I read the article (if you can call it that) "The Seven Newswomen," whom you deem to be the ones who "cast a critical eye on the candidates this election season." Seriously? What about the newswomen from Fox News? Interesting how you conveniently left these women out of your feature article. If you took the time to read their biographies, you would undoubtedly be impressed with their collective résumés and scholastic achievements, and I believe some of them may ALSO have a "critical eye" on the candidates this election season. For you to deliberately exclude any of these women from your feature story is inexcusable, but not surprising.
I am truly disappointed that your publication (like so many others) is slanted to the left. But what else is new? Your feature "The Seven Newswomen" obviously eliminated the newswomen from Fox News because of the current political climate. You are free to publish whatever you want, and I am free to no longer read it. That said, I am canceling my subscription. I'm sure one less subscription is no big deal to you. However, it is a big deal to me every time I read the newspaper or watch CNN or MSNBC or read More, and it becomes more and more obvious that the American public is being brainwashed by the left-wing media. Fairness in journalism no longer exists.
I completed the October 2012 survey—thought there would be space at the end of the survey for comments ... here's one I didn't get to post. I was disappointed the magazine chose only "liberal" newswomen to feature in "Hail to the Sheath" on pages 126-133. Newswomen on Fox News would also be "casting a crticial eye on the candidates..." Instead of appearing to reach women across both political aisles, the magazine comes across as not being interested in women with more conservative views. An obvious deletion that will dictate my decision upon renewal.
I will take you at your word that you want to hear complaints as well as compliments about your magazine. I have been a subscriber for many years and eagerly look forward to each month's issue of More. Today when I turned to the section "A Field Guide to the Mature Male," I was horrified. I am 55 years old and married with a spouse the same age. We like to share little jokes about men and women (Mars and Venus), and we can laugh at ourselves and our aging bodies. However, most of this Field Guide is just NOT funny, particularly the drawing and comments on page 140. If such an article appeared in a men's magazine about women's bodies, feminists would be appalled. I am very disappointed that your staff finds this kind of humor appropriate for the "mature" woman.
It is great there is a magazine for the “older” generation of women. You are a wonderful resource for the 35- to 50-year-old women in the country. Your subject matters are pertinent to that generation with suggestions on how to move forward when difficult situations present themselves in their lives. Great articles that address concerns such as job loss and reinventing their careers, illness and recovery, emotional issues from divorce and finding love again are in each issue. I applaud you on creating this for those women.
It is clear your staff is 40 and under. There is very little representation for women 55 and above. If we wore the clothes you show, we would look ridiculous or frumpy. Job loss and recovery for us is completely different than the 35- to 50-year-old with a career future. Medical advice is not the same either. Divorce after 25 to 30 years can destroy our lives due to loss of homes and little possibility of purchasing another. There are women who find love again, but most of us are not attractive to men of similar age that we have been fighting against for jobs our whole lives (a negative outcome of the “women’s liberation era” we are products of). Who knew that wasn’t going to work so well for us???