Send us a question or a comment
I enjoy the More articles. I would love more articles about women who choose to not wear make up.
After reading numerous comments below, I am not sure that MORE mag is listening! I too have many of the same complaints...the magazine has moved away from what 40+ women want and into a political rag. Now I do enjoy some parts of the magazine such as info on Kyra Sedgwick; stages of menopause; and a few others. However, I want more health info; fashion related to 40+ plus women in different sizes (I think the models in the mag must all be size 4 or below); more in-depth financial info instead of a one-page gloss-over; real diet plans and exercise plans showing REAL READERS who have followed the info and succeeded; and etc.
I am not sure why I continue to subscribe to the magazine when the web page provides more in-depth material related to what I am looking for in a 40+ magazine for REAL WOMEN!
are there any over 40 conservite women out there? Here's a thought, anyone not on board with abortion? Let's have a story about this and the right of our religious freedom that is being threatened...the 1st amendment is for everyone not just for the women who want everything handed to them because they have a uterus!! I am a woman and I think my 1st amendment rights are in danger of being taken away....I think our forefathers would be turning over in their graves at this one!!!
I, too, have been receiving MORE, and; at first enjoyed it and seriously considered purchasing a subscription - but the issue with the Andrea Mitchell article sent me over the top. Quite a few years ago while reading my monthly Vogue, there was an article about a family who lived in China and upon returning to the USA, allowed their children to diss our country by burning our flag at a family gathering and could not understand why they were upset. The magazine was sympathetic. I wrote a letter to Vogue and cancelled my subscription - the same I am doing now. I have been getting notices to subscribe, but will not do so now. You people in the media just don't get it. We are on to you and your liberal indoctrination and I, for one, do not have to subscribe to a magazine whose views I am opposed to or at the very least give readers an opposing viewpoint. We are being beat over the heads on a daily basis with political viewpoints from movie stars and all forms of media - almost every series on TV and the theatres want to hammer us and our children (antimated movies) with political messages. For goodness sake - give it a rest and a "read" I can enjoy.
I'm a water reader..bathtub, beach, pool. I bounded out of the tub excited to comment on July/August issue. UGGG..no section to be found to comment on this issue!!!
And I have so much to say. Even tried to click on the comment connection..got a white blank screen.
While I found the article on Hilary Clinton in the April issue interesting, I couldn't help but notice that the author seems to be writing for an audience of a different generation, using words like "glamform", "ginormous", and telling us how the reporters were "bitching" about the dress code in Burma. EDITORS TAKE NOTICE-this reader has a proper education, and does not appreciate being dumbed down in this manner. Please DO NOT hire writers younger than 40 if possible, they cannot express themselves in ways a mature women can even understand. If this writer (Lisa DePaulo)is of More Generation age, then shame on her for such lazy writing. And shame on More editors for allowing such sophomoric writing to make it to print. It is unprofessional to use words such as these in a published piece, and a sad commentary on the direction of our education system.
I have been so excited reading the April and May issues. I felt that both had articles truly written for someone like me. Even though I don't care for Hillary Clinton, I enjoyed the article about her travels to Burma, which turned out to be very interesting. I scooped up the June issue to take with me this week on a trip to Scotland, and boy, I'm very disappointed. The article on Andrea Mitchell has just reduced my view of your magazine to just another liberal mouthpiece. Honestly, can't you find a way to represent the real American woman? Many of us are Christian mothers, who believe in women's rights to healthcare, but don't agree that abortion should be a form of birth control. And while I'm not catholic, I don't believe that people should be forced to do something that is against their religion, such as forced provision of birth control. That is freedom of choice and freedom of religion, not ignorance. The point is, Sandra Fluke can get her own damn birth control because she will earn more than any of us once she graduates. Please, either stay away from your Obama worship, or provide fair and balanced reporting. I don't think i can subscribe until then. What a pity!
Have Tote, Will Carry
A plastic tote for $1,345! Honestly? My mouth actually dropped open when I saw this.
So disappointing. Another fashion and health magazine cannot help itself but to wander neck deep into the political arena. When I purchased this subscription, I thought I was getting a magazine about health, fashion and working advice for woman my age (43). I am a mother, a wife and a doctor who dedicates her life to women's health. I purchase your magazine to get AWAY from politics, which is everywhere. The story by Christina Bellantoni on Andrea Mitchell was appalling and so one-sided. She attacked Foster Friess for his reprehensible comments (which they were) against a liberal woman but was SILENT (as was Obama, NOW and other 'women's' groups) when Bill Maher called Sarah Palin A "cunt " and said Bristal Palin was "fuc*ed so hard a baby fell out." Where was her outrage then? Mitchell didn't call out her own colleague Ed Schultz at MSNBC when he called Laura Ingraham a "right wing slut". Finally, it was never mentioned in your article, nor brought up by Bellantoni that Andrea Mitchell had to publicly apologize for calling voters in Virginia "rednecks". This type of bias is so tiresome. Is this the best More can do? This sad, selective protection of liberals is shameful. Such comments have no place in a civilized society, whether it be against a liberal or a conservative. Shame on Andrea Mitchell , Bellantoni and MORE magazine. I used to put my magazines in the waiting room for patients to enjoy, now they will go in the recycle bin. Canceling subscription.
I read with great interest the article on "Lethal Weapon". Prescription drug ab use is an epidemic in the United States. As a nurse, I have been educating physicians in the use of a DNA testing that indicates propensity toward addition as well as whether the specific narcotic is being metabolized within the patient's system. This testing has been a tool for physicians to address a patients addiction genetically as well as get them to the medication that will be the most helpful. These "accidental addicts" are the result of not monitoring patients that are on narcotics and/or street drugs. We need to continue to educate physicians in this arena and proscecute those that do not follow evidence based medical protocol when it comes to narcotic prescriptions.
The work being done by Christi Hegranes (June 2012) is truly inspirational. She is giving a voice to women in societies where they have heretofore been silenced. Her contribution to the world's disenfranchised cannot be overstated.
Now, on a lighter note...I would love to see more fashion options for the 60+ woman. Let's face it, women in their 40s can still wear pretty much anything. At 62, even though I weigh 115 lbs. there are styles that I just can't wear anymore. There is an extremely fine line between dressing matronly and dressing "too young". Your magazine could provide a real service to the many women of a "certain age" who want to look stylish AND appropriate, especially those of us who cannot afford designer fashions.
I love the concept of MORE magazine. Having an insightful and tasteful magazine option would be very refreshing. However, I'm afraid that this is just another example of media being completely one-sided. What happened to the responsibility of a journalist to cover all sides of the issues and be unbiased? As a subscriber I've been waiting to see a sign that the editor realizes that not all women are democrats. There are woman of style and substance who are republicans too. I've always been very open to differing viewpoints and would like to see representation from all sides in this magazine. This is of course only because this magazine has chosen to immerse itself into polical issues. If it's a problem with finding writers who are willing to cover the "other" side, then consider this my informal request for a job. Otherwise I would suggest staying out of politics altogether. Comments from others on this board imply that I am not alone in this observasion. After reading "Return of the gender card", June 2012, I was offended on so many levels I wouldn't even know where to start. When Andrea Mitchell "weighs in on women voters mounting concerns", she doesn't speak for me.
As I looked at the cover of More's June issue, I wondered who that woman was. Madeleine Stowe was produced and styled to the point of being unrecognizable. If she's had cosmetic surgery done, which it looks like she had, it's left her quite changed. Then I turn to page 52 to read about how different and grounded she is...except for the photo of her spread across the front seat of a convertible like a Senior version of Playmate of the Month! I'm not a prude and I certainly think women of all ages can be sexy, but this is ridiculous. It's not that she's 53, it's that she's allowed her return to Hollywood to suck her into its "Forever 25" vortex. Madeleine, wake up! You can be a success without giving into the hoards of stylists demanding you become this distortion of real beauty. Or can you? My advice? Go back to that Texas ranch where I am sure, you'll find the real beauty of life.
I am so encouraged by Kathy O and Hilary Jones' comments and insight.... I am a professional working Mom and I subscribed to more because I wanted to grab a magazine that was age appropriate, but I am questioning this MORE and MORE. Your readers are NOT ALL LIBERALS. WE ARE ALSO REBULICAN WOMEN WHO CAN VOTE AND THINK FOR OURSELVES. Being Republican and fiscally conservative does not mean we are rascist or bigots. I am a minority woman with a family that includes all the colors of the rainbow and mORE....and I don't need the likes of Andrea Mitchell to TEACH ME ABOUT MY ROLE AS A WOMAN.
I am flabbergasted with MORE's interview with Andrea Mitchell. How about presenting the facts instead of falsely implying that women's access to contraception is in danger of being taken away? The real issues are:
1)expecting taxpayers to fund contraception and
2)mandating that religious institutions go aginst their beliefs to provide contraception to employees. I am a wife and mother who worked inside and outside the home for 34 years while raising 2 children. When I chose to use birth control I paid for it myself. Why should the 'Sandra Flukes' of the country expect taxpayers to cover this? I was under the impression that MORE magazine was directed toward grown up women. Real feminists and empowered women do not look to the government to take care of there every need. If women are concerned about anything it is the very real threat to individual and religious liberty from the politicians Andrea Mitchell and MORE magazine so obviously support.
I just finished reading your article about the 5 dermatologists' skin care regiments in your June 2012 issue. I was so disappointed to read that all 5 used some type of injections to keep their youthful looks. I am 63, retired and loving every minute of it. There is so much more to life than than looking like we are 35!
I have been a long time subscriber to your magazine, but I am increasinglly getting frustrated by it. While I always find something of value in it, I feel, like some others here, that it is less for "me". While I love Anna Quindlen, her piece left me a bit underwhelmed. While I agree with her that being of her generationand about the same age, I am more "me" than I may have been when younger and more comfortable in my skin. I can't say that I am happier than ever. Like a lot of fiftysomething women I know, I am financially stressed, do not have enough saved for retirement, and am worried about my college aged child and my aging parent. She and your editorial staff in general seem to live in a nice upper class cocoon, I would love to be in, but have no hope of getting to barring winning the lottery. I just skimmed the just arrived issue, and about choked about the necessity of having a $300 cashmire wrap for a plane flight. Really? If your subscription rates are dropping, it's because you are ignoring the reality that most of us are living in.
MORE keeps wading deeper and deeper into the political arena, seeming to not understand that many of your readers do not purchase the magazine for political commentary especially when it is so one-sided. Reading your interview with Andrea Mitchell from the June 2012 issue, one would think it was a paid advertisement from the Democratic Party. I truly hope MORE readers look beyond one-sided political fluff pieces like that. Women's rights are NOT being threatened by any candidates or any party. The issue is NOT reproductive rights, the issue is, does government have the right to force private insurance companies or businesses to pay for any procedure or medication? No one in Washington is trying to keep contraceptives out of the hands of women. I have worked for both private industry and government during my career. Some employers paid for contraception, others did not. If any particular aspect of health benefits are of paramount importance to you, then you need to review the benefits before accepting a job. Contraception is widely available for little cost through public health facilities for women without insurance. The democratic party grabbed onto this issue like a life raft when conservative candidate Santorum, a devout Catholic, expressed his thought that the government should not force businesses or their insurance carriers to pay for contraception. Period. Besides the fact that it was never about women not having access to contraception, Santorum has been out of the race for a long time.
This particular piece in MORE is truly disgraceful. While I do not agree with Andrea Mitchell's political leanings, throughout her career she has covered many important leaders and issues. But MORE chooses to feature Mitchell, during an eleciton year no less, with a highly-charged, misleading story that seems to have come straight out the Democratic, re-elect Obama playbook. SHAME ON YOU.
I appreciated Corbyn Hightower's essay, "Broke but Not Broken," in the May 2012 issue. Hightower's fall from wealth to poverty resonated with me. I come from the real estate industry surrounded by never-ending opulence until the mortgage crisis hit in 2008. It's ironic to see how many of my colleagues who used to tease me for driving my old battered up Ford Escort with no power windows selling their Mercedes and BMWs for second hand cars like mine. The fall from wealth to poverty is often preceded by hubris. Hightower's humbling essay shows it is never too late to embrace where you are without judgment and to accept others in spite of their socio-economic status. Thanks for sharing another illuminating nugget with us.
If it's one thing I've learned, it's that everyone has an opinion. We are all entitled to one. We don't have to agree with anyone else's opinion, but I think the idea is to be respectful of it. You can't possibly please all the people all the time. Whatever speaks to your soul...take THAT from the magazine. Whatever you don't agree with, simply dismiss.
I too was taken aback when I saw Chelsea Handler on the cover and also wanted to throw the issue in the trash. I don't mind controversy but when a woman disparages another woman constantly for the supposed enjoyment, she is nothing but a BULLY. And you became her pulpit. If this is the direction that the magazine is going, please let your readers know by having the Kardashian mother on your May issue.
I was very disappointed to see Chelsea Handler on the cover of More magazine. Quite frankly, I wanted to trash it immediately as it polluted the pages of a magazine that I thought was a little more tssteful. If Chelsea represents a woman of "style and substance," in America, then this country really is doomed! I have no more else to say!
Hey, I'm happy about Chelsea Handler on the cover even though she's 37! I'm one who gets annoyed with the vast spotlight on those under 50 -- as a nearly 58 year old. But, while I occasionally find her over the top, by and large I enjoy her and her directness. (Please don't take this as permission to feature Sarah Silverman though.
I'm also happy to see some clothes that aren't over the top expensive, especially in the piece about "slimming" outfits. Thank you for that -- I noticed.
But here' my idea, pretty please: How about an issue with a focus on job search when you're over 55? Not to talking about freelancers or creatives, or the whole "I gave it all up to find myself and start an artisanal cheese business." I'm talking corporate stuff. I was laid off in March, and while I've got hopes it is a whole 'nother ball game to be looking for managerial work at my age. Fortunately, I have a good track record, dyed hair and I'm in shape. But I swear to God, if being an early widow wasn't enough (husband died 4 years ago and as a creative guy left no money), being laid off at this age is just another kick in the pants. Oh, and I have a daughter who's a freshman in college so it's not like I can sell up and decide to join the Peace Corp.
I would LOVE a fashion spread on updating your look to read modern and closer to 45 than 65 (affordable, please, clothes/hair/makeup), approaches to the job market, all of that stuff.
And you can follow up with an article on find true love when you're closer to 69 than 40. Or being widowed.
I'm writing to say that I am canceling my subscription to More. I can't tell you how usappointed I am in this magazine for featuring such a passive aggressive bullying female as Chelsea Handler as cover subject, with the ridiculous assertion that she's a 'nice,' person. She may be crazy like a fox, for name dropping and attacking yet again, the most famous woman in the world Angelina Jolie to stir up controversy and garner interest in this banal 'More,' cover story of hers, but most of us can see this for what it is, a blatant cruel attempt to character assassinate a young woman she does not know. The fact that More stands by, and essentially sets up the pins so handler can knock them down (gee Chelsea, just who isn't an example of a 'girl's girl' in your opinion?) - encouraging her bullying snide remarks re Angelina Jolie is disgusting. Chelsea handler is a bully, and not a nice person - she certainly isn't someone I'd want as a friend. That said, I also think it's unethical of you to not reveal that Handler only became a friend of Aniston's a year or two ago when her longtime bestie who doubles as her equally long term power PR flack, signed Handler to his stable of banal mediocre petty actresses. That's when she stopped attacking and ridiculing Aniston, and started her vicious attacks on Angelina. It's clear, this kind of public slander and attack is designed to hurt Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie and their young family which I find shameful, dsgusting and hurtful. It's clear to anyone with a brain that Handler is Aniston and her power PR's hired hit woman, or make that Pitt bull. She doesn't know Jolie, and neither does Aniston. This continued hateful obsession by them is manipulative and dirty, and extremely transparent. More's participation in this subversive hit on a young mom and humanitarian, to beef up such petty bitter resentful losers (Aniston, Handler) is a clear sign you have no business in my reading selections, or my home. It was crass, tacky and low class, but no surprise considering the source. What IS a surprise is More's tacit encouraging approval and being an accomplice to such a bully.
I canceled my More sub yrs ago over your Democrat views...
Why did I come back? Now I see one or two GOP make it in... But Michelle Obama on cover and THEN Chelsea Handler too - GAG. No more More.
Of all the women in THE WORLD Chelsea Chandler makes your cover?! Is there anything to convet about HER? She represents valgarity, booze, and slutdom. her favoriate pastime is shocking us with talk of anal sex. Thanks More.
And Editor Mededith has lunch with Ar Huffington??? Enough said. Please cancel my subscription... Jeanine Shonk, Orient Ohio.
I have been disappointed by the last two issues - I found not many articles that relate to everyday/my life as an over forty woman. Also, it is hard to read - plain and simple - the font of the print is TOO SMALL. Is there anyone else out there that has a hard time just reading the magazine? I can't be the only one....
As a reader in her 50s, my memory of women's magazines is quite long. I yearn for MORE to move in the editorial direction of the defunct Mirabella and Mademoiselle magazines. There's a void since the voices of Grace Mirabella and Amy Cooper Levin left the publishing scene. Everything about those publications were art, from the photography to the typography to the headlines. Would love to see MORE nurture a stable of truly fine writers, hire the best fashion photographers in the business, focus less on you're-over-40-and-that's-ok. Forty is the new 20. We get it. Kick it up a few notches, please. Your magazine is enjoyed, but there's a need for more sophistication for female audiences that's not being taken care of in any other publication.
Please continue to include interviews with inspirational personalities, Hillary Clinton, in your magazine. Intelligent articles about intelligent women makes for a balanced "more."
It was the first story I read in this issue.
Would like to see a bit of architecture and other arts represented, as well as polital personalities that are influential in women's issues.
I enjoy your magazine but take issue with the April issue's article titled "These outfits only look expensive"...both outfits total more than $700 each! What planet are your fashion editors living on when they think that $700 is not expensive?? Please take into consideration your average reader and make your fashion picks a bit more affordable.
I've been reading your magazine since I was about 35. I love it. But, it would be nice to see a regular feature column that adds a little humour. I mention this as I came across a blog the other day where More is mentioned! It's essentially a humourous take on a woman approaching 40 called "endofadecade.wordpress.com" (More was mentioned in the blog post "Lawd-Ah-Mussy!") I think readers will get a kick out of it!!
Although your ads are getting better, I'm still offended by the use of teen/20's models. This is a magazine for 40+ women and surely you can get your advertisers to use models of the appropriate age range. I'm sick of "how to look 10 years younger" articles and ads. I'm 55, look near that age, will never, without surgery, look ten years younger. I do appreciate the latest research on how to care for my skin correctly. But, ads not aimed at your stated age group of readers is irksome. Let's truly celebrate the aging process. If you don't want to draw women readers in the 50+ range, then continue aiming everything at youth.
I've been reading and enjoying MORE for several years, and am compelled by your February 2012 issue to write this first comment to you. I read the article "Who owns our DNA anyway" with considerable annoyance. First, this is an unfolding story and I strongly believe that you owe it to your readers to publish an update letting them know that the Supreme Court has now ruled, in Myriad's favor. Second, while I appreciate your efforts at balanced journalism in this piece, as an intellectual property lawyer, I think you came up short and instead published a piece that actually (temporarily!) had a chilling effect on me and my wish to comment. There are lots of superb women who have made a career in IP law, including in biotech and the life sciences. I would love to see you include a profile on one of these women in a future issue (hopefully the one in which you publish the Supreme Court decision in the Myriad case!). For ideas, I suggest that you check with Women in Bio (wib.org).
By the way, fabulous picture of Mrs. O on the cover, and great story about her mentoring program for teen girls.
This magazine use to be great, really spoke to the age group it is targeted for, however today I read that a short haircut over 50 is "giving up", that the only shoes worth putting in the magazine cost an average of $900.00 each, and that wearing a $265.00 sweater on the weekends is normal!!!
Really?? Your lack of any pictures that flatter women, except celebs speaks volumes. Since when do we have to look like celebs? Is this People mag?
I have bought subscriptions to this magazine for gifts, and subscribed myself. No more More. If I want to be judged as "giving up" over a haircut this is not the magazine for me.
I just wanted to respond to a statement made in your February issue that Crohn's disease is "not life threatening." Although it is rare, I do know someone who died of Crohn's disease due to severe weight loss. Out of respect for her, I wanted to point that out.
i am very disappointed Mrs. Obama is on your cover as we are in the middle of a the campaign season....it appears your are pushing the current administration.....if it continues as much as I love this magazine because of the focus on older women I will cancel my subscription....i am a Republican and very proud that I am....political views have no place in a womens magazine...unless you warned me in advance this is a magazine for Democrats.
This has to be the most offensive cover you could have created. I received it the day after Obama's State of the Union (campaign) speech where he touts his presidency as a platform to speak down to the American people who (like me) own businesses, create jobs, pay for our children's college and have a tax rate that includes both personal and company taxes. Those of us who have never relied on nor asked the Government for any assistance, but took advantage of every opportunity we have had to work and create our own lifestyle. The fact that the Obama's continually use their position to promote their grandiosity is unprecedented and sickening. You should be ashamed for participating in their narcissist self-promotion at the expense of all that our country stands for. Cancel my subscription and cease all correspondence.
I really related to the Editor's letter in the Dec/Jan issue referring to work/life balance. Widowed when my daughter was 4 I was a working, full time college student. The school where my daughter went had a short day on Wed. where they got out an hour early. You don't know how many times that I would forget that it was Wed. and be the last parent there to pick up my child. I would feel like a horrible mommy.
Now I do have it all. An intelligent, beautiful 21 year old who is in college. A career that is rewarding and challenging and from which I get to work from home (only for the last year but it is heaven). A life filled with wonderful people and great times!
I can't think of another time when I've ever written a magazine to comment on an article so this is definitely a first. Not only do I adore Queen Latifah and love her on the cover of the Dec/Jan issue but I was so moved by Michelle Blake's real-life article about How Much Money is Ever Enough, I had to tell you about it. I am an ardent follower of More but many of the articles are just impractical to my circumstances or stage in life, however Michelle's really hit home in a practical, I-can-relate-to-that way. Well done and thank you.
I like the features such as "50 Perfect Gifts All Under $50" in the December/January issue. However, as a subscriber nearing 50, I am having a hard time reading the editorial description/list for it on the same page. I wear reading glasses but the type size you use for those features is still a bit too small. How about pumping it up half a point? I feel bad enough about not being able to read the label on the bottom of my lipstick.
Also, for a two month issue, December/January felt a little lightweight.
I'm a little bit late. But as an entrant of the 2011 More Beauty Search, who followed the contest closely, why did More pick a finalist who clearly didn't adhere to the rules. There was at least one finalist who had another person in her entry photo. According to the official rules, the picture should only include the entrant. I emailed More with my concerns and never heard back from them. I think all of the contestants deserve a refund..
Regarding The Man That Got Away...this start took my breath away....and not in a positive way. Misplaced emotions and actions by Ms. Kaufman and "Stephen" all those years ago caused deep pain and suffering to innocent individuals (namely Stephen's wife and children) who were not part of "their" secret. And it continues to cause pain today to Ms. Kaufman's family and to herself. I dated a Welsh man who wanted me to visit his family and sit with them "with both feet under the table". I have never forgotten the significance of that statement and it's implication of commitment. When I married for the second time, all the familiar crazy thoughts started coming to me prior to the wedding. The biggest one was where was I going to have my secret bank account incase I needed to make my escape. I caught myself before I went too far down that rabbit hole because if I was entertaining those thoughts there was no way the marriage was going to work. It takes both feet, one's head and heart for success. Ms. Kaufman you didn't ask for advice, but I am offering some. Pack the books away in the attic or better yet give them away. Only when you lose the fantasy can you have a chance at the reality. Your husband and children deserve your whole heart and in the process you may find an ever deepening love and the self esteem you so desperately crave.
Where’s the Fire?
My everyday life had become so chaotic that the spark for my passion to write had been smothered. I had been so preoccupied with everything else that I had no “me time” to catch up on my magazine reading. I believe that we attract into our lives that which we ask for. I asked for “me time” and spiritual fuel to reignite my passion. Well the universe gave me five hours, free from responsiblites in the middle of the day, on a flight from New York to San Fran. I took that time to catch up on some inspirational More Magazine reading. Okay lets be honest, as inspirational as More Magazine is I really was looking for some light reading and pictures for my vision board. Instead I found (in the November 2011 publication) Debbie Phillips in an article titled “Reinventing The Old Boy’s Club”.
In a simple easy to grasp style there were two columns with two women, Debbie Phillips and Deborah Perry Piscione, which briefly described their networking style. Phillips’s has tea parties and where women meet other like-minded women with whom they brainstorm and strategize on life goals. I was attracted to her website and book Women On Fire which I purchased immediately online. Women on Fire is a wonderfully motivating book about twenty women who share their success secrets in an effort to save other women the time of making unnecessary mistakes. I found a part of myself in each one. Well that was the spark that my spirit needed to get my mojo working again and I’ve been on fire. Of course I’ve renewed my magazine subscription (and order one as a gift for my sister). Your magazine is awesome! I thank the universe for answering my prayers so quickly and I thank More Magazine for being the answer.
Just wondering when you will be announcing when the 2012 Half Marathon will be held.
I hope to run it again and need to plan ahead. Thanks
I recently read the October issue of More, and was thouroughly enjoying it! However, my pleasure turned to dismay as I began to read at article "To Hell with Inner Beauty." I am a 17 year old girl, and sat in shock and disbelief as i read a rallying cry and justification for spending $21,000 on changing your appearance. $21,000 that could have went to charity and $21,000 that said, "If you don't like the way you look, don't accept it, change it!" Everyone has a right to do as they please but writing article condoning it isn't entirely acceptable or uplifting.
My suddenly single warning: This article will not necessarily amuse nor be an information piece. It’s more a warning like the side of a cigarette pack telling you the risks you take if you choose to light up. It will be a warning like those on alcoholic beverages that tell pregnant women not to drink and even the general public to employ good judgement when drinking in regards to operating a motor vehicle. Let’s call this article a warning label to those who may be contemplating being single again. And those who unfortunately will find themselves single unwillingly.
People think they are going to leave their troubled and angry marriages to enjoy a new life of quiet romantic dinners, dates, unbridled sex, and solid companionship.
MISTAKE! Big mistake.
This is so not the Disney Land of Dating. It is not a fantasy laced episode of Sex and the City. It’s rough and raw. No matter how much you hate your mate now, you will find life is not magically transformed because they aren’t there everyday. There’s getting over the old relationship which will surprise even the antagonists. One will have to then figure out the terms of engagement to negotiate the new ones. That is if there is that possibility of finding a “replacement” mate. Almost everyone is recycled.
We aren’t on a college campus now with the support system of frat and sorority parties to enhance our encounters for new friends and social occasions. The single dances for the mature crowd often invoke a bad wedding atmosphere of desperate people looking in all the wrong places. Desperate is not healthy.
Do you really want someone whose main activity is hanging and eating at the local bar? I leave that out there.
The pool of suitors and the suited is ravaged with cheaters, the emotionally shut down, the malcontents, the addicts, and workaholics, which then leaves about 3 people who are truly datable. Hopefully those three won’t suffer from other misfortunes like bad dental hygiene, weight issues, impending jail terms or drug/alcohol rehab.
If you get past that then you have the first date syndrome. Where to go, what to do and what not to do which might be even more important. Meeting for a drink or cup of coffee the first time is okay but it is cheap, cheap, cheap. Really, in our struggling economy extravagance is a scarce commodity. Men see dinner as a commitment, of their wallet. You also need to watch out for forgotten wallets, failures to present last names or places of resident. (What are we hiding here!)
And if you ladies meet a man and one of his first three questions is how many dates will he need to take you on before you will have sex with him.....he probably only wants to have sex.
So if your present spouse isn’t living up to your expectations, your hopes and dreams, neither will suddenly being single live up to its glorified mystique. Just saying.........
"Thank God! It's about time you got those things taken care of." These words, we are to believe, are uttered by a ten year old who has just been informed about her mother's, the journalist, Amanda Robb, upcoming plastic surgery to remove wrinkles! One hates to think about in what company this little girl spends her days, what she and her friends talk about and how they view women. "Those things" that need to be "taken care of" are the natural features of her mother's face!
Are you going to do the MORE gift bag for breast cancer this year like the past two years (at least)? In the past I have texted at a particular time and spent $100 for a great gift bag that benefited breast cancer research.
Hi. You can find a link to the September survey in this story: http://www.more.com/september-2011-survey. We look forward to your feedback!
Terms of Service |