I started reading More in my early 50's --so whenever the cover stated in your 30's, 40's, 50's, I felt I belonged. Now, at 64, I'm still going strong and still reading your magazine. But, I feel left out and to my dismay feel that maybe More is no longer for me. In the past three months, two issues hit me in the face with red letters--How to age well at 30, 40, 50. I'm starting to feel that "I'm getting old" syndrome, especially when the magazine I love isn't embracing me. I may not wear high, high heels anymore (thank God), but I still take care of my face, body and appearance. More should take (more) notice of their 50 year old readers, who sailed along gracefully on every informative article over the years, helping (if only a little) to enhance their wisdom, beauty and attitude. So lets see more of More for the exuberant 60's.
Why did I buy a magazine for "women of my age" and find an Estee Lauder ad on page 1 with 3 lovely YOUNG girls, all under the age of 25? Really? Is there no way to run age appropriate advertising? I not only don't want to look like I'm 25 years old.. I CAN'T!!!!!
Hate the change!
There is a huge difference in all aspects of life between our 30s and 40+. This covers everything from fashion & make-up to health issues to family/work issues to how we see the world through our life experiences.
I want to see only 40+ women on the cover, in the ads, and in the columns & articles. I really cannot relate to the issues of a 30-something.
I know 3 other women who purchase this subscription every year. None of us likes the change.
MORE magazine is truly my favorite since it covers what I feel are important issues for women my age.
I am a 56 year old professional and have read this magazine since it's inception. The November issue was troubling for me. The article in Stylebook: Is your closet too old? had before and many after pictures.
The styles were exactly what I would love to wear but the prices were much more than I can afford. Skirts for $695 and $780! Tops for $325, $275 and $525! It seems like this article was geared towards women who are in the upper tier of wealth and spending.
I am sure the magazine does not wish this to be true so please include more moderately priced items for me too.
To the Good people at MORE:
I was very disappointed to receive the November issue with Sarah Michelle Gellar on the cover. She doesn’t belong on the cover of MORE – maybe in 5 years but not now.
There are many other women with more “life journey” that should be gracing the cover with their in-depth story.
Please don’t start peddling backwards!
Thank you for your time.
I purchased your magazine because I thoroughly enjoyed every page of this magazine. This month, your cover feature was entitled "how to age well in your 30, 40, and 50. I almost put the magazine back, figuring that I was out of you consumer base. I am 63, and perhaps I have outgrown More. Why would you neglect people over the age of 60! I thought your magazine was designed for people above the age of ?, but perhaps you are now reaching for the 30 year old woman. If that is the case, you need more articles on weddings, childbirth, and finding a career.
If you are wondering if I am offended, I have to respond emphatically; yes.
If 60 is the new 40, what are you thinking? There are a lot of baby boomers out there still active and embracing life (not AARP) who are being ignored by this article. Just giving you a heads up, because we will probably put the magazine back on the store shelf next month.
--Carole Lynn Gathman
I was really distressed by your article on page 27 - Is your closet too old? Not so much for what you espousing, but because of the person you used as an example.