Would it make sense to open a new thread about the AfterEllen.com site? I'm curious about what others think but don't want to go too much further w/in this thread about novels.

On Don'tUWish's request, I have very nervously (only because of technically doing it, no other reason) thought that this board merited a separate discussion on itself, not least for the very fine support it has given BG but for the wealth of material it offers in itself. Over to you guys.

Thanks Richard! I have several questions, if anyone's interested in commenting on these or other issues with www.AfterEllen.com:

1. Do you visit the site a lot? What do you read/watch when you're there?

2. Do you feel like the site has changed in the past year or so? Has it changed for the better?

3. If you could wave a magic wand, what would you change about the content? Or if you'd prefer, what would you change about the look/feel of the site?

4. What have been your favorite columns/blogs/interviews/recaps, etc. on the site? Do you have a favorite blogger or writer?

5. What's your least favorite in the same categories listed in question 4? Why?

6. Who have they missed, or what topics have they missed? Any good authors, musicians, actors .... or news topics, interesting subjects, etc that they haven't covered at all or not adequately?

Since you asked.... :D

1. I visit the site daily, I'd say. Some days if I'm really busy I skip, other times I'll visit more than once. In general I do try to check the site each weekday to see what article(s) they've posted.

2. Yes, it's changed, and no, not for the better in my opinion. Too many recaps of tv shows which are of marginal interest. If a show is a reality show on a tiny cable channel, it's just not worth covering in this way, imo. Too many vlogs. Too much self-congratulation (reports on events where AfterEllen got some award or was a sponsor or something or other). Too many lists. It seems to me that it all started with that Hot List, which got a lot of attention, and then they just started doing more of the same.

3A. LAYOUT Different types of content need to be displayed in different ways, so it's easy and instinctive for the eye to differentiate. The main categories of content as far as I can tell are:
1. Interviews (self-explanatory)
2. Features (analytic pieces, all the lists etc)
3. Recaps of tv shows
4. Reviews (could be tv, films, books etc)
5. Blogs
6. Vlogs
All of these should have their own section on the home page, and be differentiated with little icons or something like that. The newest of each category should have an image, headline, and teaser text, but the older in each category should just be a headline. The MSN home page does a good version of this.

That way I can ignore the recaps, blogs and vlogs, and other users can ignore the features and reviews. Or whatever.

The navigation categories work ok as is, although if the home page layout is improved, then it's not necessary to have a link to every vlog 'series' on the top of the left navigation.

If anyone who works for AE is reading this, feel free to pm me--I do this professionally, and I've thought A LOT about what is wrong with the site layout, and how it can be fixed.

3B. CONTENT I sort of already answered this above, but the articles I enjoy are the substantive interviews, features and reviews of quality lesbian entertainment. Scripted shows yes, reality tv not so much. I hate the 'Scene' articles. I hate the lists. I hate hate hate the vlogs. I hate interviews with reality tv 'stars.' I don't like the coverage of lesbian events (like Power Up etc).

4. Of the articles currently still linked on the home page, the ones I liked were:
Jodie Foster Thanks Cydney in Accepting Sherry Lansing Leadership Award
Interview With Charlotte Mendelson
Tricia Helfer and Michael Taylor on "Razor"
"Battlestar Galactica: Razor" Delivers a Crucial Lesbian Twist
Germany's Top TV Journalist Anne Will Comes Out
Across the Page: New Releases
Michelle C. Bonilla Gets Real
More Lesbians Than Ever on "Nip/Tuck"
Outside the Lines: The Education of Debra Chasnoff
"The Amazing Race" 12 to Include the Show's First Lesbian Couple
Don't Quote Me: Rosie's Detox
Around the World in Lesbian Fiction

The writer I've enjoyed the most is LeeAnn Kriegh (big shocker there, she's the one who has done all the Bad Girls interviews, but her other interviews and her International Books article were excellent as well), and as for bloggers, the only one I follow is Ace, primarily because she writes about theatre a lot.

5. The VLOGS! When I watch video, I want there to be sets, lighting, makeup and editing. I don't like to watch writers pretend to be television anchors, in the backdrop of their livingrooms. Blech. I also think because of the vlogs and the blogs and how much space they get on the home page, there's an awful lot of 'straight' content on the site. I can read Entertainment Weekly to get straight entertainment news. I go to AfterEllen for the lesbian stuff.

I also have a problem with so many shows being recapped. However, if the home page were redesigned, so that all the recaps could be listed in their own little section, rather than mixed in with the substantive writing, then I would probably be less bothered by it.

6. Theater coverage has gotten much better in recent months, primarily in the blogs, but also in an article here and there. I'd like more articles that take a critical point of view. These days the only real criticism the site puts out there is about the lack of lesbian characters on network television. But there's no real substantive look at how lesbians are portrayed in the media, the business issues behind why lesbians aren't included in tv and film, etc. Entertainment Weekly had two great articles about a month ago, which looked at why Brokeback Mountain hadn't inspired a whole slew of movies about gay themes, the way Chicago inspired a whole slew of movie musicals. That's the kind of thing AfterEllen should be writing about. Here are links to the articles, for reference:
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20153963,00.html
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20154416,00.html
Basically, the site has started to feel like a propaganda machine for the lesbian entertainment machine, it's trying to be the entertainment itself (with the vlogs etc), and I'd like it to go back a little more towards it's outsider, evaluative perspective. While still keeping me up-to-date on all the tv shows and films which have lesbian characters. :-)

Oh I remember AfterEllen from ages ago. Could that be as long as 2000 or 2001. I remember finding it during the KimandKerry era.
I like/liked the original intent of Sarah Wands website, to address the visibility, or lack of it, or lesbian and bisexual women in the media....that's still a good mission statement. That saying, hey, it's corporate now innit? Afterellen as well as Afterelton bought by LOGO which is owned by media giant Viacom.....

Yep I would agree with abzug, it's basically a media promotion webmag now. There's one advantage of this I can think of...it's called ACCESS. Ms Wand and her gang now have access to behind the scenes which they didn't have before. The bad is that it's just another media rag for popular comsumption, sorta like how the Advocate magazine is just People magazine for Gay People.

That saying, the site is on my favorite list (I don't have many). I add it wherever I am working. I ck it once a day. If one of the 2 headline boxes/features/articles is of interest I'll ck it out. I hate the blogs, I can't stand the vblogs the have infected the site. I hate (hate is lesser than can't stand) lists or articles which include straight women...The book reviews used to be better I feel. More indepth...although I like the book lists because its a jumping off point. I got a lot of book ideas and don'ts from the most recent listing. I ck out interviews of "artists" but not necessarily tv or media celebrities. I never watch the vblogs. I just looked at the 2 features today...one on music and one on a Jodie Foster sigthting I don't listen to music much so didn't read the first.....I read the Foster one because who isn't interested? Besides, it's sorta interesting to watch Jodie ooze slowly out of the closet. After all she met her partner 24 years ago in 1983....

I could care less about reality tv and almost every single primetime show....as we know, Bad Girls is a giant exception.

The original long ago AE had a forum but that's long gone. I am not registered on this Afterellen...don't have the time to even keep up with and contribute to my current web involvment obsession...this board. But do read scribegrrl's BG recap just because one can never get enough. LOL.

I don't have any feelings one way or another what is done with the site because I figure it's only a matter of time before Wand moves on and it's just basic swallow pieces for public consumption. I much prefer something with depth...anything at the Annex is hands about. :)

I guess we started this off on a bit of a negative note, perhaps stifling conversation? I mean, while I bash AfterEllen, I love media and entertainment, and I love lesbians, and I can't imagine suffering through a world where AE didn't exist, because finding lesbian entertainment would be like an ongoing 365-day a year search for a needle in a haystack.

And, let's not forget if it weren't for AfterEllen, I never would have watched Bad Girls. That's the truth. And then what would my life have been?

Plus, just read the site this morning and it sounds like they're launching a Kate Clinton vlog! Holy crap, after all my harping on the vlogs, I might actually have to watch this one!
Kate Clinton :wub: Me
And the more she lets her hair go grey/white, the sexier she gets....

That's an interesting thought about Sarah Warn possibly selling AfterEllen eventually. I guess Logo probably paid her one amount when they bought the site and now pay her a salary -- bet she's in hog heaven -- but maybe not if "her" site is now governed by others.

At risk of seeming a fool for answering my own questions .....

1. I check AfterEllen once a day most days except the weekends. If you're a lesbian and interested in entertainment/pop culture where else can you go? Anywhere? They have the market cornered.

2. The site has definitely changed a ton (IMO) and not for the better. Did the changes start when Logo bought them out? When the Hot 100 list caused waves? Whenever it was and whyever it happened, I'm not a fan.

3. If I had a magic wand, I'd give it to Abzug to fix the look/feel of the site. :D About the content, I'd chuck the frothy fluff -- dumb interviews, pointless lists, cable reality TV recaps/reviews/interviews. I'd find writers willing to take risks and write better, more thoughtful articles.

4. My favorites have obviously been the Simone/Mandana interviews. I read the Friday B.L.W.E. article every week, which I guess is really just a compilation of blogs when you think about it. Pretty much any time AfterEllen gets serious I'm happy.

5. Least favorites are covered above -- dumb interviews, pointless lists, cable reality TV crud, vlogs, endless blogs -- lots of stuff that I don't think they used to have or didn't have as much of.

6. They're missing international content. I'd like to read about famous lesbians from countries outside the United States. They're missing some really famous lesbians who probably avoid them and women who play lesbians and probably avoid them, like most of the actors from TLW. They've got an obvious 'in' with the actors from South of Nowhere but maybe they're decidedly 'out' when it comes to other shows -- and I agree with Abzug or whoever said the changes to the site might mean they'll never get certain people who think the site's too lightweight.

1. i visit the site about daily or so. i look at the recently posted article list to see if anything is of interest to me. occasionally i go through blog posts that aren't on the main page anymore.

2. i only started reading the site recently, following links from this board, so i can't comment on whether or not it's changed (though of course i completely believe everyone who says it has).

3. abzug's format change suggestions are very reasonable and the site would do well to heed them, or something like them. i find the long list of recent articles completely undifferentiated by type, topic, or content to be annoying. as for content, the more, the merrier. i'm not bothered by anything that is there. i figure someone's enjoying it. i'm personally completely uninterested in all things music related, but i would never suggest they stop covering that aspect of entertainment. i have never looked at most of the blogs or recaps, so i wouldn't mind if they were gone, but again, others must enjoy them.

4. i read most of the book related articles and interviews (or i at least skim them), same with most movie related articles. i read BLWE. i've probably read 80% of the bad girls recaps. if there's a name in the headline that i know and am interested in, i'll probably read the article. and, i'm not (too) ashamed to admit this, i read the "shot at love with tila tequila" recaps. i'm rooting for dani. i mean, come on, a fairly butch dyke winning a dating show against girly girls and men? how awesome would that be? i've never watched the show, nor do i have any interest in doing so, but i read the recaps weekly. also, the only vlog i've watched is "the lo down" which is ostentibly about queer women of color in entertainment, but has mostly been about tila tequila and "life". i enjoy watching that a lot. i always laugh and get a lot of entertainment out of it.

5. i don't read the columns or blogs or interviews or recaps that i don't like or am not interested in, so i don't really have a least favorite.

6. since i know nothing about pop culture, media, or entertainment, if they missed it, i'm sure i did too. :-)

In the interests of full disclosure I have co-authored material on AE (old brief 'intro' to BG, before AE started proper coverage. Not a paying gig, of course.) Part of the reason I worked on that piece was born out of my frustration with the site: it felt, to me, like, the All-L-Word, All the Time site. (So no, I wasn't a fan. I go there for BG-related updates, which is all I've ever done. Since LeeAnn Kriegh started doing articles for them, I've also read anything she's written because she's damn good. And of course that doesn't mean if I see an article about Jodie Foster I don't read it, hello, we have priorities here.. )

It wasn't til BBCA picked up BG there was any real coverage abt the show, as I recall. So that was driving me nuts, in addition to AE's obsession with the L-word. A lesbian media site--with NOTHING to say about Bad Girls? They'd had like, 1, 2 small articles mentioning the show in terms of lesbian couples, then a lot of nothing. In short: if a film or TV show wasn't current--and au courant--they weren't on top of it, or much interested. Which is pretty much their MO, far as I can tell.

Imo the site has always been lightweight (although I haven't been around from the early days like Solitasolano!) Regarding msalt's post in the previous thread (should I move some of those over--do you guys want that or just... leave it?), I understand (I think! :) ) her tone, but it raised some questions for me.

So yeah, it's just a media site, just entertainment. The problem is, it's also about the only one we have. And that, as I see it, is the most typical thing about this whole issue. We've *always* got "one or two" of things and those are supposed to represent ALL of us, & satisfy everyone's agendas. Impossible all the way around. We get 1, 2 movies a year, on average. A few lesbian mags in print, the rest go out of business. A few new presses (mostly print-on-demand) to replace the almost-every-single-lesbian-press-in-the-US which closed in the last decade. A few marginal characters in a few TV episodes of various shows.

I see no reason to assume that means I should feel all fuzzy & grateful for whatever tablescraps I get, and just... shut up & wag my tail about it or something whenever there's a new fake-kiss on a reality show.

AE has never seemed (to me) to want to be anything but a fluff-oriented place. I don't see how their 'agenda' has changed in any significant way from their pre-corporate days to now. Fluff-as-agenda would be fine in an ideal world. It's even fine in this one. (I'm just not interested, myself.) But AfterEllen is still likely to be one of the *only* places lesbians go to for media-related info, for so long as it exists.

Abzug, I don't think raising questions or having criticisms is or needs to be thought of as "stifling" any kind of debate, by the way, because the nature of the site itself is always going to be problematic. (Ie, there's nothing wrong with questioning ourselves & our tone or approach, but I see no reason anyone should apologize for questioning the site, or criticizing it.) We might as well talk about it, because I doubt anyone over there is wringing their hands about glass-half-empty-half-full dilemmas such as: What is their obligation to the community/communities they ostensibly serve?

I agree that we should all theoretically Shop wherever we want for whatever, hoorah for late-capitalism etc. But in reality, lesbians don't have that option for lesbian-related material. And we're not going to anytime soon. I keep coming back to the problem being always the same: we don't have enough options. We never have enough damn options.

I would really have to agree with those who call AE, a "fluff piece" , but even worse than that, it has become a piece of pretentious nonsense.

For my money, Sarah Warn and her G/F need to find a new line of work.

Time was you could go to 365gay.com (for example) and get a bevy load of news but once Logo got a hold of everything, each website piece that makes up the whole is nothing but a series of circuitious links...and precious little of what made the original website a place worth checking out.

Once in awhile, you can catch a piece of interesting news or an interesting interview (provided the interviewer doesn't have an agenda). but for the most part quantity trumps quality. No amount of website redesign is going to change or fix poor quality.

I'll check it out, but I rarely stick around. If AE thinks the number of website "hits" is indicative of approval they really need to think again.

Corporate consolidation/centralization does not generally serve any community well...it's akin to Murdoch owning all the newspapers and radio outlets...one doesn't get the benefit of differing opinion or news, does one?

Such good points ....

--- not enough damn options

--- a lot of hits (which they may be getting) doesn't mean a lot of approval (see above -- we ain't got nowhere else to go)

--- the Murdoch-ization of lesbian content online. Those circuitous links ... does Logo own 365gay.com too? Or is it The Advocate owns 365, but there's an agreement that they can all share each other's content? Regardless it definitely limits the amount of original content ... and of course most of the content outside AfterEllen is for gay men.

--- at the same time, we all go to AfterEllen and we all find something there to bring us back so I see that side too. Maybe there's no harm? I feel offended in some way but can't figure why ....

I have to say (and didn't someone say this before? I can't find it) that the "Scene: Dallas" article they've posted today is one of those I really can't stand. The writing is inconsistent and the events are OVER, so it's not like we can go to them .... am I the only one who's annoyed and wondering what they could be posting instead of these dumb things?

Well, I just surfed in from AfterEllen.

I visit the site 1 to 2 times a week but there were times when I used to read anything that was posted, now I read very selectively, hardly anything at all and obviously it can be attributed to the fact that they post very little stuff worth reading.

The thing that bothers me greatly is the way they divide one single article into like…2 to 4 pages? So it’s usually a picture and 3 paragraphs per page. Are they trying to get more hits by doing this? Bad Girls recaps (which I now read only in case of deathly boredom, e.g. very seldom) are divided into 6-8 parts - I prefer having all information in one window, opening 15 windows and switching between them drives me nuts.

I used to love Sarah Warn’s weekly column, it entertained me. Now it’s a different person every week, most of the time news I don’t care about and it’s just not fun anymore.

A lot of movies/books haven’t been reviewed, mostly only Hollywood films get reviews, no international stuff here.

I actually pretty much agree with what abzug said, so I don’t want to repeat everything. The site sort of reminds me of The L Word, it started out nicely, it was fresh, original and just for us, but now it’s part of Logo (or whatever their deal is) and it feels like it’s too mainstream, they’re trying to sell themselves too hard or I don’t know what. So yes, I do still visit it on a regular basis, but it used to be better.

Oh yeah, one more thing, I can’t for the life of me understand their fascination with Leisha Hailey. Why people think she’s the funniest, hottest and most talented woman/lesbian alive is a total mystery to me.

Out of the things I liked recently are the article about the “prominent German” coming out and all things Jodie Foster (surprise, surprise).

Despite my criticism, I would have to agree with ekny's assessment concerning the LACK of lesbian/bi portrayal, programing, and inclusion in all types of popular media. AfterEllen's icon includes the phrase "Because visibility matters".
I went poking around the web for a comparable website like AE and didn't find one...seems to me there where more offerings earlier in the decade, but many have disappeared or like, AE, been taken up and folded into a corporate cover.
Just look at LOGOonline's menu of websites: there are TEN websites in LOGO's family. This includes AfterElton (another Sarah Warn original) and 365gay (news). LOGO online is not the only example of the corporatization GLBT content, PlanetOUT media empire includes Gay.com, magazines Advocate, Out, and OutTravel, and then some. The third gay corporate fiefdom is here!Networks.

As I said, I usually ck the site everyday, don't read the blogs or watch anything, just look to see if the two new feature boxes for the day are of interest. Today: the Dallas thing...not planning on going to Dallas soon, plus the age cohort thing is kicking in...this feature not really aimed at me. The second feature, Naughty or Nice, an attempt at a variation of the 'end of the year' wrap up. Don't really get it and most news stuff (vs entertainment only) I keep up with on GLBT political blogs.

So my point? Yeah, I take anything I can get...advertisments notwithstanding (gee, I wonder why the giant photo of Michelle Paradise in the Jodie Foster story?). Yeah I'm jaded but I'll glance at most anything. Wouldn't want to miss anything ya know.

ps..for book ideas, ck out Lambda Literary is you haven't already. I was surprised and pleased to see someone on AE mentioned the organization since this thread was started.

Not to go off-topic, but for those who might not be familiar with it, www.glbtq.com is a substantial & ongoing wiki-like effort centered around short entries for gay/lesbian things in the arts. (Not that well-indexed--I keep stumbling over it & meaning-to-bookmark it kinda-thing.) It's serious *and* accessible. I've always liked it, the layout's clean, the articles are generally quite good, if sometimes a bit short, and there's always something *more* I want to look at on the site. :) --e

Thank you both for the links. I've heard of Lambda of course but never thought to visit their site, and the encyclopedia site is completely overwhelming but a great resource. Wish something like that existed when I was in college.

Those sites obviously don't pull in the supposed 500,000 visitors a month that AfterEllen gets, which is the largest visitorship or subscriber base or what-have-you that I've ever seen for a lesbian publication. This might sound like a crazy question but does anyone know how many lesbians there are? I mean overall or in any one country? I debated this with a friend who came up with a far lower # than mine .... and of course it depends on your definition and all that but do we have any idea?

Reason I'm curious is I wonder what the potential audience is, like is AfterEllen barely scratching the surface or is half a million a big piece of the total population?

Did anyone see AE's revised home page? Hard to believe, but they actually made it WORSE. Now, other than the first two articles being at the top, you have to scroll like 3 screens down the page to see the rest of the articles. But don't worry, the video and blog content is front and center.

I hope everyone is writing them (comments@afterellen.com) to tell them how crap this is. If people don't complain, they won't know how much many of us hate it.

LOL. I thought it was a mistake when I saw it yesterday.
I didn't even see the articles down below.....now there's even more I'm not interested in....all those video blogs....you'll notice along the lefthand menu link that video blogs are not only first but endless and if the endless list of video blogs isn't enough, the last link is for "ALL VBLOGS". Gag me with a spoon as the old saying goes.

I guess that's not "garbage" for the site because the next left menu divison is for just plain "Video" followed by "Photos". I can't tell what's actual commerical corporate product and what is exclusive AE product...whoops I guess that;s the point, there is not longer a difference.

I support the writer's strike, but if you want to see something really embarrassing, watch the "Lesbians on TV PSA No. 2". Then again, maybe you shouldn't or you will throw up.

I hope articles of substance will still show up now and then on AE, but they will be hard to find amongst the trash.
(End of what for me is a rant.)

I just e-mailed afterellen.com and asked them to please keep the articles front and center rather than making afterellen.com the bad vlog comedy central that it appears to be going toward.

I am so happy that others are finding the site an absolute mess and more for the very young lesbians rather than for a wide range of lesbians. Most of the vlogs are an absolute waste of time. NOT CLEVER AND NOT FUNNY.

My rant is also over, although at some point I could start again if this crrrap continues. :rolleyes:

Got an answer from Sarah Warn all ready. Didn't make sense to me because the new layout isn't easier for those of us who don't like the vlogs, but it sure was a fast reply which makes me think they are getting criticism from quite a few of us.

"Hi Brenda - The new layout was actually designed to make it easier for people like you who don't like the video blogs to ignore them and focus on the written content (blog posts and articles). Almost all of the content featured on the homepage is text - the only place you see vlogs are in the right-hand column; the two featured articles and the content in the left-hand column below them are all text, with the older articles directly below the most recent blog posts."

Hope this explanation helps,

Sarah

Thank you for the rants! I feel the same and just wrote to comments@afterellen.com to tell them.

That response is so idiotic, because of the first three screens of information on the home page, the vlogs take up more than 1/3 of it, the blogs 1/3 of it, and the articles less than 1/3. I guess you needed to state explicitly in your email that you hate the blogs as well.

I was intrigued, so I watched this particular video.

Oh dear GODDESS. :rolleyes: :o :lol:

Embarrassing, you're right!!

I vote we all make constant, annoying video posts and send them in emails just to see how they like it.

Yargh. I really can't stand the vlogs or whatever. I think I watched maybe the very first one they did, and I wasn't impressed. From there on, I tried every now and then to watch one but I just do not understand why everyone loves them so much. I loved reading the articles but now... I just find the site useless. It's sad. I wish there were more alternatives.

well, i took abzug's advice and i wrote AE an email with my comments on the new look. i haven't heard back, but here's an excerpt from my email to them:

they totally changed this! okay, it probably wasn't due to me, but i'm thrilled just the same.

I must say their new look doesn't bother me that much, but, then again, I don't frequent their site all that often. Having said that, I must admit that the Nikki image that they have on that Bad Girls ad banner thingiemabob scares the living daylights out of me! I don't know why, but there's something about that image that makes her look kinda puffy. Not cool!

I haven't heard back either but props to them for posting a really decent interview of a couple L-Word stars. One of the first good interviews I've read on there in a long while.

As much as I've complained about the vlogs, I just started watching the first episode of Kate Clinton's vlog:
http://www.afterellen.com/taxonomy/term/3025
and I've already laughed out loud like three times. I just love her. But see, she's a professional performer, and even she comes across a bit awkward. But still great.

I just looked at the www.afterellen.com Hot 100 list, and this time neither Simone or Mandana made the list. As dumb as the list is, I'm still disappointed especially since the show got a TON of coverage on AfterEllen this year.

The other thing that annoyed me is that the AfterEllen pseudo-celebs -- their reporter (Karman K.) and their vloggers (several) made the list.

Commenters are also noting there's not much cultural diversity in the list but then there's not much cultural diversity in the women we see on our TVs and in films so that doesn't surprise me.

I happened to look in on this site and read an article about an all women rock group called 'Fanny' and would heartily endorse what David Bowie said about them as 'one of the finest f---ing rock bands of their time.' I managed to lay my hands on their second album 'Charity Ball' years ago which I still have. (No way would I get rid of my vinyl collection just because CDs were coming in.)

That album has very smooth harmony and lead singing by the Millington sisters (lead and bass) bookended by Nicky Barclay's classic rock vocals which does have its tender moments. June Millington has total command of every lead guitar stylings around at the time underpinned by Jean Millington's classic curling basslines. Add in rock solid drumming by Alice de Burh and Nicky Barclay's driving organ and piano work and you have a group that gives any other group around a good run for their money.

The article is curious about reactions to them that, on the one hand, that other musicians of the time respected them but on the other hand they 'got asked all the time about the male studio musicians who must've played on the album." The closing comment by Bonnie Raitt, in the liner notes to First Time in a Long Time, calling them a "real rock band full of smart, tough, and talented women — who could really play" puts it in a nutshell.