For example, I was totally alienated by the March edition's In Your 30s comment that 'This is the time to experiment. Short, sheer, skintight - for you, nothing is out of bounds.' Which is exactly why I want a magazine catering to older women - some things are now out of bounds and we need advice on how to walk the line between fun and stylish, yet appropriate. I am a young 51, but don't want to have to compare myself to a 30 year old.
I'd love to hear what has caused this change in MORE.
If MORE is a magazine for women why pose Connie Britton wearing a black lace teddy?
I just don't see the need to have her lying across the bed with her shirt half off. Yes, she is beautiful but we know that. It was a total turn off for me and I didn't even read the article.
It's disappointing that we are still using that even to sell to ourselves.
I am sure you could have shown her doing just about anything else that would portray her as the smart, funny and beautiful person she probably is.
--Mary J Stoner
I have been a reader of MORE almost from its inception...and do not in any way consider myself to be conservative in my thinking...but I was truly disappointed in the photo spread of Connie Britton in the March issue. She is an attractive woman; yet the pictures presented of her bordered on tastelessness. I'm sure that her beautiful figure could have been photographed in different settings that still did justice to how lovely she is.
Thanks for listening,
I am a woman in my mid-50s who, hopefully, is headed for my 60s. I have been looking for a magazine that speaks to those in my age group and had hoped it would be MORE, I was excited when my first issue arrived – March 2013 – and one of the feature articles was about what women should wear in each decade of their lives. Was glad to see that MORE also included a section on “In Your 60s.” What bothered me, however, is that the section on 50s noted that back in the 1950s, women who wore bright colors were considered garish, yet your section for those in their 60s featured only black and white clothing. So has the 60s become the new 50s? My mom is heading into her 80s and wears plenty of bright colors and has the best sense of style of anyone I know. The whole section was really rather depressing. Sure black and white is a great combination, but only black and white? Is this all women my age have to look forward to? In this day and age, women of all ages should have the freedom to embrace some color.
--Kathleen Brunet Eagan
Dear Editor Seymour,
I have been a fan and subscriber for several years and frequently give this magazine as gifts. But this February issue made me want to give a few opinions and i was unable to get my eldest daughters aged, refurbished Dell laptop to link up on your site. I stuffed my thoughts aside until March issue arrived and found I could hold my stuffings no longer.
I don't know if its my being post-hysterectomy, having three kids including two teenagers at home as a single mother and the stress is getting to me or plain mid-life crisis or if the magazine has changed...but point blank - in my opinion - this magazine just doesn't represent REAL women. It feels like "fantasy fodder" for us 'normies.' The masses that have to shop at Walmart and discount stores. That have oatmeal each morning not because it's a health trend but because it's CHEAP breakfast food.
I find little to identify with in sections like 'Finance' when it's about someone spending 'out of spite,' turning down a $5000 writing job so they can watch more t.v. with her boyfriend and thinking it's something to be proud of. Or 'I threw away half a million dollars, out of guilt' - pleeeese. What i could do with $500K!
I could write you 7-8 paragraphs about REAL finance if you like. "How to live off $1500 a month with Three Kids" or "If I Get a Part Time Job My Kids and I Lose More in Food Stamps Then The Job Pays." The Rat Wheel of financial stress, dependence on government assistance - i know alot about that.