Written by Ekata Lahiri
A common misconception which has been in practice for way too long is the usage of the term ‘feminine hygiene’ to describe products which cater to people who menstruate. Such usage is problematic for several reasons.
To begin with, using ‘hygiene’ for menstrual products implies that periods are essentially an unhygienic and unclean, a process which requires special products. Situating menstruation in such a context automatically sets wrong precedents about what is otherwise a normal bodily process.
But besides this, using the term ‘feminine’ interchangeably for all people who menstruate is also heavily problematic since it is exclusionary and not gender-neutral. The origin of its usage can be linked to the larger misconception that biological sex is similar to one’s gender (further explained here), which in reality, is not an accurate statement.
First, we need to be clear about the distinction between sex and gender. Biological sex is assigned to a person at birth, and it is almost completely based on the appearance of their external genitalia. On the other hand, gender is a social and cultural construction, and although it is still a product of prolonged conditioning, it has little to nothing to actually do with the person’s sex.
Since menstruation is a bodily process, the immediate response of people is to relate it to one’s body; however, what the usage of words such as ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ in the context of menstruation does is to mix up a person’s gender expression and their biological sex.
There are a few other points which we must keep in mind while formulating our vocabulary while talking about menstruation.
- Not all women menstruate, and not everyone who menstruates is a woman; not using the term ‘menstruator’ / ‘menstruating’ people is inherently trans-exclusionary.
- Even while speaking about women who menstruate, to reduce their ‘womanhood’ to one bodily process reinforces the idea that women’s chief purpose is to reproduce, which is a problematic gender role requiring little explanation.
Gender identity does not function in a binary, and there are many gender identities and expressions beyond the male-female model we have been exposed to for most of our lives. This binary does not just exclude trans people but is also not mindful of non-binary, genderfluid, and gender non-conforming people.
This is mainly why stating that only women menstruate is simply a wrong statement, as it completely dismisses trans people who menstruate while not identifying with the ‘female’ gender. The discourse around menstruation completely immerses itself in vocabulary, which reinforces the gender binary. In that case, the chances are that it would become significantly difficult for trans and non-binary people to access menstrual and reproductive healthcare, which would, in turn, increase chances of gendered violence.
Therefore, it is very important to start with the basics (which, here, is the choice of words). Eventually, we work our way around more pressing changes in how both menstruation and menstruators are treated within the larger medical discourse. In addition to this, directly equating only women to menstruation also sets the precedent that the process (and its purpose) is synonymous to the experience of being a woman, which reduces people to their wombs and childbearing capacities.
In a world where the need of the hour is to increase awareness around gender roles and how they can be undone, using gender-neutral terms such as ‘menstruator’ also helps eliminate associations that restrict women’s capabilities and bodily autonomy.
However, there is also growing disconcert from cisgender women regarding how using the term ‘menstruator’ results in an erasure of their lived experiences, as has been discussed in detail in this article. There have also been debates around whether the term ‘menstruator’ should be discarded- and replaced with ‘women’- since it is the sexuality of women which has been under patriarchal control (which means that even if trans or non-binary people menstruate, they would not be discriminated against like cis-women are).
Such a stance reeks of gender essentialism and is an example of trans-exclusionary radical feminism (or TERF). It invisibilises both the gender identity and the bodily experiences of trans women, who can and do experience period-like symptoms, especially following their hormone replacement therapy. This has been elaborated here by Sam Riedel.
Similarly, such a stance also invalidates how trans men can menstruate as well. Since one’s genitalia is not a defining characteristic for their gender identity, the process of menstruation should also not be attached to one specific gender. Although most advertisements around menstrual products have focused on cis-women, there have been some campaigns on trans men as well (like this one by Pink Parcel), which amplifies an otherwise almost invisiblised concern.
A change in how we address menstruators would certainly normalise such conversations in our daily lives to a greater extent, eventually resulting in reduced stigma around the topic at large.