What do you think?
Rate this book
Letters to Ms., 1972-1987
Letters to Ms., 1972-1987
264 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1987
58 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
January 25, 2010
i got this book from a library booksale a few years ago & i like re-reading it as a guilty pleasure. it's a really interesting look at how far we've come in the past 20-30 years. "ms." magazine readers of the 70's & 80's talk about needing their husband's permission when applying for their own credit cards, getting fired for refusing to type business letters with the heading "gentlemen" when they know it's going to a female, etc.
but what i love even more about this book is the wingnuts who write in. the phenomenon of totally random people expressing totally random things was not born with the internet. apparently, the need to share the bizarre minutiae of one's life with the world happened even when people had to do it via snail mail. my personal favorite is the woman who wrote saying she'd come up with a perfect gender-neutral term for husband/wife: "groonblid". apparently, she came up with the word from leftover letters from her scrabble set & thought it would take america by storm. my second favorite is the housewife who wrote saying that she would no longer make ice cubes for her husband & teenage children, because she didn't use them, and included the (four-paragraph!) letter she wrote her dependents telling them. so. WOW.
but what i love even more about this book is the wingnuts who write in. the phenomenon of totally random people expressing totally random things was not born with the internet. apparently, the need to share the bizarre minutiae of one's life with the world happened even when people had to do it via snail mail. my personal favorite is the woman who wrote saying she'd come up with a perfect gender-neutral term for husband/wife: "groonblid". apparently, she came up with the word from leftover letters from her scrabble set & thought it would take america by storm. my second favorite is the housewife who wrote saying that she would no longer make ice cubes for her husband & teenage children, because she didn't use them, and included the (four-paragraph!) letter she wrote her dependents telling them. so. WOW.
August 2, 2025
MUCH MORE THAN JUST A BATCH OF ‘LETTERS TO THE EDITOR’
Mary Thom was former executive editor of Ms., and also wrote ‘Inside Ms.: 25 Years of the Magazine and the Feminist Movement.’
Gloria Steinem wrote in her Introduction to this 1987 book, “When I look back on the fifteen years of Ms., the letters are what I remember best… Of course… I get to see the letters there is no room to publish in regular letters columns---and that’s a lot. Though we give more space to letters than any magazine I’m aware of… our monthly mail total is far bigger than that received by magazines with ten times our circulation. That’s why I’m grateful for the opportunity to share these letters that this book presents.”
Mary Thom explains, “when Ms. magazine began publishing in 1972, few of us who were on the staff were prepared for the experience of reading the rich variety of letters that were addressed to the editors. They allowed us to get to know thousands of our readers on a level of intimacy that one shares with only a few real-life friends… From the beginning, it was clear that the Ms. readers made up a very special community… Perhaps because … Ms. has so profoundly to do with their own life choices, most letter writers are anything but detached observers… And they show an astonishing concern about each other that made the Letters to the Editors column each month probably the most popular feature in Ms. ... readers have claimed the Letters column as a forum in which they can participate directly in the magazine.” (Pg. xv-xvi)
Thom makes an editorial comment, “In a memorably sensible article of November 1976… Molly Haskell explained the difference between Paul Newman coming along to sweep you off your feet and a ‘rape fantasy.’ Robin Morgan returned to the discussion in June 1977, drawing on ‘mytho-history’ and metaphor in ‘What Do Our Masochistic Fantasies Really Mean?’ Both articles opened up a forum for our readers to discuss fantasy and reality.” (Pg. 15)
In a June 1973 letter, Claudia N. Heller explained, “My husband says I used to be a bitch once a month but, since I subscribed to Ms. now I’m a bitch twice a month.” (Pg. 27)
Thom explains, “bringing up children remained a primary concern of Ms. editors and readers. In one aspect of parenting, the issue of working parents and child care, the Ms. offices served as a laboratory. Alix Matty Langer had been coming to work at Ms. with her mother, Phyllis, since she was six weeks old… Some readers were less enthusiastic than we were about the experiment---among them Dr. Benjamin Spock.” (Pg. 42)
In a February 1973 letter, Mary Fortuna reported, “Rather than hire a housekeeper and baby sitter for our three preschool children, my husband and I decided to ‘hire’ me---to pay me a salary and contribute social security. The Internal Revenue Service said nay; this can only be done for someone not a family member. We tried to contract for disability insurance for me---in the event of me not being able to perform my housekeeping and child care duties---but we have not yet found a carrier. I am not adding to the family income---and hence cannot be compensated for a loss that does not exist. The implication is clear---the establishment is making it more attractive to leave the home and let others raise their families. So I went job hunting. Result: very few jobs open in my field; higher salaries for men of the same background, hesitation to hire a woman with three ‘little ones’ because I might … miss work. Let’s find out why men with families are considered good, stable, desirable employees and women are not.” (Pg. 99-100)
Mary Thom wrote, “The first bit of copy in the Spring 1972 Preview Issue of Ms. appeared on page 4 under the headline, ‘What’s a Ms.?’ The half column that followed that ‘Ms.’ had appeared in secretarial handbooks for more than 20 years---recommended as a form of address when a woman’s marital status was unknown---and that now ‘Ms.’ was being adopted by women who wanted to be recognized as individuals rather than identified by their relationships with a man. The column told how ‘Ms.’ was pronounced (‘miz’; later we explained that the plural was ‘Mses.’’), suggested somewhat prematurely that the practice of using titles was going out of style anyway, and ended by saying that the use of ‘Ms.’ is meant ‘only to signify a female human being. It’s symbolic, and important. There’s a lot in a name.” (Pg. 139)
She points out that “Perhaps the most constant complaints came in reference to cigarette advertisements. Here a reader makes fun of a reference in an article to the salutary effect of trees on an environment: ‘I read your article… while sitting under my favorite tree and smoking my favorite brand of cigarettes. I looked up at .. the towering oak above me and took a puff of my cigarette. I breathed deeply of the oxygen emanating from the tree and took another drag on my cigarette. My anger rose. How dare they cut down trees? How dare they assault my health by depriving me of oxygen? I took two more puffs on my cigarette. Trees are… essential for life on earth. I lit up another cigarette. Thank God for Ms. At least you have my health in mind. Thank you for such an enlightening article, and most important of all, thank you for your cigarette ads. It’s just me and my tree and my cigarette and my (pardon me while I cough) health(?).” (Pg. 167)
She observes, “with the 20,000 letters Ms. received in response to the Spring 1972 Preview Issue, an instant community was born. From all over the country, women wrote in---telling their life stories, delighted they weren’t alone in the changes they were trying to make. We published many of these letters of discovery in our early issues.” (Pg. 207)
She reports, “Sometimes Ms. itself took an active hand in organizing change. A Preview Issue article, ‘We Have Had Abortions’... included a statement signed by 53 well-known American women. It grew into the American Women’s Petition, a call to protect reproductive freedom directed at legislative bodies and pubic officials around the country and signed by tens of thousands of readers of Ms. and other feminist publications.” (Pg. 214)
This book will be of great interest to fans of Ms., and of the community it created.
Mary Thom was former executive editor of Ms., and also wrote ‘Inside Ms.: 25 Years of the Magazine and the Feminist Movement.’
Gloria Steinem wrote in her Introduction to this 1987 book, “When I look back on the fifteen years of Ms., the letters are what I remember best… Of course… I get to see the letters there is no room to publish in regular letters columns---and that’s a lot. Though we give more space to letters than any magazine I’m aware of… our monthly mail total is far bigger than that received by magazines with ten times our circulation. That’s why I’m grateful for the opportunity to share these letters that this book presents.”
Mary Thom explains, “when Ms. magazine began publishing in 1972, few of us who were on the staff were prepared for the experience of reading the rich variety of letters that were addressed to the editors. They allowed us to get to know thousands of our readers on a level of intimacy that one shares with only a few real-life friends… From the beginning, it was clear that the Ms. readers made up a very special community… Perhaps because … Ms. has so profoundly to do with their own life choices, most letter writers are anything but detached observers… And they show an astonishing concern about each other that made the Letters to the Editors column each month probably the most popular feature in Ms. ... readers have claimed the Letters column as a forum in which they can participate directly in the magazine.” (Pg. xv-xvi)
Thom makes an editorial comment, “In a memorably sensible article of November 1976… Molly Haskell explained the difference between Paul Newman coming along to sweep you off your feet and a ‘rape fantasy.’ Robin Morgan returned to the discussion in June 1977, drawing on ‘mytho-history’ and metaphor in ‘What Do Our Masochistic Fantasies Really Mean?’ Both articles opened up a forum for our readers to discuss fantasy and reality.” (Pg. 15)
In a June 1973 letter, Claudia N. Heller explained, “My husband says I used to be a bitch once a month but, since I subscribed to Ms. now I’m a bitch twice a month.” (Pg. 27)
Thom explains, “bringing up children remained a primary concern of Ms. editors and readers. In one aspect of parenting, the issue of working parents and child care, the Ms. offices served as a laboratory. Alix Matty Langer had been coming to work at Ms. with her mother, Phyllis, since she was six weeks old… Some readers were less enthusiastic than we were about the experiment---among them Dr. Benjamin Spock.” (Pg. 42)
In a February 1973 letter, Mary Fortuna reported, “Rather than hire a housekeeper and baby sitter for our three preschool children, my husband and I decided to ‘hire’ me---to pay me a salary and contribute social security. The Internal Revenue Service said nay; this can only be done for someone not a family member. We tried to contract for disability insurance for me---in the event of me not being able to perform my housekeeping and child care duties---but we have not yet found a carrier. I am not adding to the family income---and hence cannot be compensated for a loss that does not exist. The implication is clear---the establishment is making it more attractive to leave the home and let others raise their families. So I went job hunting. Result: very few jobs open in my field; higher salaries for men of the same background, hesitation to hire a woman with three ‘little ones’ because I might … miss work. Let’s find out why men with families are considered good, stable, desirable employees and women are not.” (Pg. 99-100)
Mary Thom wrote, “The first bit of copy in the Spring 1972 Preview Issue of Ms. appeared on page 4 under the headline, ‘What’s a Ms.?’ The half column that followed that ‘Ms.’ had appeared in secretarial handbooks for more than 20 years---recommended as a form of address when a woman’s marital status was unknown---and that now ‘Ms.’ was being adopted by women who wanted to be recognized as individuals rather than identified by their relationships with a man. The column told how ‘Ms.’ was pronounced (‘miz’; later we explained that the plural was ‘Mses.’’), suggested somewhat prematurely that the practice of using titles was going out of style anyway, and ended by saying that the use of ‘Ms.’ is meant ‘only to signify a female human being. It’s symbolic, and important. There’s a lot in a name.” (Pg. 139)
She points out that “Perhaps the most constant complaints came in reference to cigarette advertisements. Here a reader makes fun of a reference in an article to the salutary effect of trees on an environment: ‘I read your article… while sitting under my favorite tree and smoking my favorite brand of cigarettes. I looked up at .. the towering oak above me and took a puff of my cigarette. I breathed deeply of the oxygen emanating from the tree and took another drag on my cigarette. My anger rose. How dare they cut down trees? How dare they assault my health by depriving me of oxygen? I took two more puffs on my cigarette. Trees are… essential for life on earth. I lit up another cigarette. Thank God for Ms. At least you have my health in mind. Thank you for such an enlightening article, and most important of all, thank you for your cigarette ads. It’s just me and my tree and my cigarette and my (pardon me while I cough) health(?).” (Pg. 167)
She observes, “with the 20,000 letters Ms. received in response to the Spring 1972 Preview Issue, an instant community was born. From all over the country, women wrote in---telling their life stories, delighted they weren’t alone in the changes they were trying to make. We published many of these letters of discovery in our early issues.” (Pg. 207)
She reports, “Sometimes Ms. itself took an active hand in organizing change. A Preview Issue article, ‘We Have Had Abortions’... included a statement signed by 53 well-known American women. It grew into the American Women’s Petition, a call to protect reproductive freedom directed at legislative bodies and pubic officials around the country and signed by tens of thousands of readers of Ms. and other feminist publications.” (Pg. 214)
This book will be of great interest to fans of Ms., and of the community it created.
January 15, 2008
This collection is a guilty pleasure, a discrete vantage point into another era. Consider an American culture where female drivers are openly ridiculed, women working in any profession is tantamount to treason against the family. It sounds fringe now, but at one point was the dominant paradigm. If you ever consider your feminist-based gender-egalitarianism flagging, brush hands with this slender tome. It's a reminder of our common past.
August 8, 2007
Found this at a fleamarket...pretty neat, a great antique. There's nothing really spectacular about this book, other than being fun to read. It's basically a collection of letters, published and unpublished. They are divided into neat categories and often have editor's notes to provide the context for the responses.
There are also some funny letters from people who hate Ms./feminists. I remember one from a man who thought a "fanny patter" was a real item for sale in the magazine and wanted to find out to buy it. But it was really one of the sexist ads that people send in!
There are also some funny letters from people who hate Ms./feminists. I remember one from a man who thought a "fanny patter" was a real item for sale in the magazine and wanted to find out to buy it. But it was really one of the sexist ads that people send in!
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews