Maxim slammed for resurfaced article teaching men how to ‘cure’ feminists: ‘I feel physically ill’
Just a week after facing criticism for an old article ranking the “unsexiest women” in Hollywood, Maxim magazine is under fire again — this time for a resurfaced piece from 2003 that many are calling blatantly misogynistic.
The article, titled “How to Cure a Feminist,” recently resurfaced via a Reddit post and has drawn widespread condemnation online. Purporting to be a guide for men on how to “tame” feminist women, the piece outlined four steps for transforming what it described as an “unshaven, militant, protesting vegan” into an “actual girl.”
The piece was accompanied by a series of progressively sexualized images, presented as a visual “regression” from feminist to bikini-clad ideal, sparking further outrage.
The first step advised men to “win her over” by pretending to be a feminist ally — suggesting questions like “What must women do to earn equal pay for equal work?” to appear sincere. It featured a caricatured image of a woman with visible body hair, smoking a cigarette, and shouting anti-male rhetoric via a cartoon speech bubble.
Next, the article instructed readers to “open her eyes” by introducing her to so-called “lipstick feminism” — a more traditionally feminine version of feminism — and recommended signing her up for Bust magazine, which it described as promoting independence while remaining “relatively hairless.”
The third step, “treat her right,” encouraged men to behave as they would with “any other girl,” implying that feminists just need a softer approach to abandon their views. This section was accompanied by an image of a young woman dressed in a short skirt and crop top.
Finally, “shift her focus” instructed men to subtly redirect her interests to more traditionally male-approved activities. The article cited author Michele Weiner-Davis, suggesting that common interests — like baseball — could help men connect with feminist partners. The transformation was completed with an image of a woman in a revealing bikini, stamped with the word “CURED” in red.
The piece has sparked sharp criticism across social media, particularly on Reddit, where users denounced it as thinly veiled “bimbofication porn” masquerading as relationship advice.
“I feel physically ill knowing this was in a mainstream magazine,” one commenter wrote. Others noted how emblematic it was of early 2000s media, an era often criticized for its casual misogyny and harmful gender stereotypes.
“This just sums up the nonsense that was the early 2000s,” one user said. “The media constantly took hot wrong takes when it came to women.”
Last week, Maxim was also called out over a similarly problematic 2007 list that ranked the “unsexiest women in Hollywood,” placing Sex and the City star Sarah Jessica Parker at the top. That piece referred to the actress with derogatory language and likened her appearance to that of a racehorse — further cementing critics’ view of the magazine’s history of sexist content.
As these past articles resurface, they’re prompting fresh discussion about how far media — and societal attitudes toward women — still have to go.
About Post Author
