Dear Cosmopolitan Editors:

In response to the Cosmo Question “What’s With the Bodyguards?” in the December 2012 issue, I feel like the publication of such material is detrimental to the reader’s self-image. Suggesting that it is “normal” for a woman who is experiencing the “vulnerability” of a breakup to seek sexual comfort from a man who can provide her safety implies that women require child-like care. This article is implicit in stating that women search for men “who (have) more brawn than brains,” thereby characterizing women as helpless and shallow. As this article states, this is a “classic” model: women love the men who protect them. The article seems to argue that without a man, a woman is exposed. Heidi Klum is a powerful woman and therefore a role model for many other women. However, focusing on a “trivial” relationship with her bodyguard degrades Klum and readers alike by presenting assumptions as fact.

Muscles aside, the article asserts that power is connected to money. No matter your sex, a large bank account can be extremely influential in increasing one’s security. In fact, before these celebrities started dating their bodyguards, they hired them! Even though power dynamics are in flux between the sexes, and more women than ever occupy power-role positions, what is left unsaid is that women in the workforce make less money than men. It is commonly cited that many women make only 77 percent of their male counterparts’ earnings. On top of this, many women believe they need more products to maintain their body than men. As far as I can tell, none of these phenomena can be traced to biology.

I admire your magazine’s mantra of a “Fun Fearless Female.” I believe that to “have it all” as a woman in the United States is to shake up the system and take charge of our destinies together; to succeed is an individual endeavor, but to succeed as a woman is to succeed on behalf of all women, everywhere. By telling readers in what ways they will be fulfilled sells a false vision of “success” that reinforces patriarchal expectations of femininity. December’s cover model Taylor Swift is as sweet and as feminine as could be — a perfect model for all respectable women. Now that she’s dating a Kennedy, she could even be considered an American princess! While a princess is everyone’s little girl, I am disappointed that your cover girl could not reflect a more realistic and fearless woman, and that your articles shamelessly advise women to follow rigid sex binaries while claiming to tear them down.

Love,

A Flexibly Fearless Female