I’ve made this argument in the past about men’s magazines compared to women’s magazines. I’m not talking about magazines that come wrapped in plastic, but rather magazines aimed at a specific gender.
This month I have the perfect example.
Ignoring the titles and headlines, are the covers really that different?
The argument I have is that the media uses women to market to both genders. For women it’s “you could be this;” for men “you could have this.”
That both of these covers are from the December 2010 issues drives the point home. This isn’t a contrived comparison. This is a today comparison.
Look at Vogue and Maxim for the same type of thing. Ignore the words and look at the covers.
Diving deeper yields the same thing. Up top you have the “get fit.” There’s the obligatory “sex” thing (with the Men’s version you mix in technology). From there it admittedly breaks down a bit… it’s funny that there’s more mention of boobies on the women’s version though. :-)