Conference turris::womannotes-v1

    MS. Magazine was sold recently - new editors and writers.  Gloria
    Steinem is no longer with the magazine :-(.
    
    I too am a bit disappointed in the "new" look - in fact quite a
    few people are - take a look at the letters to the editor this month.  They
    are getting both support and criticism.  The editor also wrote an
    article in the front stating her position on the turn of the magazine
    seeing it as a positive step.
    
    I think the best bet for readers is to write in and express their
    dissatisfaction and then wait and see once the new people settle
    in.                                        
    
    Suzanne

    I, too, recently saw Ms after a long absence from it. The ads and
    many of the articles were pretty nauseating. To be fair, the article
    about the blissfully happy woman is the first in a series about
    different lifestyles, but I did notice that they chose to start
    the series with a very 50's (white) family. The mom stays home and
    works hard all day with her two kids. The dad earns an average income
    and comes home for dinner. Mom and dad cuddle on the couch after
    the kids are in bed. Mom hopes her daughters get a better education
    than she did; dad hasn't thought about that yet, but maybe he can
    provide. It just didn't strike me as real life for most people.
    But its tone carried through the rest of the issue. Too bad.

    I've been a MS subscriber for several years, so I've been able to
    watch this transition pass beneath my wondering eyes.  Or
    something like that. 
    
    The Vanna White cartoon was a parody and I thought it was
    hysterically funny.  (I thought about putting it in the humor note
    but I'm not sure it would come across without the cartoon.) The
    cartoon is a continuing series based on "Little Women" in the
    modern world.  
    
    There have been good things and bad things about the new Ms.
    The previous notes have pretty well summed up the bad.  
    
    On the good side, the writing is much fresher and their long
    articles are more thought-provoking than they were for a while,
    when they had settled into a period of using the same handful
    of writers all the time.  
    
    They're trying to appeal to a wider audience.  Apparently their
    subscription and newsstand appeal had shrunk pretty much to the
    group of women who would identify themselves as feminists to a
    Gallup pollster, and they wanted to try to reach a broader base of
    women.  (I know, more money, but also more power.) So, they need
    to be less radical and more involved in the things everyday women
    worry about. 
    
    My first reaction to the family-lifestyles starting with the
    Cleavers was to barf; my second was to cancel my subscription
    on the spot.  But after I calmed down, I decided to give them
    a chance.  After all, you don't dump an old friend just because
    she tells you she has deep longings to be like her mother.
    So I'm taking a wait-and-see attitude.  
    
    But so far I'm inclining to not renewing . . .
    
    --bonnie

    I don't know.  Ms. is where I first heard of clitoridectomies and
    other brutalities.  Would they publish such things now?  Is it still
    the learning place it used to be 12 years ago?