Product Details
Would you like to give feedback on images?
|
Tags Customers Associate with This Product(What's this?)Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
|
1) It still has the fluffy/girly "Cosmoesque" articles we can't help loving (i.e. "What are his p.j.'s telling you?") -- which the upscale fashion magazines (such as Vogue) won't cover -- but it presents these in a much more respectful way than Cosmopolitan (or even Glamour) would. ~For example, in an article entitled, "How long should you wait to get married?", a handful of couples of differing experiences simply explain what worked for them. There is absolutely no commentary; readers are to take these first-hand accounts and decide how they feel about the issue for themselves. (This is how Marie Claire does most of its articles.) This is in direct contrast to the Cosmo approach which, no doubt, would have included a timetable to follow and games to play to make it happen, all under the authoritative voice of some quacky, pseudo-"expert".
2) It has intelligent stories about women around the world. These are very eye-opening and mind-expanding, and often offer information on how the reader can get involved with the issue presented.
3) Its fashion coverage is extensive and top-notch for a magazine that is not solely dedicated to fashion. It presents trends and how to wear them in the real world, as well as a wide array of pieces for every shape and budget. (For my purposes, it serves me better than the upscale fashion magazines.)
4) It only uses models for (some of) the fashion spreads. All other articles feature the ("real") people who are explaining their experiences in relation to the articles' topics. This provides for a much more realistic perception of the body.
Considering the above, I still find it amazing that Marie Claire and Cosmopolitan are published by the same group!
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|