The Bleeding Unobvious
And in radical menstruation news:
I suspect sharp-eyed readers can guess where this is going.
Readers may wish to ponder whether listing special sex-based requirements – taking time off work, every month, for days, and still expecting to be paid, for instance – is the ideal basis for asserting the obviousness of workplace gender equality.
I’m also unclear on how gender equality, a term used many times, is bolstered by the belief that menstruating women may in fact be men – and the implication that men can also become women and can therefore barge into previously female-only spaces.
The crucial signal, I’d suggest, is that the author, Meaghan Furlano, is willing to pretend that menstruating women are somehow not women and are in fact men. One might call that lying. And referring to women as “menstruators,” as if this were a breakthrough and a basis for applause, does not immediately evoke equality or respect.
A shocking twist. How very daring.
Who are all women. Hence the menstruation.
What those “hetero-sexist beliefs” might be remains, rather oddly, a thing of mystery. Few details are forthcoming. They are, however, “deeply concerning.” And I’m inclined to wonder whose responsibility it should be, if not the adult woman concerned, to manage menstruation.
Ms Furlano, a PhD Sociology student at Western University, and “a scholar of feminist media,” goes on to list the special things that must be done by all employers in order to accommodate “menstruating workers.” These menstruating workers who aren’t necessarily women, remember, and while stressing the importance of gender equality, including the equality of made-up genders, and while expressing dissatisfaction with efforts to comply:
I don’t know about taboo. Indeed, menstruation seems a loudly aired fixation of, for instance, scholars of feminist media. It’s practically a credential, a merit badge, all but obligatory. As for shameful and secretive, I can only suggest that most of us probably don’t care to know in any great detail about how you’re bleeding from your genitals.
All well and good, I suppose. But none of this seems obviously supportive of some unassailable claim of gender equality. It’s a list of costs and possible inconveniences.
No laughing at the back. The P-word was inevitable. Also, menstruators.
Ah, educational correction. Another cost.
And it seems to me a little odd to bemoan the idea that menstruation may, for some, have medical connotations while simultaneously expecting days off work, every month, due to being disabled by the very same phenomenon. Those “painful menstrual cycle-related symptoms or illnesses,” to which Ms Furlano refers. If periods leave a woman agonised and unable to work, for days, every month, this may signal some underlying issue – say, endometriosis or some auto-immune disorder. And a visit to the doctor may be in order.
Again, and let me stress this, most of us don’t want to know about the stains in your underwear. It’s not the kind of information that many of us crave. And at risk of being damned for my “hetero-sexist beliefs,” I suspect that many women are quite happy not to draw attention to their menstrual status. It being, for the most part, no other bugger’s business.
I can’t recall ever being offended by the visibility of a box of tampons, and these repeated claims of some egregious, crushing stigma seem to be teetering on a pinhead. The customary expectation of some minimal discretion – analogous to not announcing every bowel movement – does not strike me as a Big Ask, or a basis for victimhood.
Or for “a powerful feminist intervention,” “a radical transformation and physical restructuring of workplaces,” with continual monitoring and “interrogation,” as Ms Furlano demands.
Via Jonathan Kay.
When did we decide that discretion was a dirty word? Also privacy?
So. Much. That.
Also “menstruators” can fuck off.
Well, the apparent need to loudly foreground a possibly tiresome but fairly unremarkable biological function, to make it a massive thing – entailing “a radical transformation and physical restructuring of workplaces,” with continual monitoring and “interrogation” – does seem, to me, a little weird.
And the convolutions around the sex of the people having periods doesn’t exactly diminish the air of contrivance.
In other news, I WILL BE AWAY FROM MY DESK WHILE I TAKE A SHIT.
I prefer my ‘menstrual status’ concealed thank you very much.
Yes, but that sounds terribly hetero-sexist. You’re obviously being oppressed. We all need to know whether you’re preventing leaks.
Photos may be required. Or at least a good drawing.
We don’t hate them enough.
I don’t know about taboo.
Seriously? The topic is so taboo that ads for pads and tampons are banned from TV, radio, magazines, and all other media, any mention of menstruation is censored from TV or movies.
Every grocery, drug store, and convenience store that sells pads, tampons, or other products is required by law to keep them locked in a separate space in the back, and when you buy them they are put inside a false container, such as a cereal box, so nobody in the front of the store sees them.
Midol™ and similar analgesics can only be purchased with a prescription from a board certified OB/GYN with a DEA registration. In the US&A, giving one to a fellow uterus haver is punishable by up to a $10,000 fine or up to five years imprisonment
I think the problem is that, in order to assert and maintain their own in-group status, their imagined superiority, many of Our Betters feel obliged to mouth the most obvious bollocks.
They seem to feel a need to say things that are dubious, incoherent or absurd, even self-refuting. But for them, incoherence and absurdity don’t appear to matter much. What matters, I suspect, is that their pronouncements will not be confused with the opinions of their supposed inferiors, whose more mundane perceptions must be visibly disdained.
It’s a phenomenon touched on in the later paragraphs here.
Related: women who wear pussy hats.
And yet we’re expected to believe that the fact that menstruation isn’t an obvious topic of loud and very public workplace discussion – not that it’s forbidden, mind, merely discreet – is somehow oppressive, a crushing injustice. Evidence of “hetero-sexist beliefs” and the unbearable downtroddenness of women.
Some of whom are men.
When one pays attention to what these women say and do, it seems fairly obvious that not only are they not oppressed by social norms of reticence, but rather that they are bullies loudly violating such customs in order to harass and humiliate others.
Also: The more absurd the pronouncements which normal people must silently accept, the greater the humiliation.
Nor are we as intolerant as we should be.
Look, for the most part, what’s a week or so per month? I mean they’re women and really don’t do much of anything important at work anyway. Right?
[ Dons body armor, MOPP gear. Edges away from Mike. ]
Sigh. So tired of this shit.
It does have a wearying quality, not least because there seems to be an inexhaustible supply of this generic arse.
Reading the whole thing is a pretty dulling experience. The sheer poverty of imagination, of originality. The begged questions, the mouthing of utter bollocks, the transparently untrue. The lack of anything suggesting autonomous mental activity.
Band name.
Heh.
Step 1: Feminists denounce lack of female firefighters.
Step 2: Standards are lowered to admit unqualified women.*
Step 3: Unqualified men “change gender” to qualify.
* While simultaneously feminists insist that standards are not being lowered.
About those lowered standards….
Well, if they care to maintain their standing among the elect they are so obliged.
Ooh. Haircut in 30 minutes. Begin countdown.
[ Low hum. ]
Hope Santa brings a new overcoat.
Heh. Rather depends on whether your haircuts are tiresome and unremarkable.
[ Hum intensifies, red light starts blinking. ]
Heh. I’m reminded of one particularly bitchy female who was my lead for a brief time. I was away from my desk for a few minutes and when I returned, she demanded to know where I was. I replied I had to use the bathroom. She texted back with “TMI! TMI!”
As someone who “was there” when women first entered the professional work force in significant numbers, I was taken in by the equality thing. Of course I grew up with girls/women in my classes, taking serious math/science/etc. courses, even in moderately competitive sports like swimming and running where the best girls are often on par with the middling boys for a few years. I would kind of smile when my father (retired engineer but also later real estate broker) asked how I could work for a woman, how does that even work? By the middle of my career, once the “glass ceiling” was significantly cracked and the not-exactly-cream-of-the-crop was seeping through, I realized what he was saying. We let our guard down. Women have way, way too much power in business and in government. They are destroying civilization from the inside in ways that very few people even want to understand.
I’m not saying that it was a total mistake to let women in. One observation I pointed out to a few guys and they heartily agreed was that any meeting (of engineers anyway) should contain at least one, at most two women. It keeps the men civilized and even somewhat focused on being their best while moderating the dick measuring. But you get one more woman in there, or give a woman the power of controlling the meeting and you are asking for trouble.
OK, a straying (leaking?) off the topic of menstruation in the workplace but if we had just kept an eye on what was happening, we would be talking plugs and fluids right now either.
Many years ago I read a passing mention of an “art” play in which the characters appeared on stage sitting on toilets and occasionally retired to private cubicles to eat. This was, it seems, “challenging” and “thought provoking”.
Heh. Or possibly addition by subtraction? I’ll burn my own damn coat, TYVM.
Re: Jordan Neely/Daniel Penny: This seems accurate and pertinent:
Many of the clueless liberals/progressives/leftists I knew in college went to very nice high schools in wealthy suburbs–sometimes even private schools with lots of advanced placement classes and no low-intelligence slum-dwelling students. My experiences at a public school with its share of lowlifes gave me an education that those suburban kids never got.