I wish you were right, but you are wrong in so many ways. I'm not going to waste my time, you have made up your mind.

I'm glad you have had access to that information, enquiring minds. Or as Dr. Does says, "Stay Curious."

If you want to see women go uneducated, shame on you. We no longer have a society of readers, we now have watchers! Think about it.

I have to laugh, thinking back, 1960-62, I babysat for a family where there was always the latest issue of Cosmo, and I got quite an education from that magazine even then.

I got NO information/education at home, and Yes, I had to educate my dearly departed first wife who had little or no sex education at home either. Same with the woman I was married to for almost 40 years, no education at home from mom, but she had older sisters and she did seek the information, she was a reader.

She was also strong willed, you would have liked her!

Which assumes every woman in America/the world reads Cosmo, that's an interesting assumption. This is good information everyone should have access to, we agree on that, but making a universal readership claim for Cosmo, I'm not buying that at all. One number I see for USA is a monthly sales of 3,032,211 where the female 19+ population is >200,000,000 so that's a penetration of about 1.5% and lets say each magazine is read by 3 women, that's 4.5% of the over 18 female population. Sorry your argument doesn't hold up to scrutiny.