Victoria V. Hearst, 58, is an heir to the Hearst Publishing empire. Her Catholic grandfather, William Randolph (W. R.) Hearst (1863-1951), began the company when he was 23 years old, after his father, George, placed him in charge of the San Francisco Examiner in 1887.
Today, the privately held, information and media, business is composed of nearly 200 companies, in 150 countries.
Unlike Victoria’s cousin, William Randolph Hearst III, who is currently the Chairman of the Board of Hearst Foundation; a director of Hearst Corporation; and the president of the William Randolph Hearst Foundation, Ms. Hearst is concerned about the psychological damage that one of the Hearst Corporation’s magazines, is doing to minor children. The magazine is Cosmopolitan, and it is known as Cosmo, for short.
Victoria is the daughter of Randolph “Randy” Apperson Hearst and Catherine Wood Campbell (Roman Catholic). Her father was the fourth of five sons of her publishing mogul grandfather, and a fraternal twin. Interestingly, Ms. Hearst is also one of five siblings, although they are all girls.
Prior to Victoria’s cousin William’s tenure, her father, Randy, was the Chairman of the Board of Hearst Corporation from 1973 to 1996.
Ms. Hearst is also a sister to the infamous Patty Hearst. In 1974, Patty was kidnapped by the Symbionese Liberation Army, brainwashed to join her captors and to rob a bank. She was arrested, tried and sentenced to 32 years in jail, which was eventually reduced to 7 years. In 1979, her sentence was communed by Democrat Pres. Jimmy Carter after she’d served just 22 months in jail.
Sadly, both Victoria and Patty’s parent’s marriage did not survive the traumatic experience of Patty’s kidnapping, trial, sentencing and prison time. They divorced in 1982, just three years after Patty’s release from prison.
Five years later, in 1987, Victoria’s father Randy became a born-again Christian when, after a brief second marriage, he married his third wife, Veronica de Uribe, who was, as was his first wife, a Roman Catholic.
In December of 1995, Victoria ended a difficult relationship with a man she deeply loved. It was then that she joined her father and became a born-again Christian as well. The following year, her father resigned as Chairman of the Board of the Hearst Corporation to spend more time with his wife.
Four years later, in 2000, Victoria’s father died at the age of 85, and the following year, Victoria founded Praise Him Ministries, near her home in Colorado, with some of her inheritance. Her religious organizations include Praise Productions Christian Store and the Ridgway Christian Center.
It was soon after Ms. Hearst’s rebirth to Christianity that she began to take notice of the pornographic content, and in particular, the vulgar nature of Cosmopolitan’s front covers, as compared with those produced by the magazine during her childhood, and earlier. The covers portrayed women as smiling, witless, willing sluts, whose “higher calling” was limited to being exploited as sex toys.
Upon reflection, I couldn’t agree more with Victoria’s assessment of the current magazine. It is, even to the casual observer, very obvious that the publication bears no resemblance to its original format as a family magazine and that it instead resembles Playboy.
And, why is that? Could it be that it now reflects the non-Christian male’s prurient propensities, as defined by the salacious rhetoric of the non-Christian husband of Cosmo’s most infamous chief editor? Once again, both Victoria and I would agree. And so, the answer is a resounding, YES!
Cosmo’s notorious editor-in-chief was Helen Gurley Brown (1922-2012), and her creepy husband, was David Brown (1916-2010).
Upon reflection, Victoria was correct when she attributed the complete reversal, of the magazine’s fundamental 1886 creation as a family magazine, to the 32 year reign of editor-in-chief, Helen Gurley Brown and, I believe, much of the “credit” for this transformation must go to her association with, and her marriage to, David Brown.
So, just who was Helen Gurley Brown and why was she so preoccupied with sex? The primary reason for her obsession was the fact that dissolute sex had literally defined her personal life as a young woman.
But, none of that would have mattered to anyone, had she not married Brown. Her ability to reverse Christian America’s view of casual sex as immoral, was made possible only because her influential husband found her past propensity for promiscuous behavior worthy of acclaim, rather than recrimination.
In fact, non-Christian Brown was so enthralled, and enamored, with his wife’s past sexual dalliances that, throughout their marriage, he not only prompted her to acknowledge her sleazy past publicly, but would personally promote her slutty behavior as admirable, or amusing, to both friends and colleagues! Duh!
Although Helen Gurley and David Brown met in Los Angeles, she did not grow up there. In fact, she grew up, in abject poverty, in the Ozarks Mountains of Arkansas. Her politician father, Ira, was killed in an elevator accident when she was 10 and she was therefore raised by her mother, Cleo. While still in her teens, Gurley’s mother, briefly moved the family to Los Angeles where her sister, Mary, contracted crippling polio and her mother was diagnosed as a depressive.
Once in California, Helen Gurley never looked back. In 1941, at age 19 she joined an “escort service” and had sex with a 50-year-old man for $5. She chose secretarial work as her vocation and sleeping with her bosses as her avocation. And, as one of the few pretty, and promiscuous, women, during the highly moral 1950s – Boy, did she get-around!
Among the scores of men she “dated” were both Jack Dempsey, the heavyweight champion boxer, and Ron Getty, the son of the oil tycoon J. Paul Getty.
And, like many poor, young, star-struck, women of the 1940s and 1950s, including Marilyn Monroe, she believed the influential, non-Christian men when they told her that she could sleep-her-way-to-the-top.
Not surprisingly, this would prove to be a deliberately contrived lie, created by influential, powerful, but ugly, men seeking sex with beautiful, but poor, and gullible, single young women.
Much later in her career, Gurley would counsel women to avoid this fabrication saying, “You can’t sleep your way to the top, or even to the middle, and there is no such thing as a free lunch. You have to do it yourself, so you might as well get started.”
Despite this pronouncement, it would be shown that she herself had done nothing of the sort, but instead, continued to use her feminine “guiles” to massage the egos of influential males, in order to achieve her personal goals of fame and fortune, finally marrying the very influential, but very ugly, David Brown.
Interestingly, her personal combination of explicit sexuality, and self-absorbed narcissism, would eventually become Gurley Brown’s depleted premise upon which she, and Brown, would create radical, third-wave feminism, and Cosmo would become their monthly voice.
To this end, Gurley Brown would espouse her twisted ideology through both the magazine and her books. As Henry Makow, Ph.D once wrote, “She taught women how to parlay sex appeal into profit and control. She helped to transform feminine nature from love and devotion to calculated predation.”
As a chronically promiscuous woman, with nearly twenty years of experience under her belt (no pun intended), Gurley’s life as a leader of debauched women, would begin, in earnest, in 1959 when, at the age of 37, she met and married, David Brown.
Brown graduated from Columbia University’s School of Journalism and Stanford and began his career as a journalist. Nearly ten years before meeting Gurley, he rose to become the managing editor of Cosmo. (Note that this is by no means a coincidence to Gurley’s later hire as the editor-in-chief of Cosmo in 1964. It was, instead, the reason).
At the time of Gurley and Brown’s first meeting in 1959, he was VP of production at 20th Century Fox and she was working, and sleeping-around, as an advertising copywriter on the Max Factor account at the Hollywood advertising agency of Kenyon and Eckhardt (K&E).
Not coincidently, Ms. Gurley eventually became the highest paid advertising woman in Los Angeles, and continued to work at Kenyon and Eckhardt until 1962, when her first notorious book, Sex and the Single Girl, was published.
Upon meeting, one of Gurley and Brown’s immediate connections was that he too had been raised solely by his mother, which was very odd in America at the time, where 94% of its populace came from intact Christian families.
The only difference between their matriarchal upbringings was that Brown’s was not as a result of the death of a parent, but as the result of a divorce, which was, at the time, even odder. Gurley would marry the older, and twice-divorce, Brown within a year of their meeting.
Incredibly, soon after Gurley and Brown were married, her obviously non-Christian husband (what Christian husband would, or could, make the following request of his wife?) suggested that she write a book, based on her personal sexual escapades as a young, single woman in Los Angeles. He said that her book should be about “how a single girl goes about having an affair.” Duh?
Gurley and Brown’s unprecedented, highly unorthodox, and exceedingly anti-Christian view, that immoral female sexual behavior was acceptable, or worse yet, preferable, to marital sex, would become the driving force behind the dramatic changes Helen Gurley Brown would make at Cosmopolitan magazine, and through her influence on the massive, young, female baby boomer generation, the world at large.
Geis, who shared the same prurient propensities as Brown, would become one of many non-Christian purveyors of licentious material in both California and New York at the time.
These non-Christian’s obsession with the publication of “obscene” and “lurid” material, not only led to suits filed with the U. S. Supreme Court but continue to this very day with the lascivious sex scandals surrounding non-Christians such as Congressman Anthony Weiner, former NY Gov. Elliot Spitzer and producer Harvey Weinstein.
Geis was the president of Bernard Geis Associates. And ironically, as Geis ventured to push-the-envelope, and publish more and more sexually explicit books, with thinner and thinner story lines, he eventually went bankrupt in 1971.
Although a runaway success with young female baby boomers, Sex and the Single Girl would shock many Christian parents. But, ironically, it would also shock one of Gurley Brown’s contemporaries, the creator of radical, second-wave feminism, and non-Christian, Betty Friedan.
Friedan would state that Gurley Brown’s message in Sex and the Single Girl was “obscene and horrible”. Friedan never condoned explicit sexuality as a path to be traveled by women seeking to “liberate” themselves from domestic “domination”, “oppression” or “patriarchy.” She, instead, espoused that women should use their minds and pursue an “independent” lifestyle, sans men and family, through education and then a job.
Ironically, Gurley Brown agreed with most of Betty Friedan’s radical, second-wave ideology. But she also believed that simply encouraging women to hate men, and use their intellect to advance themselves, was too limiting.
It was obvious that, as opposed to Betty Friedan, Gurley Brown was a pretty woman. And as such, she believed that there were other avenues to be traveled by women seeking “independence” through wealth and power.
And, the success of Sex and the Single Girl would prove to be the vehicle, and primer, for Gurley Brown’s own brand of feminism, which was the narcissistic form of radical, second-wave feminism – radical, third-wave feminism.
Despite rabid pushback, concerning the content of her book, Hearst Publishing (no doubt through David Brown’s influence) offered Gurley Brown, who had zero experience as an editor, the position of editor-in-chief of Cosmopolitan magazine in 1964.
Gurley Brown’s unprecedented hiring occurred during the very same year that the oldest of 38 million female baby boomers, who began to be born in 1946 at the conclusion of WWII, would celebrate their 18th birthday.
Finally, with Cosmopolitan under their control, Gurley Brown, and her creepy husband, had a global venue through which they could spread their anti-Christian, sexually oriented, radical, third-wave feminist BS, to millions of young, vulnerable, Christian girls who were just coming of age.
Almost immediately, Ms. Gurley Brown began to deliberately, and dramatically, shift the focus of the magazine away from its traditional family format, which was based on factual, faith-filled, family life, as espoused by the tenets of Christianity, and towards the frivolous, fictitious, fact less and fraudulent ideology of radical, third-wave feminism.
Helen Gurley Brown’s “reign of sexual sleaze” began with her very first issue of Cosmo, which was published in July of 1965. Unlike the January 1965 issue, which had Christian TV “husband” and “wife” Dick Van Dyke and Mary Tyler Moore on the front cover, Gurley Brown’s July issue showed a provocatively dressed female model instead.
Gurley Brown’s inaugural issue also included provocative cover blurbs written by none other than her sex obsessed husband, the ugly David Brown. He would continue to write Cosmo’s cover lines, including its racy buzzwords, (despite not having worked for the magazine since 1951), for years to come.
Inside Gurley Brown’s inaugural issue of the magazine, she included a condensed version of another non-Christian, author Rona Jaffe’s new book, Mr. Right is Dead. She also included an article about the recently released (1961), and highly controversial, birth control pill.
In retrospect, its obvious where Gurley Brown, and her weirdo husband, were headed – all the way down hill. And they planned to take all of the young, gullible, Christian female baby boomers, that they could ensnare, with them, thereby “normalizing” their debauched, and non-Christian, view of women as solely, sex objects.
As Gurley Brown’s “career” lengthened, she continued to write books. In 1982, she published another book titled, Having It All. It was here that she promoted her finely tuned, but twisted, priorities of radical, third-wave feminism. Not surprisingly, it was again based solely on the exploitation of women through explicit sexuality.
This book also produced one of the most widely recognizable rallying cries associated with radical feminism – “having it all.” In the end, it would prove to be a blatant lie! A lie that scams young naive women into believing that if a woman adopts the ideology of radical feminism, as a way of life, she will be heir to “having it all.”
The full title of this, anti-Christian, pack-of-lies was, Having It All – Love-Success-Sex-Money. In it, 60-year-old, Gurley Brown once again shamelessly promotes her sexually debauched feminist lifestyle to yet another generation of young, innocent, 18-year-old girls.
These were the very same young Christian female, baby boomers (b. 1946-1964), who were continuing to graduate from college in droves.
Young women who were desperately trying to redefine themselves as first-female-in-the-family college graduates and “career” women, rather than as traditional Christian wives and mothers.
“Having it all” would become the mantra for these newly hatched radical, third-wave feminists, as they deliberately strove to throw off the mantle of their Christian faith, and instead, become “liberated”, “emancipated”, feminist “Superwomen.”
Sadly, it would be twenty years before Gurley Brown’s first recruits would condemn her methods as personally disastrous. Generations of women would finally learn-the-hard-way that, “having-it-all” would prove to be a pointless, painful and heartbreaking pursuit because it was at the expense of women’s bodies, minds, self-respect and ultimately, their souls.
Gurley Brown would continue her sexual diatribe well into her dotage. In her 1993 book titled, The Late Show, she continued to write anti-Christian rhetoric for young women, including, “Welcoming a penis just seems more womanly to me than baking chocolate chip cookies or doling out money for a grandchild’s college tuition.” Duh?
In Ms. Brown’s efforts to deliberately mislead millions of young Christian women away from their faith, she is also quoted as repeating the standard BS as defined by radical, second-wave feminism, “Marriage is insurance for the worst years of your life. During your best years you don’t need a husband.” Double Duh.
Seriously. How do you find a good husband as a, very used, 45-year-old? The answer? You don’t! You wind up instead, living in a condo with a cat for company.
Throughout her lengthy career Gurley Brown never stopped championing promiscuity among the single set, and as late as 1996, when she was 76 years old, she is quoted as saying, “To be desired (physically), in my opinion, is about the best thing there is.” Dumbo Duh!
As Judy Gruen wrote, “She encouraged young women to “sow their wild oats” just as men in secular society were expected to do. She made the concept of being a “good (Christian kqd) girl” seem oh so 1950s”.
What a blatant betrayal of young women!
Gurley Brown, and her non-Christian radical feminist cohorts, including the dysfunctional Gloria Steinem, Betty Friedan, Bella Abzug and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, destroyed the protective mantle provided to women by Christianity’s 2000-year-old sexual mores and traditions. Mores which were all based on patriarchal protection from evil, abuse and heartache through women’s adherence to the Christian concepts of abstinence, modesty, self-respect and human dignity.
Revoltingly, Gurley Brown would become an incredibly wealthy woman while disingenuously promoting adultery, sexual promiscuity and sexually explicit behavior for other people’s young daughters, while she and Brown remained, above-the-fray, childless, and in a monogamous marriage, for over 50 years. To them, it was all just a lucrative game, but for other people’s children, their hypocrisy would prove life threatening.
In retrospect, Gurley Brown brought with her regressive transformation of Cosmo, the total degradation of Christian women. By reducing young women to nothing more than the sex symbol she actually believed herself to be, she destroyed more lives than can be determined.
By promoting the behavior of “appealing” sexpots, who were brainlessly driven by promiscuous, and explicit sexuality, she undermined Christian women’s respected, and revered, place in society, exposing them to disease, abuse, abandonment and mental trauma.
Gurley Brown denied generations of young women their traditional place of honor in society, where the love and devotion of Christian fathers, husbands, brothers and nephews inspired them to become exemplary wives and mothers to the next generation of illustrious, honest, faith-filled and trustworthy Christian male leaders. As poet W. R. Wallace correctly wrote, “The hand that rocks the cradle, is the hand that rules the world.”
Pathetically, as a result of both of the Brown’s twisted view of women as simply sexual playthings, they sapped women’s true value as critical purveyors of Christian morality to their children. And America is suffering from the devastating loss of influential Christian male leaders, as can be seen by today’s U. S. Supreme Court decision, legalizing same-sex marriage in all 50 states, which was enabled solely by former Christian, radical feminist and wimp, Justice Anthony Kennedy.
So today, fifty-one years after Helen Gurley Brown began her reign of sleaze at Cosmopolitan magazine, the twisted results are in, and they continue to shock.
As conservative political commentator, radio talk show host, columnist, and attorney Debbie Schlussel writes,
“Helen Gurley Brown’s legacy is sexually transmitted diseases, broken marriages, generations of children born to single mothers who will never have a father and will become sores on America. She told women they could do it all, have a career, sleep around, and, ultimately, like her have a career and be married. But she never had children. And for married women who do have children (let alone single mothers), you cannot do it all. Instead, they are tired, haggard, and constantly whining about having to do it all.”
It would be very hard to argue with Victoria Hearst’s assessment of Gurley Brown’s negative influence over the content of Cosmo, and more disturbingly, over the lives of three generations of formerly Christian women.
And, it would be even harder to argue with Ms. Hearst’s comment, “The magazine promotes a lifestyle that can be dangerous to women’s emotional and physical well-being. It should never be sold to anyone under 18.”
Now, Victoria Hearst was aware of all of the extenuating circumstances that I just described when she decided to contact the management of Cosmo about her concerns about Cosmo’s influence over minor children. She also realized that her attempt to limit Cosmo’s availability to minors was an uphill battle because Cosmopolitan magazine was a very lucrative asset of the Hearst Corporation.
But, as a Christian, she felt that she must try. She told FOX411’s Pop Tarts columnist,
“About 12 years ago, before the Lord told me to found Praise Him Ministries in 2001, I noticed how pornographic the content of Cosmopolitan magazine was. I telephoned Frank Bennack, head of the company, and told him Cosmopolitan should not be sold to minors and that I would like to address the board about it. He refused to allow it, and refused to admit that Cosmo is pornography. Sex sells and the company does not care that Cosmo gets into the hands of children. Since Frank blocked my access, I decided to bypass him and send my petition directly to each board member via Federal Express… I never received a response from the company. But I had delivered the message God wanted. I went on with life and never looked at Cosmo again.”
As mentioned, it was in 2002, after Victoria’s frustrating conversations with Frank A. Bennack, Jr., who was the CEO of Hearst Corporation from 1979 to 2013, that she wrote to all 24 members of the Board of Directors of the Hearst Foundation to express her same concerns.
And, as we can see by the board’s lack of response, it was obvious that the twisted, radical, third-wave feminist priorities begun by anti-Christian Gurley Brown – sex sells, money is our god and objectors be damned – overrode any concern by the board for the damage the magazine was doing to innocent children.
Sadly, despite being shrouded in silence, William Randolph Hearst III’s Board of Directors “response” to Victoria was heard loud and clear. They chose to respond in the same callous manner as did Frank Bennack and, most assuredly, as would Helen Gurley Brown herself. NO GO!
And, as a result, Victoria Hearst’s concerns for innocent children’s lives would, for a second time, fall on deaf ears.
After moving on with her life, Ms. Hearst joined forces with former fashion model, and Christian, Nicole Weider, in 2012, in order to revisit the pornographic problems with Cosmo.
Ms. Weider, said she found God after “a self-esteem-crushing period of partying and promiscuity in Hollywood.” She then launched Project Inspired, which is a Christian blog for girls. Nicole said, “I wanted to use my experience in Hollywood to influence and impact girls to do the opposite.”
This 26-year-old woman, had already initiated a campaign called the “Anti-Cosmo Mission” which also reflected her concerns about Cosmo’s negative influence on children. Coincidently, they mirrored those of Ms. Hearst. Their new collaboration was named, “Cosmo Harms Minors.”
Ms. Weider said she started her campaign against Cosmo after she witnessed a group of 13 and 14 year olds whispering over an issue of the magazine, on display at a CVS drug store. The issue featured Twilight actress Ashley Greene on the cover. After the children left, she picked up the magazine and was shocked by what she saw.
Ms. Weider admits she read the magazine, which she hid from her mother, as a young teenager. But, by comparison to the issue she held in her hand, which “talked about all these freaky sex positions I’ve never even heard of,” the magazine from her childhood, reflected a more innocent time, “when Mandy Moore was on the cover and the sex tips involved scrunchies.”
As a result of their new partnership, Victoria Hearst’s efforts to limit children’s access to Cosmo was renewed, and her expectations, to resolve this matter, remained the same. She wanted the magazine to be limited to adults-only because she said that it was full of “disgusting stuff.”
As an example, a front cover line from one of the magazine’s issues exemplifies the “disgusting stuff” Ms. Hearst is concerned about – “Your Orgasm Guaranteed,” “Um, Vagina, Are You Okay Down There?” It reflects Cosmo’s depleted view that women are no better than a compilation of usable sexual body parts!
Victoria expressed her ongoing concerns when she concluded,
“Cosmo is leading the way in further de-sensitizing young women and girls to accept and participate in the pornified and sexually violent culture around them. The ‘Cosmo Harms Minors’ campaign seeks to inform, expose and equip communities to take action and protect minors.”
After the launch of their new campaign, Victoria is quoted as saying,
“I love my family, I love Frank Bennack. I do not love what they print. I am not concerned about any potential conflict with my family or Hearst Corporation executives. I am only concerned about keeping pornography out of the hands of children. I am very confident that our mission will be accomplished. How long will it take? As long as it takes. Nicole and I will not quit.”
It’s as though the editors of Cosmo assume all young women are, by nature, sluts, which is not surprising since that is exactly what Helen Gurley was raised to become by her dysfunctional. non-Christian upbringing.
But as a Christian, Victoria Hearst believes the opposite. She believes that young women are created by God, and as such, bring the best of God’s nature and love, to earth. She believes Cosmo is deliberately misleading young women, with false promises of “liberation” and “emancipation”, when in reality the magazine is promising nothing but personal grief, pain and heartache for those ensnared in their wicked web of lies.
It cannot be denied, Cosmo is deliberately trying to destroy the innocence of very young girls before they are old enough to understand the long-term ramifications of following Cosmo’s sexually explicit “advice.” And worse yet, for every one of the magazine’s young readers, it is an innocence which can never be retrieved or recaptured. It is truly a slaughter of the innocents.
So, what are Ms. Hearst “contentious” demands of Cosmo which don’t even require the courtesy of a return phone call?
Surprisingly, Victoria does not want the magazine to stop publishing, nor does she want the editors to cease and desist printing its sordid content. She simply wants the magazine placed out of the reach of minors. She wants the magazine to be placed in a plain brown wrapper, stored behind the sales counter, and only sold to people who are over the age of 18, just as with Playboy and Penthouse.
Considering how little today’s secularized culture, of influential non-Christian media moguls, do to protect young children from evil, Ms. Hearst’s request to conceal the magazine below the sales counter, seems very reasonable. Just because sex sells doesn’t mean you have to be a proud, and very public, promoter of pornography to children!
I believe that this is the very least that the Hearst Corporation can do to make amends for the 50 years of personal damage they have allowed to be inflicted on innocent girls at the hands of the likes of Helen Gurley Brown, and her anti-Christian sex fiend husband, David Brown.
It’s time for the Hearst Corporation to take responsibility for the damage it has rained down on millions of America’s young girl’s lives, through its unabashed, and totally non-Christian, pursuit of the almighty dollar.
Please pray for Victoria and Nicole’s success in this pursuit. But especially for the remaining Christian men on the Board of the Hearst Corporation. Pray that they finally acknowledge, and implement, Victoria’s simple suggestions.
Pray that these men return to their senses, and demure to her reasonable requests. This simple action just may begin to reverse the tide of sexual insanity which was unleashed by radical feminists, and anti-Christians, like Helen Gurley and David Brown.
Update: Fortunately, Frank Bennack, Jr., after 30 years as the head of the Hearst Corporation, recently retired. But unfortunately, non-Christian, Steven R. Swartz, was chosen to replace him. As a result, Victoria Hearst’s efforts will have to be re-doubled as the fox is, once again, in the hen-house.
We now must pray, even harder, for Victoria’s success!
Update August 2015: Victoria Hearst has successfully done an end run around her family’s unresponsive, anti-children, company. She has convinced both the Rite-Aid Pharmacies and Food Lion Grocery Stores to place Cosmo out of sight, and out of reach, of minor children.
Congratulations to both Victoria and Nichol! I pray this is just the beginning!
Please also show your support for Food Lion by shopping at one of their 1,100 grocery stores in southeast USA but also take a moment to thank its CEO Meg Ham for her consideration for children as well here: