We Hear You! Letters from Our December 2013/January 2014 Issue

Leave a comment here or send us your feedback by letter or e-mail—we love hearing your thoughts!

by MORE • Editors
emma thompson cover image

I admire Alexandra Starr's writing and enjoyed her article, "The New Founding Mothers." A wonderful article about a state whose singular women rightfully deserve attention. 
However, I could not help think about Jeannette Rankin the first woman in Congress elected in 1916 and 1940 from Montana. She was a true pacifist who voted against the WWI vote and the declaration of war against Japan. Jeanette's individual life was full of firsts also.
I remember Bella Abzug speaking about her disappointment in women's response to the challenges during the 70's and 80's.  My wish is for more historical stories of inspiration for the women of today.
Thank you for the article.
--Louise Edwards


The reason I subscribed to MORE originally was because it was touted to be a magazine designed for women over 40. Like my friends I was tired of the cliché publications focusing on the younger generation - good as they are they just didn't speak to us any longer.  However, I've noticed on several of your magazine covers that you STOP showing women over 50. I'm sure you're aware that baby boomers are the fasted growing age group - so many more turning 65 everyday. And not only are we active (I’m 62, do boot camp, golf, swimming, yoga and Zumba weekly and my Mom who is 84, does Pilates and yoga weekly) we also have the financial means to support your advertisers. So my friends and I would like to see a bigger focus on the active 60+ women, new careers, relationship advice, fashion, beauty and health. Thanks for listening!
--Karyn O'Connor

Dear Editor,

I have been a More subscriber since I was in my 40's. I am now in my early 60's.

More was initially designed for women in their 40's, 50's and 60's. Most women's magazines were geared to women in their 20's and 30's and still are. More was unique, and the magazine realized that as women aged they were more established in their careers, had the desire to read about successful women in their age group, see models in their age group wearing the clothes they wanted to buy and hearing about make up, body issues and other beauty tips applicable to their age group. 

I have noticed that More Magazine has shifted its focus now to concentrate its articles for women in their 30's, 40's and 50's. I am very disappointed each month to see this shift continue. Why did More decide to eliminate women in their 60's? Except for Model Contest selection of a 71-year-old woman, there was a 30 yr. old, 40 year old and 50 year old. Why include a 30 year old and eliminate a 60 year old?

I also noticed with regret that the magazine has eliminated its articles that I loved on cooking/food and travel. 
--Karen Lamkin


I was very disappointed when your folks decided to include 30-somethings in MORE magazine.  Frankly, so many mags already address issues for the 'younger' woman.  The only reason I can see that you've included the 30-somethings in MORE is to increase your advertising income.  Seeing 'How To Age Well at 30......." on the November cover and 'Your Best Hair at 30............" on the December cover reminds me of Glamour, InStyle, Cosmo, Self, Shape................you seem to be morphing into one of the pack.  Working Mom stories and having it all - for the 30-year old just starting out - will be the next slew of stories that will probably have me cancelling after all these years.  I read them all when I WAS 30!!   And I'll be mourning the loss of a long-time friend as I cancel.

Share Your Thoughts!



I too was upset with the article by Amanda Robb, "The Woman who won't back down". I am against violence in any form - the killing of Dr Tiller and the killing of innocent babies.
I am thankful for the extra regulations that have been placed on Abortion clinics and Planned Parenthood. " In one year South Wind performed 1000 abortions" says the article, Are they proud of this? I'm disgusted and sad. How about writing a piece on how abortions kill babies and the long-term psychological problems that occur with women who abort???

I was very angry when I read the article by Amanda Robb, "The Woman Who Won't Back Down." She is the person who took over Dr. Tiller's late term abortion facility. I found the article one sided and found it disturbing that she and Dr. Tiller were made to look like heroes. He should not have been murdered. His life was just as important as every one of the lives he took during his late term abortions. He did unspeakable evils to innocent unborn children, but he is a child of God and deserved life. No pro-life person would think otherwise. We would fight for his life too. Burkhart's comment, "Are we going to be a country that forces Midwestern women to be pregnant?", was ridiculous. It implied that women do not know what causes us to become pregnant! It sounded like we suddenly find ourselves pregnant maybe from something in the water! Pregnancy is not a germ or a disease that must be ripped out of a woman even up until birth as was done at that clinic. This is a living, growing child with a heartbeat. We get all up in arms about the use of fur and the killing of whales, and we should, but the babies need us too. Speak up! Women need help, not death for their unborn babies. One mother + one dead baby = two victims and one rich abortionist.


Emma Thompson’s profile in your Dec 2013/Jan 2014 issue was both entertaining and interesting. As the article details, Emma Thompson “finds joy with extended family, a pantry full of comfort food, and a new burst of creativity” However, it would have been more informative to mention her latest “creative” endeavor: adding her name to the protest against the inclusion of the Israeli theater company Habima, at an Shakespeare festival held in May 2013. Ms. Thompson, along with more than thirty British stage and screen artists insisted that by “...inviting Habima, the Globe is associating itself with policies of exclusion practised by the Israeli state and endorsed by its national theatre company.” In this declaration the artists demanded that the invitation be withdrawn, “… so that the festival is not complicit with human rights violations and the illegal colonisation of occupied land.” It would be been more intellectually honest of More to include this facet of Emma Thompson, albeit a view perhaps less entertaining.
As the Bard of Avon might offer, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks.” Why pick on Israel? While I champion Ms. Thompson’s right and desire to protest human rights violations, her enthusiasm would appear a bit more genuine had she initiated a boycott of say, Yemen. In Yemen, a woman is not recognized as a full person before the court. Moreover, a single woman’s testimony isn’t taken seriously unless it’s backed by a man’s testimony, or concerns a place or situation where a man would not be. And women can’t testify at all in cases of adultery, libel, theft or sodomy.”(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/10/27/7-ridiculou...) But given the misogynistic laws pervasive throughout the Muslim world, Yemen would certainly not be the only stop on Ms. Thompson’s train of righteous indignation, were it to allowed to proceed freely and factually. She and her cohorts have condemned Israel for its human rights violations in regard to Palestinians.
And, as the Bard would declare, “What light through yonder window breaks?” “Guess who graduated first in this year's medical school class at the Technion, Israel's version of M.I.T? “ Not surprising to those knowledgeable about Israel’s educational system, the answer is: “..an observant Islamic woman named Mais Ali-Saleh, who grew up in a small village outside of Nazareth, in Israel's Galilee.” (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diana-bletter/guess-whos-valedictorian_b_3...) Though chic for many actors/musical artists to don the keffiyeh of outrage against Israel, the less fashionable pathway of historical truths would be the more admirable pursuit. In conclusion, the Bard is worth turning to: “in a false quarrel there is no true valor.”
Diane Biegel

Post new comment

Click to add a comment