What is wrong with female stereotypes in women magazines? Absolutely nothing. A stereotype is a generalization, a generalization is what the majority of a given subject is like or what they do or do not do. There are numerous instances where stereotypes are problematic, but there are numerous instances where stereotypes are accurate and help. That is what women's magazine stereotypes are, they are accurate and helpful with the interests of what the female readers of these magazines are interested in knowing. For example, Glamour, Health, and Martha Stewart Living are women consumer magazines and their three main categories are sex, exercise, and foods.
The producers of these magazines make them off of what their stereotypical consumers are interested in and portray women in their magazines that they feel their consumers would see as "easy on the eyes". Which would you
rather read, an article about exercise with an overweight person or a physically fit person? Anyone that chooses the overweight one would surprise magazine producers because their stereotypical consumer would want the physically fit one.
'Glamour' has a very specific stereotype in mind when it when it comes to their articles and layouts. It is filled with physically fit, attractive women. There stereotypical reader is interested in sex, exercise, and fashion, so of course their articles are going to be about sex, exercise, or fashion. The women models they have in there photographs are going to be more attractive than everyday women. They are paid a lot of money to look good, and on top of that they get their photos airbrushed to improve their looks even more. That does setup an unrealistic goal when a women working a fulltime, stress full job wants to look like one of these models, but it is definatly implied...