Svend is getting some Mya's for his honey, I believe and will probably be able to speak on these with some expertise. Are the mya's modeled after the Rev series? Everyone seems to like those skis.
Liam is quite correct, I have bought the 2012/13 Mya 9 for my wife as a Christmas gift.
The Mya series mirrors several unisex models in Head's range, not just the Rev. There are narrow carvers, at least two all-mtn. skis in the 79 to 85mm range, and the mid- to high- 90's soft snow skis. The Mya 8 (demoed by both our daughters last year) is the women's equivalent of the Rev 85. The '12/'13 Mya 9 is the analogue to the Rock 'n Roll. Both Mya 8 and 9 are just a titch softer than their counterparts; otherwise identical as far as I can tell. This year's Mya 9 is not the same -- wider, different rocker profile. But as far as I can tell the Mya 8 is unchanged for '14. By no means are these dumbed down versions of the men's skis -- all the reviews and hearsay from shop gals say they are every bit as high performing as their counterparts.
On the topic of women's skis in general, I honestly don't think that these are all softer, wussified versions of men's skis. That is an unfair generalization. True in some cases; not true in others. Some models definitely are, but OTOH there are plenty of examples of models where the manufacturers have not sacrificed performance and build quality when making women's models. Next time you're at a Volkl dealer, pick up an Aura or Kenja, and compare it to a Mantra or Kendo. I think you will be surprised -- they are more similar than they are different.
Nor have they all gone to girlie pink and flowery graphics. Some women's graphics are very tasteful and definitely not overly feminine.
Bottom line is you have to judge each model on it's own merits, and compare it side-by-side with the unisex equivalent.
That said, I think it is reasonable for the makers to build women's versions slightly softer to compensate for the lighter skiers who will be using them, and this should not be taken as a condescension, but as good design (as long as the final performance target is achieved for both versions). As an example, I know of at least two women, both quite light in weight (~120 lbs, and ~110 lbs), who were skiing unisex skis that were simply WAY to stiff for them. They just couldn't bend them, and their skiing suffered accordingly. They are both much better off on a softer woman's model which still has a high performance ceiling. No shame in that. And if the women's model is too soft, then there is usually the unisex version available to buy (if it is indeed stronger/stiffer).
If you think about it, women have WAY more choices and options open to them than men do. How fortunate. Nothing to complain about there.
As for my wife and daughters, there is a mix of unisex and women's models on the rack. So, Liam, since you ask, here is the breakdown.
Wife:Head Supershape Speed, 163 cm, 2007 (unisex) -- there was a women's version of this called the Power One, which was identical; she has the unisex model.
Head Great One, 165 cm, 2009 (women's) -- identical in every way to the iM78; metal laminates, sandwich sidewall, Intelligence, same flex and stiffness; fitted with a race plate and an LD12 binding, this ski just flies; no speed limit.
Dynastar Exclusive Legend Powder, 165cm, 2008 (women's) -- not sure if there was a unisex version of this ski, but it is basically a lighter version of the Mythic Rider, and a bit narrower at 85mm.
Daughter (15 y-o):Fischer Progressor 8, 160 cm, 2009 (unisex) -- there is no women's equivalent as far as I know; perhaps the Zephyr C-Line comes close.
Fischer Maunga, 160 cm, year unknown -- women's twin tip, 84 mm waist; not sure if she will keep this one, with the new Watea in the picture; perhaps for the occasional foray into the park.
Fischer Watea 88, 168 cm, 2012 model (unisex) -- identical to the women's Koa 88; perhaps a tiny bit stiffer, but I have not compared them side-by-side (FWIW, my daughter would not even consider the '12/'13 version of the Koa 88...too much pink! Gotta love her!)
Daughter (17 y-o):Elan Mo' Spice, 165 cm, 2010(?) -- women's twin tip; sandwich sidewall, somewhat beefy, stiff for a park ski, not wimpy by any means.
So, there you have it. As I have had a significant input in choosing all the above, I have tried to be completely objective in the selection and as noted above, have judged each model on it's own merits irrespective of whether it was women's-specific or not. The ski had to fit the skier, in other words.
As for the new Mya 9 coming in to my wife's quiver, it is intended to replace the Dynastar, which she has simply outgrown performance-wise. She was looking for something heftier and with more power, and slightly wider to make some of the off-piste more accessible.
Interesting discussion though. Lot's of fodder here for more.