It's cute, not necessarily useful. As the article pointed out, it is more expensive than a S&W which is a better gun, IMHO. .32 is too small. There is the fact that the presence of a gun ends most violent encounters before they start, but still.
One thing that I have found difficult working with women and guns is that there are a number of factors. I took a lady out shooting and tried to make sure I had something that didn't kick a lot, so I brought a large N-Frame and fired .38s out of it. Almost no recoil, but I didn't factor in the size of her hands...she could barely hold the thing. Most large revolvers have little recoil unless you are being outrageous (hot loaded .357, .44 magnum, that dinosaur hunting .500 S&W...) but women often cannot hold them. Small frame revolvers like the Ladysmith or the newer scandium (titanium alloy) J-Frames kick quite painfully. With enough adrenalyne this can be compensated for, but still. I am rather larger and small handguns just plain hurt to shoot. And lets not even get into direct blowback compacts like the Radom or Makarov. They are easy to carry, especially if you carry a purse, but I have felt like I would have carpultunnel (sp?) after two magazines.
At the end of the day, I do think women should be armed more often than they are as frankly, they are targeted more often. Male-rape is relatively rare and men are on average larger. At 6'3" and nearing 300 lbs I am not much of a target, armed or unarmed. Maybe from a group, but then the revolver is the equalizer, as it has always been from the Colt Patterson to the present. A 5'3" woman at 100 lbs is going to need an equalizer from just about any single man, and certainly against a bigger one or a group of them.