It's really good to hear your honest opinion on this panel. I didn't go to it, but I heard a lot of criticism at WAM of the panels that featured people from mainstream women's and teenage magazines, and talked to one woman who got up and left this panel you were at because she was so annoyed. I wish there had been more of a discussion between the various factions at the workshops. I think the teen magazine women would say that if a girl picks up a magazine for tips on doing her hair for prom but ends up reading a feature about transgender teens and gets politicized, then score one for feminism. On the other hand, I think these magazines are doing more harm than good. And is it often that a girl gets politicized or feminist from an article in a magazine, especially one that's also telling her how to be skinny and stylish and liked by boys? I wish I had been there to hear what the Teen Voices people had to say.

I was at the panel and actually thought that some interesting things were said (especially near the end of the panel). Yes, there are some harmful images in teen magazines. But I don't think that Teen Voices is coming at it from the right angle. Would you honestly have picked it up as a teen? I certainly wouldn't have, and even the teenage girl on the panel who works for Teen Voices admitted (after going on and on about how bad consumption is, how bad mainstream teen mags are, etc.) that she absolutely loves Teen Vogue for its fashion spreads. I think that this points to a void between the two poles-- which is what the panel discussed near the end.

As an aside, I don't think that the "clique"-ness of the panelists was any different than what I saw at your panel on Saturday; why the need for pettiness?

Hi Lisa,

I was also at the panel, and I agree with you that Teen Voices really isn't a palatable alternative to mainstream fashion magazines. But my problem with the panel was that I think that mainstream fashion magazines are really toxic, and I think that people who work for them should at least be willing to consider a critique of the culture of beauty, heteronormativity, etc. that they further. It's great that articles about girls in sports, rape, contraception, global women's issues, etc. are in young women's magazines. But when they're completely overshadowed with the advertising -- which /does/ affect content to a large extent, certainly to the point where "fashion" as an industry can't really be outright critiqued-- it definitely takes away from the message.

I read fashion mags as a teen, and although I'm part of the Sassy generation (and loved it), and I still pick up an issue of Teen Vogue or YM here and there, I can't read women's magazines now, because they make me totally crazy. And I am doing a PhD in media studies! We have to acknowledge the real effects of these types of traditional women's media before we can reform them.

I am not holding women who work for Jane, ElleGirl, etc. complicit in any sort of crimes against women or anything stupid like that. I worked at Microsoft, so I fully understand the tension that comes from trying to reform a system from the inside. But please admit that the tension is there, and don't respond with "Well, we write articles about gay teens", because that's not an answer.

Lisa--wasn't trying to be petty, really. Apologies if it came off that way. I just thought that there was a clear divisiveness in the panel that affected the quality of the conversation. And actually, most of the people on my panel had never met.

And I agree--I wouldn't have picked up Teen Voices when I was younger. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking forward to some sort of alternative middle ground for feminist media, does it? I guess I was just looking for a conversation that offered solutions or strategies, and less of defending existing publications.

I was at the panel about feminists in the mainstream that featured some of the same ladies, and while I thought they did a nice job of talking about the negative effects of the women's magazines, they really stressed the kernels of goodness in them. I don't totally disagree with that, but I felt like it wasn't a helpful conversation because I shouldn't have to sift through the crap to find the one good story. Ultimately, if you're also spending a lot on beauty and advertising and lame, destructive relationship stories, the reporting on other female issues, no matter how well intentioned, will probably suffer.

I wish I hadn't missed this panel because I think it would have really added to what I took away from the first one.