, that doesn’t necessarily mean that we think you do the same thing to us.

So as far as the “bukaka” goes, I’m sure that if there wasn’t any societal pressure on the females, they’d sit the same way we do if given the choice. Just look at all-female high school students [and younger]. Majority of them don’t give a rats ass how they are carrying themselves when they’re with their fellow girls; that suggests that the natural tendency of comfort is to assume positions that aren’t “proper” when mixed with the opposite sex ;)

Why do guys hardly ever change their sheets?

Cosmos reasoning: “Men have a weaker sense of smell, and their skin isn’t as sensitive as women’s,” says Fisher. “So guys aren’t as likely to notice (until maximum grime has been reached) that they’re snoozing in stinky sheets.”

My reasoning: Do you know how much a pain in the ass it is to put that fitted sheet on? I don’t think that I have ever lain in bed and determined that the sheets felt weird, nor have I had a girlfriend that has ever made that remark. Thanks Cosmo for making me analyze how my sheets feel every time I climb into bed, like I need something else to be paranoid about.

Carlo’s input: I personally have a very sensitive nose (I feel wierd when someone sneezes near me because more often than not, I can smell their sneeze after a few seconds they let it go) It’s just that we are more objective than women. What I think is that for women, the very fact of knowing you did “other things” in bed already puts their mind in alert mode for hygienic concern, even if the bed looks and smells perfectly fine.

Just take motels as examples. There was a study done before. The rooms look and smell perfectly clean, until you find out that it has been used 10 times a day – but that doesn’t take away the fact that if you hadn’t known, you also wouldn’t notice it. Quite frankly, I think women are just the same as us when it comes to detecting odor, it’s the whole psychological part of it that’s drastically different from us.

Why do guys assume every guy who’s not one of his oldest friends is a loser?

Cosmos reasoning: It goes back to caveman-clan mentality, says Fisher. Guys don’t want to let anyone they perceive as the enemy into their inner circle. They see all men they don’t know (and that includes the geek at Starbucks) as a threat. Help him evolve by pointing out that these days, more girlfriends are stolen by best buds than by strangers.

My reasoning: This question is a perfect example of the bullshit that Cosmo slings around. Guys don’t do constant evaluation of other guys, unless we are sizing them up for fighting purposes. This is a feminine trait, and stating that we think in the same manner is false. The only time I see another male as a threat relationship-wise is when another man’s balls are slapping against my girlfriend’s chin. At that point the relationship probably can’t be saved — well, you could join in but that would be kind of um… gay. (Not that there’s anything wrong with that.)

Carlo’s input: While I think he’s right for the most part, I think the question is wrong to begin with. I actually don’t assume such with any male acquaintances I make. There are men my GF has been with that I think to be losers, but there are also a few that I admit to be ok people, even if I don’t know any of them personally. But I have yet to feel “threatened” so to speak. So this question probably doesn’t apply to me (I’m probably in the minority here)

But as far as “not constantly evaluating other guys,” yeah, the author’s right, we simply don’t care for the most part. Their existence will only matter to us if they are an imminent threat, which unlike women, us men don’t assume to be the case unless there is compelling evidence on hand. (read: just because you think it, doesn’t mean it is so – a very woman trait)

Why do guys like women on top?

Cosmos reasoning: According to our August 2005 sex survey, 53 percent of men prefer this chick-in-charge pose. “These playful guys are always looking to have a good time, but they still know how to be attentive,” explains Hargrave. “Pleasing you is a priority, which is why they prefer a position that best allows you to achieve orgasm.”

My reasoning: You are expecting me to say less work right? That does come into play, along with the being able to access the breasts; it honestly has nothing to do with how it works for you. In fact, we would rather bring you to orgasm with you not leading the way; it makes us feel like we have accomplished something. Sitting there and letting you use us like a chair-mounted dildo detracts from the ego boost.

Carlo’s input: I have to admit, for me it’s less work.

And I have to disagree with the author a far as claming that if we had our way, we’d be on top and dictate the pace. I’d still want to be on the bottom. You women probably think you’re empowered by having control being on top, but to me it’s the opposite, to me you’re doing all the work, and that’s what makes it sexy, it’s like you’re working hard to please me, and I find that very sexy.

I think by now, I know that I’m probably a taker when it comes to bed. I can be the giver when motivated enough, but for the most part, I enjoy receiving more.

Why do guys believe they need to win at everything?

Cosmos reasoning: It’s no secret that men have a severe need to succeed, and once again biology is to blame. In the face of competition, a man’s testosterone level soars, making him more willing to take risks, explains Alan Booth, PhD, a professor of sociology at Pennsylvania State University. And though this overdrive can be annoying, you may not want to discourage it

My reasoning: Wrong again, not everything has a psychological or physiological root to it. I squarely blame the “No Fear” T-Shirt brand for making shirts that say, “Second Place is the First Loser.” That ruined my outlook on sports forever: now I have to win, because nobody wants to be the first loser. It has nothing to do with the rush and everything to do with the shame.

Carlo’s input: This cracked me up. But yes, when it comes to stuff like that, the whole it’s just a game or even the it’s the effort that counts is total bollocks.

These things, are usually contests; and by nature of contests, you play to win. If you don’t mind losing, then just don’t play and have someone else take your place… someone who’s willing to put more than the half-assed effort you seem to be willing to give.

If you do lose, you have permission to feel bad because hopefully you did put in the effort to win and lost. Besides, have you ever heard a winner say “It’s just a game”? of course not! Those statements are specifically made for losers to cushion the devastation they probably felt by losing.

I’ve won and I’ve lost, but I never tried sugarcoating anything. I’m proud when I win, and I feel miserable when I lose… but then I pick myself up, and learn from it… move on, and do better next time. Simple as that.

And btw, permission to feel bad is NOT the same as permission to bitch and cry about it. If you do the latter, it just puts you in the “pathetic” spectrum of things, and you get no sympathy votes from me.

I think I have clearly pointed out the flawed logic that Cosmopolitan uses. Now you know what is corrupting the minds of your girlfriend or wife and making them totally unreasonable. Wait, that could just be the hormones… nah, it’s the magazine.

Carlo: Amen brother! To me, ultimately, if you [woman reader] actually take to heart whatever magazines like these say with regards to Men, instead of actually going out there and learning by experience; you, dear, fail at life – and probably deserve to remain clueless… in that case continue reading that stupid magazine of yours.