What is the sexual revolution? Wikipedia defines it as a time of sexual liberation that challenged traditional gender roles, lasting from the 1960s to the 1980s. But a decades-long movement that shook up America cannot be expressed in such a short blurb. The sexual revolution of the 60s is arguably one of the most influential times in social justice history and led to the modernization and mainstream of feminism in the United States. Although, it started much earlier than the 60s. Pressure had been building, from women such as Alice Paul and Carrie Catt, and even earlier from Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton. The famous suffragists who campaigned for women’s suffrage almost their whole lives, set the stage for the sexual revolution by pressuring politicians and encouraging the American public themselves, to get used to the idea of women with power. Without first political reform, social reform cannot follow. The sexual revolution was all about power. The power to treated equally, to be taken seriously, even to enjoy sex. These were all rights that were denied to women by the demanding and restrictive expectations society placed on their shoulders. How did women break through this wall? Well it started with a rather unremarkable woman, Helen Gurley Brown.
Helen Gurley Brown started out as one of the few women to break the wall in the working world, with her advancement from secretary to copywriter, early in her career. She started climbing her way up from there. First, she met and married a high-powered story department head from 20th Century Fox. His name was David Brown, and he was the first one to give her an idea to write a book. Helen had grown up poor, and after climbing her way up, she wanted to give advice to other working girls going out into the world alone. So, she created her book “Sex and the Single Girl”. It was an immediate success. With hundreds of thousands of readers all across the U.S., Helen Gurley Brown soon became a common household name. With tips from saving money and paying for a car, to how to have an affair, Helen’s book was the self help book for working girls. Helen taught these girls how to game the system that was rigged against them. Even after her second book, Helen wanted more. Eventually, she and her husband thought up of an idea for a magazine, called Femme. Here is where the genius for Femme lied. In allowing readers like this to fully explore their options and have something fun to read, instead of either informational articles that were too complex, or boring and patronizing “ladies” magazines. Helen and her husband pitched this idea to Hearst, a magazine company, and soon Helen became the editor-in-chief of the floundering Cosmopolitan.
Cosmopolitan went through its biggest change under Helen. She introduced the concept of the “Cosmo Girl”. The Cosmo Girl is a girl who is sexy and curvaceous, eye-popping, and most of all, she must look like she enjoys sex. That idea is what Helen Gurley Brown sold to the American female working class. Use sex. Enjoy it. She introduced them to the idea that not only could you enjoy sex, but you could use your body to your advantage. Helen created massive publicity with her never seen before frank and honest messages on sex and sexuality. She knew her audience, the working class girl, and she catered to them. She explicitly told her editors that the language must be baby simple, that they should use fun words and easy language, and she had the request that everything they published had to be something Helen herself could do. This way, it made Cosmo the most accessible magazine for working girls at that time. Cosmo introduced sexual agency into a new generation of women and girls, that had never seen such ideas previously, and they loved it. Cosmo sold millions of copies every year, and it became immensely popular. The articles it ran for working girls and the way it appealed to them, made them want to be a Cosmo girl, “attractive and ambitious”. For a short while, Cosmo was considered ahead of its time, the vanguard of a new wave of feminism, but soon, an new magazine would emerge.
This new magazine, called Ms., was by no means as popular as Cosmo. It only sold a couple thousand copies a month, and only appealed to a certain type of reader. It appealed to the college educated, upper middle class girl who was working her way up in a respectable job. She had a degree, and was using it to make a modest salary. She was introduced to the likes of Gloria Steinem, and she was educated about feminism and wanted to make a difference. Ms. magazine was all about starting groups and revolutions, and trying to make a difference. It was not an easy read, and was not for the working class. It denounced Cosmo as a cheap magazine selling sex instead of feminism. With one third of its readers with advanced degrees, Ms. attracted a more educated, high-dollar audience. These were the more modern feminists who had already moved on from sexual freedom, to topics they deemed more important, such as equal pay and equal opportunities. While these were important topics at the time, the difference between these two magazines and the readership that followed them perfectly described some of the class divides of the sexual revolution.
The differences between Ms. and Cosmo really exemplified the reality of feminism and other social justice issues of that time. Higher planes of thinking and more complex ideas were sold to the people who could afford it, and those who could not had to live in the past. Like a high-end product displayed in a department window, equality and women’s rights were a luxury few could afford. While Cosmo was historic in bringing some rights to the working class, there was still a distinct divide between the two magazines and their ideas. While Cosmo was working on opening up sexual liberation to the working class, Ms. was years ahead in pushing for equal pay, no discrimination in the workplace, and other new social and political issues.
While both advocated for women’s rights, they were both polar opposites. Ms. was a small and selective magazine that screened every ad and only selected certain ones to be displayed in their magazine. Because of this and other exclusive practices Ms. remained small, and appealed on only a couple thousand readers. Cosmo, on the other hand, was a multi-million dollar venture. While Cosmo published articles on how to get over misogyny based problems and issues, they would then have ads that reinforced the very ideas they were trying to destroy. This highlights another issue of the divides between the magazine. For Cosmo to reach all the girls that it did, and continue spreading their ideas, they needed the money that the ads gave them. Because Ms. had such a small and select readership, they did not need to worry as much about producing enough copies, and could be more selective with their ads.
Another important issue of the area that affected the public greatly, was abortion and contraception devices. While abortion was not legal until approximately half-way through the sexual revolution, problems with it persisted for many years afterward. At first, middle-class married women could get a doctor’s referral for an abortion easily enough. Everybody else, especially single women and poor women, had to resort to more unsafe measures to terminate their pregnancy. Some women went to shady underground clinics, often with the risk of death or injury from hemorrhaging. And if they went to the hospital because of complications from a botched abortion, they were often judged by the doctors and nurses, and sometimes given inferior treatment. The unfairness of this is obvious. These practices were making it so only those with a traditional role in society, with the money to pay for it, could be given the privilege of choice. It restricted those who may need it the most, poor and single women, from having a choice and control over their own bodies. Another landmark device was the Pill. Approved by the FDA in 1960, it was very highly restricted for many years. Again, middle-class married women who wanted it could get it easily enough, but those who really needed it, were denied it.
In conclusion, the class divisions of the sexual revolution ran deep within progressive movements and ideas of the time. Feminism was being mainstreamed, but only for those who could afford it. With the differences of Ms. and Cosmo highlighting the differences of feminsims for the different classes of women, and the availability of abortion and the Pill the commercialization of feminism is plain to see.
A well written and insightful article. Amazing job.