Double Standards In Magazine Covers

 Women are fun to look at naked.


A no-brainer, I know, but something I notice every time I look at a magazine these days. Which is a bit odd, since you'd imagine there would be a fair number of naked men on magazine covers too, if we lived in a society as progressive as we claim to be.

Not so. Women are mostly-naked on the covers of "Men's Interest" magazines (obvious), tattoo magazines (alright, tattoos are sexy), car magazines (we covered this), both women's and asexual fitness magazines (muscles, losing weight, fine. We need to see those results, sure), even weed magazines and generic, theoretically non-sexual Women's Interest stuff. Keira Knightly, I get it, you ended up being more high-fashion than Natalie Portman. That's cool. You don't have to wear a denim jacket without undershirt on the cover of In Style. That's not in style. There is no cover story about losing weight even. Who are you trying to impress with your small chest and flat stomach? I'm not going to buy this magazine. I can see you actually naked on the internet for free. What are you doing?

Amusingly, it seems the only interest group that seems to put predominantly-naked men on their covers are Hardcore Body Building magazines.

You know, those guys at the gym in tiny shorts, shaving their chests and admiring the only oiled-up men.

Them, and PlayGirl, I guess. But I've never seen a copy of PlayGirl get any closer to selling than making it as far as being opened and unceremoniously wadded up behind a toilet in the men's room stall.