In the U.K., we divide the nation into regions - which we call constituencies - each having an approximately equal number of voters (100,000) and each can vote in 1 MP. Some regions are of course more population dense, so geographically smaller. But this ensures some level of fairness - particularly given that the constituencies are defined by a democratic body that is independent of any party affiliation.
Rural areas may be disadvantaged in terms of political mindshare - and this can have a determental affect on all areas of society - afterall, we may not recognise it day to day, but do we really wish to live in a society that is unable to produce it's own food? In other words, city dwellers get more MPs than do rural dwellers in general!
This is a problem that US politics has approached differently, but with it's own unique set of problems - namely that it is possible for politically canny players to win presidency without achiving anywhere near the popular vote. Ah ... it's all very challenging is it not. But at least now, you too understand some of the issues we face ;)
Approximately half of all the money that comes into your household is spent by politicians on your behalf. Why would you not be interested?