We Hear You! Letters from Our October 2012 Issue

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

by MORE • Editors
salma hayek cover image

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.  

--Kathy Entringer

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.

--Diane Hannan

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.

--Karen Ryan

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???

Share Your Thoughts!

Comments

Iris 11.05.2012

Well, the article A FIELD GUIDE TO THE MATURE MALE, to me, was disrespectful to men, disrespectful to my husband, and, frankly disrespectful to me. There was NOTHING positive in this article and I didn't find it funny. I found it offensive.
Have I gotten too old for MORE Magazine? I didn't think so. At 61 yrs young I still work part time, I go to the gym, I know how to have a good time.
I am disappointed.

Amy Kar10.26.2012

I found so much meaty stuff to read in the October issue. You seem to put the more frivolous articles up front, but I do enjoy the occasional makeup info, even if I don't spend quite so much on the stuff!
But I'm really writing to say how much I got out of reading the piece on sex trafficking, the piece on Isabel Wilkerson/Richard Wright in Paris, and the interview with Salma Hayek. They were all thought-provoking articles, and more important than "Hail to the Sheath;" granted, the women on TV need to look good for the cameras, but are they really purchasing most of their clothes from SFA, shoes from Jimmy Choo, and jewelry from Tiffany, or was that just magazine-sponsored for the photo shoot?!
As for the "Mature Male" thing - just silly and fun, if a little hyperbolic; I see no harm in it if you don't take it seriously!
I'm now officially in my sixties, having just turned 61 this week, but I still think there's enough in More for me (how I chuckle when I read, "This is what 42" looks like - just wait for menopause, honey!). I like the serious articles and I always read nutritional information (even though I get CSPI newsletter and often know more than your articles tell us!).

L 10.25.2012

This is a comment regarding your article on our first lady's article!! We elect a president not a first lady and our president is well payed for his service along with many wonderful perks the whole family endures.
Although the first lady job is not easy we must remember that it comes with a choice before taking it!! Our first lady receives many wonderful perks that include many trips around the world along with wearing and experiencing a most glamorous and expensive lifestyle which offer many great opportunties that strengthen her wordly experience and leave plenty of open doors for her future especially after she leave this honorable job. Yes indeed a stay at home mom can only dream of such a fascinating and fulfilling job as we do dont get paid and have no perks and do a heck of alot more scarificing!!! imagine the mom who works full time and still has to come home after a full day and atill play the role of an unpaid stay at home!!!! Yes indeed, no one promised the political world to be a rose garden afterall what job is? The one with no pay and many perks or the one with pay and no perks and lets not forget the hardest job the one of them all the no pay, no perks and alot of heck of alot more scarficing!! One day there will be a women president along with a first man (HOW SWEET THE SOUND) and he will reap the many benefits and great opportunities this great service for the people has to offer without pay!!!!! Never worried about any first lady regardless of their backgrounds before entering into this great service for the people because they are all well taken care of while they are in and are always well taken care when they come out, smelling like that wonderful fresh rose we all dream about!!!!!!

Mitzi 10.20.2012

I thoroughly enjoyed the article on the woman combatting sex-trafficking. For once, you profiled a woman who is not a fashion plate with a perfect figure and tons of money to throw at uncomfortable shoes. Please - more stories about real women making a difference!
Notice a bit of "mission creep" in the past few issues......featuring more under 50 women and over. Having second thoughts about your audience, are you?

Marianne Harmon10.20.2012

I had a subscription to More a few years ago but cancelled it because I didn't think it represented me well at all. I saw Salma Hayek on the cover of October's issue and picked up a copy out of curiosity. When I read through it, I remembered why I cancelled my subscription previously. In your article, Hail to the Sheath: Reporters Wear This Season's Best Silhouette, it was remarkably noticeable that you included all major networks except Fox News. You had women from PBS, MSNBC, CNN, NY Times, Washington Post, CBS This Morning, and Politico.com, all left-leaning, if not tilting, organizations. Are you trying to purposely limit your audience to less than half the country? Be inclusive, not offensive.
Marianne Harmon
Severna Park, MD

Elizabeth 10.06.2012

Like many other readers whose comments I’ve read here, I was surprised to find something as callous and offensive as “Guide to the Mature Male” in this magazine. Hey, like most of the women who read this, I have a guy and he's pretty great, or I wouldn't have chosen him.
This is typically the one magazine that I read cover-to-cover, have recommended on many occasions, and have given as a gift to many friends and family. I still enjoy many of the features and articles in it. I always laugh at the high-end fashion—over $1000 for a pair of shoes, a handbag? Are there really women who can’t find enough useful things to do with aalllllll their money that they would spend like that? But one trend I’ve seen lately that I really don’t like is the mind-numbing number of ads up front. The September issue was the worst—FOURTEEN PAGES OF ADS before getting to the table of contents? —what is this, CosMOREpolitan?

Leann Holcomb10.02.2012

I have always enjoyed reading More magazine until this month. I found "Kathy Griffin's 7 reasons not to date a man over 40" vulgar, offensive, and not at all what I expect to find in a magazine that targets "women of style and substance". I would expect this from one of your trashy competitors. If this is the direction your magazine is going I'm sad to say I will not be going with you.

Robbie Davis09.29.2012

I read the article on concierge medicine with interest. I converted to a concierge plan a number of years ago to follow my long-time GP. Although I truly appreciate the perks of the system (and they have been very helpful on a number of occasions), I feel very guilty that I should be able to get better health care merely because I can afford it. This speaks to the wider issue of why we desperately need health care reform.

Post new comment

Click to add a comment