Letter to Gloria Steinem

Title

Letter to Gloria Steinem

Subject

Women's Movement, Letter

Description

Letter sent to Gloria Steinem from Sheila Michaels in 1971, explaining the origin of popularizing the feminist address from women as Ms.

Source

Sheila Michaels Collection, M373, Historical Manuscripts, Special Collections, The University of Southern Mississippi Libraries

Date

Circa 1975

Rights

Copyright not evaluated

Format

.jpg

Language

En

Type

Text

Original Format

Typed on paper

Files

October 15, 1971<br /> Dear Ms. Steinem:<br /> I hear you are putting out MS., a magazine, and thought you might be interest in the chronology of the term--then again, maybe not. I am avoiding several overextended deadlines, and so have all the time in the world to tell you. The pronunciation, "Miz", by the way, is not inflexible. I simply though of both at the same time because I am from Missouri, and it was always necessary to ask whether Miz Lovercam or Miz Schnackenberg were married.<br /> <br /> At the end of 1961 my roommate became CORE's first female field secretary (CORE was founded in 1943 or 4). She was in Detroit lecturing on the Freedom Rides and ran into a little group called "News and Letters", headed by a woman who, I believe, knew Trotsky. They were about 50 people, mostly auto workers, and having withstood the vicissitudes of time and politics in this country are still, I think , about the same number. Anyway, they had a singularly sensible line for that time and Mari, having a great deal of the ex-nun about her, believed in encouraging them and strongarming me at the same time, and took out subscriptions for both of us.<br /> <br /> The copies that came to me where all addressed, "Ms. Sheila Michaels." I never knew if it was a means of saving space, a typo, or a radical posture. But it struck a responsive chord. Her subscription was to "Miss Mari Hamilton," but that gave no clarification, as she has always been so insistent upon the use of courtesy titles that she dragged the entire State of Alabama before the Supreme Court for their refusal to use them.<br /> <br /> I toyed with the idea for several years. When I finally left SNCC in 1965, I had a heightened respect for myself and a beginning self consciousness. (I had been a SNCC field secretary for 1962-4, and as there were few women in the position, and I was one of even fewere with any degree of autonomy, I had become thoroughly sick of the limitations, not to say aware of how little freedom I had been given and how tenuous that was. I though it was interesting that SNCC, which was founded by Diane Nash, and had a white Georgian, Jane Stembridge, as its first field secretary, should in time, as its importance grew, [typo] narrow its opportunities to women to near the point of exclusion.)<br /> <br /> I tried out the "Ms." then, in 1965. But it was more trouble than it then seemed worth. I would explain very carefully and continually that I refused to be defined by whether I "belonged" to a man. Well, I was laughed out of it.
When the Woman's movement came along in 1968, I again tried using it. It didn't catch on. I am pig-headed about small things, but have always been passive and loath to push my own --or anyone's --ideas. It did not seem worth the trouble, and most women were soured on it and felt the movement had bigger things to worry about, and I tend to agree. It is such a minor point, and why is this letter getting so long? I suggested it again when we founded the Feminists in 1969. The feeling was, "that's very interesting, Sheila," and we left it at that. I believe that it caught on after the Feminists were given a slot on one of the first "Womankind" shows on WBAI. There was a point when were taping at which everyone fell silent, unable to think of what to say. The subject was marriage, and so I dragged in my meager idea that I'd been worrying like a dog all these years. I had thought it was edited out of the tape, as I didn't hear the show. I suppose that tells us something about trivia and the value of the media, or our inability to anticipate others' needs.<br /> <br /> I am now rather of the opinion that is is a genteelism that embarrasses me slightly, I hope it will become archaic. I hope that eventually it will be unnecessary to identify people by sex, as it is another trap. (You'll remember, by the way, that in 18th century, all women were "Mrs.", as the French call all grown women, "madame".)<br /> <br /> The use of "ko" and "ko's" interests me. Another form I like immensely I found in a Chinese cookbook written by a doctor Buwei Yang Chao, in 1945. She proposed using "hse" where gender was not necessary. Another concept I find virulent and most feminists think a silly idea is the use of the word "bastard." It is grossly insulting to a large number of people and the most anti-feminist word of condemnation in current use. Think of it: it implies that base and sadistic behavior is an attribute of being born to an unmarried woman. That not belonging to a man is so evil, that the issue of a woman wronged-- can only perpetrate destruction and cruelty in society. It is another case of attributing the crime to the victim. It is much more important to me than "Ms.", but it may simply be that the newer idea always seems so much more urgent than the ones one has absorbed.<br /> <br /> Yours truly,<br /> Sheila Michaels

Citation

“Letter to Gloria Steinem,” Online Exhibits at Southern Miss, accessed May 4, 2024, https://usmspecialcollections.omeka.net/items/show/484.

Output Formats