We Hear You! Letters from Our May 2013 Issue

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

by MORE • Editors
lauren graham image

First let me compliment you on the magazine, it has lovely stories and is inspiring to many of us older women, in many ways. But, may I just give you my slant on getting older...I am a 61 year old, wife, and mom of two adult children, and a 12 year breast cancer survivor..With that said, I feel almost guilty in confessing to you, I do not feel particularly lucky on a daily basis and have a less "upbeat" take on life, rather than the always grateful and happy people that seem to be reflected in the stories in your magazine. I guess what I mean is that there do not seem to be any ladies who reflect the negative and angry way that disease( and others) affect us and am I the only one who not only feels like "why me?" but in fact, "why the HELL me?" and the many ways the experience has affected my life, EVEN THOUGH I HAVE SO FAR, SURVIVED.  For example, the lousy body image we see every day when getting dressed, the ever present fear of the next mammo, and of course, the lingering dread that we may have indeed passed this horrible thing tour daughters and grand-daughters both of which I have. I just wanted to say that..Please do not understand me, as I have received your publication for several years and will continue to. I love it. But just needed to vent. Thanks for listening and again, I especially enjoy your letters from the Editor. Continue your special work.

Sincerely Yours,
--Linda Tones

My daughter and I have always been Gilmore Girl fans and when I received your May 2013 issue and saw Lauren Graham on the cover, I instantly ripped open the protective covering to read the article. My jaw literally dropped when I saw the photo of Lauren bent over with her boobs falling out of her blouse and her legs splayed with the grass skirt exposing them.  I had to flip back to the cover to make sure I was not looking at Cosmo.  I felt as though Lauren should not have allowed herself to be photographed in such a sexually explicit pose; perhaps things were moving so quickly she was unaware of what was happening. What is wrong with Peggy Sirota and what was she thinking when she asked Lauren to pose like this? What is wrong with More Magazine thinking this is an appropriate photograph to highlight their cover article? Who is Jonny Lichtenstein and whose idea was this anyway?  Is someone trying to make us notice their name and achieve notoriety at Lauren's expense?

My impression of this magazine was that it is for the more mature woman who has richly experienced life and is smarter and more confident because of that experience. When a smart, confident and mature woman looks at a photograph of a beautiful woman who has allowed herself to be cheaply displayed as an object of pure sexuality, she wonders if perhaps feminism has not made as much progress as she had previously thought.  Lauren is a beautiful, intelligent, sexually attractive woman who does not need to expose herself to the world in such a provocative pose. Even if I had Lauren's gorgeous face and body, I would not allow anyone to photograph me like this in my own home. 

Maybe it did not feel sexual or provocative when the photo shoot was being done but it certainly appears as such when you look at the final result.  This photograph should have been given to Lauren quietly so she could hide it in her diary or paper shredder.  That would have been the only decent thing to do with it.  Instead whether Lauren was aware of it or not, this magazine exploited her beautiful womanhood to something that in the end truly cheapens this magazine.  My impression has always been that this magazine was for mature women who value brains as well as beauty but does not allow themselves to be thought of as sexual objects.  The cover of your magazine is More for Women of Style & Substance.  This is substance?
--Nancy Dahood

I love More magazine because, when I started reading it, I felt like I had finally found that sweet spot between being too old for Glamour, to down-to-earth for Vogue, and too into magazines to give them up.

But your newest issue (with Lauren Graham on the cover) made me sick.  It was so full of retro body-shaming that I could barely make it through the issue.  Please take a careful look at this issue. 

Share Your Thoughts!

Comments

Hoyt06.21.2013

I am disappointed to watch More become another magazine for the 35-50 demographic. The occasional inclusion of a woman in her 60's is not enough to balance the focus on celebrities who are nearing or barely 40. There are many talented and interesting women in their 60's and 70's who have reinvented themselves several times and found fashion and a style that suits them. They have found a way to get "more" out of life, and I would like to read about them.
Unless I see some change back to the magazine I thought I was buying when I subscribed, I will allow my subscription to expire.

Hoyt06.21.2013

I am disappointed to watch More become another magazine for the 35-50 demographic. The occasional inclusion of a woman in her 60's is not enough to balance the focus on celebrities who are nearing or barely 40. There are many talented and interesting women in their 60's and 70's who have reinvented themselves several times and found fashion and a style that suits them. They have found a way to get "more" out of life, and I would like to read about them.
Unless I see some change back to the magazine I thought I was buying when I subscribed, I will allow my subscription to expire.

Daphne Galvin06.02.2013

In "How To Find Happiness At Any Age", I found it interesting that there was no mention of "sex" or "sexuality". Hard to believe that those critical components of aging end in our 30's, especially when we are getting happier as we get older!

Cheryle 04.29.2013

The article “The Rebel Priests” in your May edition was a very disturbing and painfully biased article full of untruthful suppositions. It is quite apparent that the author did not take into consideration a number of very basic facts regarding the Catholic Church.
1) When a bishop is excommunicated, he loses all power to perform any sacraments. Ordination is a sacrament; no power to perform this sacrament means no valid sacrament. Hence these misguided women in your article were never legitimately ordained. If you are not ordained, you cannot be elevated to Bishop, thus these misguided women are not valid bishops and are not in succession of St. Peter.
2) To have a valid marriage within the Catholic Church, the ceremony must be performed by a validly ordained Priest or Deacon. I certainly hope that Ms. Venne is not misleading the couples that she “weds” that their marriage will be considered valid in the Catholic Church.
3) The 2010 Delicta Graviora did not “condemn” female priests, it simply reaffirmed in very clear language the church’s stance on the priesthood. The misguided women in your article are free to interpret this as condemnation; however it is a shame that they take such a stand.
4) The priesthood isn’t a myth dreamed up by authoritative or egotistical men; this is also based on scripture. God chose who would be his disciples (Mark 3:13-14). Read the passage closely – he chose all men.
5) The celibate priesthood is also based on scripture (Matt 19:12; 1 Cor 7:32). In John 13:34 God commands us to love one another as He loves us. This is not an easy commandment – to accomplish this requires a total commitment to the Church and her members. When a man is ordained to the priesthood he knows that his life from that point forward is about emulating Jesus, that he is to love us as God loves us. This is an amazing sacrifice; please do not diminish this unselfish act.
The author also makes the statement that the women profiled in the article had hoped that Pope Francis would allow women to be ordained priests. This is a Canon Law – not a guideline that is simply revised with each newly elected pope. The pope can change a Discipline but he cannot change Canon Law.
One last note: It is true that in the bible many prophets suffered for their cause; however it should be noted that the prophets were all following the laws and the word of God. It is very unfortunate that the women in this article are spinning the words of God into an elaborate web of deceit. Revelations 22:18 very clearly warns of such actions, I suggest they read this passage very closely.

Post new comment

Click to add a comment