‘Dear Ms.: A Revolution in Print’ offers raw, heartfelt look at feminist magazine’s trailblazing role
Key Art for 'Dear Ms.: Revolution in Print' Photograph by Courtesy of HBO

Before Ms. debuted in 1972, women’s magazines were mainly focused on selling beauty products and teaching women how to care for their husbands and children in the home. They prioritized defining women by the men in their lives and the restricted role as homemakers and consumers that they were pressured to play under a patriarchal capitalist system. Ms. represented a shift in thinking as a new wave of feminism, beginning in the 1960s, had women redefining themselves and grappling with the sexist social constructs that burdened them. 

Ms. was an experiment, an experience, and a reflection of that ever-changing political sphere, which wasn’t always unity and roses. The new docu-series Dear Ms.: A Revolution in Print takes on the task of exploring the rich and layered history of a magazine that not only reflected what was happening in the fight for women’s rights, but at times influenced it. It’s a raw and heartfelt celebration of the power of the press and a recognition of the long way we still have to go when it comes to winning true gender equality. 

The three-part documentary is directed by filmmakers Salima Koroma, Alice Gu, and Cecilia Aldarondo and produced by William Ventura and McGee Media. It chronicles the trailblazing articles that helped define and elevate the discourse around women’s liberation, showcasing cover stories that dared to put abortion, home life, workplace issues, and sexual politics front and center, bringing about a challenge to the language used on the gender battleground. 

More than 50 years since its debut, the magazine’s editors and contributors, including co-founders Gloria Steinem, Letty Cottin Pogrebin, Pat Carbine, and first editor Suzanne Braun Levine, sit down for interviews to discuss how Ms. came to be, the struggles it faced, and their mission to continuously explore often taboo topics when it comes to the lives of women. The series isn’t a fluff piece about the magazine but an honest reflection of a publication that was crucial to the growth and accomplishments of the feminist movement.

Gloria Steinem| Photograph by Rita Waterman/HBO

In total, the series runs for nearly two hours, and even that doesn’t seem like enough time to sit with the expansive history of the magazine. Yet, the filmmakers do a commendable job by focusing on some key themes and particular articles. This helps give audiences a glimpse into the workings of the magazine, the political terrain it operated in from the 1970s to the ’90s, and how it addressed complex topics that didn’t always have clear-cut solutions. Themes of female unity across racial lines, media representation of women, reproductive rights, sexuality, and sex work are given significant focus because these were key issues the publication grappled with both on its pages and among its staff. 

The issue of feminism across racial lines features heavily in the first half of the series. This is particularly explored when it comes to Black women and their role in the feminist movement and the fight for liberation. The docu-series gives credit to Ms. for hiring Black women and giving them space in the pages of the publication to tell their stories, but it also deals with the shortcomings of a magazine founded by six white women when it came to truly representing the fight for women’s equality. 

This was, honestly, surprising to see the series start with addressing this glaring issue from the very beginning. That’s because far too often, white women are made the face of women’s struggles in the mainstream press. This was very true in the 1960s and ’70s. A related dynamic played out in the Civil Rights movement, which saw Black women playing very critical roles even while the face of the struggle was mostly Black men. The lack of proper acknowledgement of the role Black women have played in the histories of both the feminist movement and the Black liberation movement is still a problem today. 

We get to hear about the experience of famed writer and social activist Alice Walker and her experience as an editor of Ms. as a Black woman. Although the author of The Color Purple doesn’t sit down for a present-day interview for the documentary, the filmmakers share some of her correspondence with other leaders of the magazine from the 1970s, as well as her eventual letter of resignation, expressing her displeasure with the lack of Black women on the publication’s covers. For, while the publication had Black women writing articles from its onset, the magazine’s cover featured white women most of the time. The film reveals that there was often there was a pushback from distributors against having non-white women on the cover for fear of losing the ability to sell on newsstands in the American South. Yet, even with this obstacle, the editors began featuring more women of color and Black women on the cover. 

The disputes over cover imagery pointed to another obstacle the publication faced—capitalism. 

Publications cost money, and often, Ms. is shown to be dealing with the paradox of publishing stories that challenge the capitalist patriarchal system while having to find ways to make a profit in order to continue operating within that system. The women at the magazine challenged the status quo, but they often had to find ways to deal with the very advertisers they criticized if they wanted to keep the doors open. Viewers are also educated about how advertisers were stricter on women’s magazines than male-dominated ones. 

Ms. took took the notion that “The Personal is Political,” a phrase popularized by the title of an essay by feminist activist Carol Hanisch in the magazine in 1969. It put issues like domestic violence, female pleasure, and abortion access center stage. As they continued to write on such topics, the editors and authors had to deal with backlash from right-wing conservatives and also advertising companies. They received letters addressed to their office regularly, many in support of their publication, but there also plenty in opposition. Viewers are treated to a wide array of clippings from these letters, in which women claim they cried tears of joy when they read the first issue of the magazine, while men complain that Ms. convinced their wives to leave them. 

Gloria Steinem and contributing writers of Ms. magazine| Photograph by Jill Freedman/HBO

It’s also noted that Ms. was one of the first publications to publish a high number of letters from readers. Hence, the name of the series is Dear Ms., as often the letters started that way. This is interesting because it shows that, through these letters, the leadership of the publication kept a finger on the pulse of what people were feeling, not just about their magazine but also about the topics they covered. This becomes very apparent when the magazine’s staff deal with probably their most controversial and polarizing topics—pornography and sex work. 

These debates, in which Ms. played a large role, are given significant attention in the second half of the series. It starts off by speaking to the question of female pleasure and normalizing sexuality and sensuality. This then segues into sex and pleasure under the male gaze (as in, actions or content made with what men supposedly want to see in mind), particularly in general media and by extension pornography. 

Feminist writer and activist Andrea Dworkin is recognized as a prominent advocate against pornography. The series highlights the debate around the distinctions between porn and erotica and which is harmful to women. There’s a fascinating exploration of the origin of the two words to showcase these differences. It’s pointed out that the term pornography comes from the Greek word pornographos, meaning “depicting prostitutes,” while erotica comes from the Greek word erōtikos, meaning sexual love. This is highlighted to explain how Ms. originally was pro-erotica but against the pornography industry, as they saw the latter as exploitative and often violent towards women. 

But the film also shows how this was a divisive issue, as other figures like Veronica Vera, Annie Sprinkle, and Candida Royale, who played prominent roles in the pornography industry, felt left out of the conversation. They felt pornography, and sex work as a whole, wasn’t inately harmful to women and could be reformed. Ms. would eventually burn some bridges both with Dworkin and with some on the side of pornography, as they attempted to wage a battle of ideas within their pages to debate the topic.

Thus, the film shows that even within the feminist movement and revolutionary struggles, there can be divisions on strategy and the differences of views on what are the best interests of those involved. The series, thankfully, doesn’t attempt to come down one way or the other on the topic but leaves it to those involved to speak their peace and explain their side. 

There is so much packed into the three-part film that it will no doubt lead many to want to read the groundbreaking original articles it showcases and the feminist literature it highlights. And that’s a good thing, considering that what is also made glaringly clear is that voices like the ones Ms. has showcased in its half-century history are still greatly needed today. 

The magazine debuted at a time when abortion was illegal and women weren’t even allowed to have their own bank accounts (that came in 1974 under the passage of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act), and yet, here we are in 2025 with abortion once again being made illegal in multiple states and the rights of women still under attack. Of course, it can be argued that this is because the very system Ms. attempted to strip down—capitalism—is still the one we live under. And given that sexism and racism are baked within this system, the constant battle against that oppression remains. The reversal of Roe v. Wade has shown us that even when something is won, it must continue to be defended and analyzed, as the early years of Ms. did extensively.

Viewers can take solace in the fact that the legacy of Ms. is there to learn from, despite the setbacks to the feminist movement that have occurred since its time. It’s surreal to watch the blatant media sexism highlighted in the film through its archival footage, realizing that much of that has simply “evolved” into other forms, such as the online podcast misogyny that is the “manosphere” of today. And, to be frank, we still live in a time when the media and journalistic terrain tend to lean more towards highlighting male voices over female, including in leadership. The anecdotal sentiment that women are usually the ones designated to take notes in meetings, as the film points out, is still practiced today, unfortunately—even in spaces thought to be progressive. 

Dear Ms.: A Revolution in Print is a must-watch for exploring the history of prominent progressive female voices in the press and media landscape as a whole. It’s honest, self-reflective, and unapologetic in celebrating the legacy of Ms. and the continued analysis of the work it carried out. It demonstrates that female voices in media are still necessary and crucial today. 

Dear Ms.: A Revolution in Print debuts Wednesday, July 2, on HBO and will be available to stream on Max.

We hope you appreciated this article. At People’s World, we believe news and information should be free and accessible to all, but we need your help. Our journalism is free of corporate influence and paywalls because we are totally reader-supported. Only you, our readers and supporters, make this possible. If you enjoy reading People’s World and the stories we bring you, please support our work by donating or becoming a monthly sustainer today. Thank you!


CONTRIBUTOR

Chauncey K. Robinson
Chauncey K. Robinson

Chauncey K. Robinson is an award winning journalist and film critic. Born and raised in Newark, New Jersey, she has a strong love for storytelling and history. She believes narrative greatly influences the way we see the world, which is why she's all about dissecting and analyzing stories and culture to help inform and empower the people.