Since I will be 40 next month, I decided to get a magazine subscription for women 40 and over...titled "MORE".

Here's the link:
http://www.more.com

I will be getting it in the mail soon....so those of you who had or is now reading this magazine, is it good? What's all in it?

I love it. I have a subscription. All kinds of good stuff relevant to US. I'm sure you will enjoy it alot.

I've never heard of it but it looks interesting. I was getting Oprah's O magazine for about a year. I did like the articles, but it has SO much advertising in it! Plus, it was too expensive if you ask me. How much is a subscription for "More" magazine?

I wanted to add something........I was exploring the magazine through the link you posted and found some great articles on peri-menopause and menopause under the health tab at the top of the front page. Thanks for posting it!!

I have had a subscription to More Magazine since it started and I really enjoy it. I pass it along to my girlfriend when I'm done and she enjoys it also....and I'm sure you will too!

c

p.s. My favourite magazine is Body and Soul Magazine. I keep those!

I subscribe to it also. It has had a few good articles but I don't see myself renewing.

I had a one year subscription and didn't renew it, but still read it since I can get it free from the library. There are a couple things that bother me about More.

1) The publisher must be under the impression that their readers are mostly very highly paid career women. For example, the Nov '09 issue is right in front of me. Page 29 is a style page about wrist watches. There are 5 watches pictured. Here are the prices: $680, $23,600, $14,350, $5,500 and $2,995. I don't know about you guys, but the most I have spent on a watch was about $75. Come on, do you have $23,600 laying around to be used on a watch?!!! In their defense, the next page is titled: "Jungle prints under $100." So, after I'm thoroughly depressed about the watches, I turn the page and feel better. Yeah right! (I'm still thinking about the women with all that money to spend!)

2) They focus their job related articles on college educated, life long career women, who are highly marketable in today's work force. I guess I just wish that they would realize that there are women out there in their 40's and above who have been stay-at-home moms, and who disparately need guidance in how to get back into the work force. So, Nov, "09 issue, page 106 is "10 Best Jobs." For whom? Eight of them require at least a bachelor's degree. The only job I would be eligible for is #10... farmer. (nothing against farmers!)

The health and fitness articles are why I bother with More magazine, since they do apply to me, and I enjoy them.

Just my 2 cents and a book's worth.

jem

I think most magazines feature fashion/clothing that doesn't apply to anyone I know. They will feature an outfit where the pants are $150, blouse,,,maybe $74, shoes $175....you get my point. I don't know anyone that buys clothes like that.

Most magazines photo shop all the models too. No one really looks like they do in a magazine. We all try to live up to those standards.

I do enjoy reading More magazine and take out of it whatever I can.

Instead of buying a subscription, couldn't I just read it on line? All I would be interested in is reading about health issues, etc.

I agree with a lot of what has been said. As far as the expensive fashions, most magazines do that. But the value in seeing what's "hot", fashionwise, is that you can use that information at any store. For instance, this fall, "skinny" pants and leggings with long belted sweaters or tunics seem to be "in", and you can find good looking ones at Target as well as Nordstrom's. Or you can look at those expensive watches and find similar ones on sale at Macy's or J.C. Penney. What's good to know is the STYLE that is popular, and which styles YOU like.

I get "More" free, with my airline miles. I get far too many subscriptions free that way - but More is one of my favorites.

What I DON'T like about "More" is that the models they use - although our age and not model skinny - still usually look far younger than their age. What's wrong with being 52 and looking 52, not 35?? I think most of them (not all - some people are naturally young looking) have had work done to appear so young. They once had a little controversy about that, and MORE magazine said they wouldn't presume to interfere or chastise women for doing anything they wanted to do to cope with aging. It's not that we want them to interfere or chastise - just to show BOTH the younger looking AND the women who appear to be their own age - what's wrong with that?

I used to subscribe, but don't anymore. It made me feel worse about myself. I like Self magazine and Body+Soul much better.

I just had a "preview" with the current issue before I receive my first subscription in the mail in about 2 months from now....and here are my thoughts:

1. Actress Diane Keaton, on the cover, looks photoshopped. I have looked up her photo with Google and she really has those lines on her face....but on MORE, she has no lines on her face. This shows that ALL magazines, including MORE, photoshop their models or celebrities....even in teenage magazines too!

2. Yes, those clothes shown on MORE are considered very high priced. I am not for those articles since I can find clothing similiar to them in a much cheaper and better deal, like in a department store (Target, Kmart, Walmart, Bell's Outlet, etc.) ....the clothes in the articles are nice to look at but too expensive.

3. I love the beauty tips and the makeup shown to make you look better and even a bit younger. I also like the health stuff in there as well.

[quote name='HOHNancy' date='Oct 27 2009, 05:43 PM' post='316032']
I just had a "preview" with the current issue before I receive my first subscription in the mail in about 2 months from now....and here are my thoughts:

1. Actress Diane Keaton, on the cover, looks photoshopped. I have looked up her photo with Google and she really has those lines on her face....but on MORE, she has no lines on her face. This shows that ALL magazines, including MORE, photoshop their models or celebrities....even in teenage magazines too!



I just recieved our new copy of "ARRP" magazine in the mail today. Natalie Cole is on the cover and she looks about 35-40 and georgeous. Very few lines on her face...I guess that picture was "fixed" too. By the way....she's 59....

Why are celebrities so afraid to show that they are "regular" women just like us?? It's frustrating....