Theory to Praxis: Combatting Period Poverty at Davidson and in Charlotte

One public health issue that falls within the realm of gender and sexuality studies -particularly reproductive justice- is period poverty. Insufficient access to menstrual supplies or environments that allow safe changing of products means that people who experience periods face additional challenges to their everyday hygiene, which has a direct impact on other aspects of their life. For example, a survey of U.S. teens found that 4 out of 5 individuals “either missed or knew someone who missed class time because they did not have access to period products” (Capozzi). In addition to encompassing the lack of menstrual products available to people that need them, the term period poverty also references the lack of health education because of stigma around periods, lack of funding and resources, or other reasons.

Period poverty is often cited as an issue for developing nations, and while this is true, it is also a pervasive problem for people in many situations where their needs cannot be met. Not everyone who needs period products is a woman, but since they are marketed towards women, they are unnecessarily expensive (llano). In the United States, this means that people living in poverty or experiencing homelessness are especially susceptible to period poverty. It is important to note that youth experiencing homelessness are disproportionately LGBTQ people of color (Griffith), so period poverty is not just a women’s health issue, but a very intersectional one.

Two ways Davidson can make menstrual care less stigmatized and more accessible for the community are by increasing the availability of period products in public restrooms and providing opportunities to support menstrual justice in the greater community.

  1. Many of the public women’s restrooms on campus have free tampons available in them- Wall, Union, the library, and Chambers are a few examples. However, they are often out of stock, which eliminates any benefit of them being offered there. In addition, they are only ever set out by the sinks in the women’s restrooms, but not the men’s. Increasing options for gender-neutral restrooms is something we have discussed in class and other students have brought up in their proposals, and I would argue that offering free menstrual products in all public campus restrooms would be a small, good first step to implement towards that goal.
  1. Davidson has the wealth to provide widespread access to menstrual products in public restrooms, but this kind of accessibility is unfortunate not the norm. To encourage action on this issue, I propose putting up posters about period poverty in restrooms. These would include a definition of what period poverty is, as well as a QR code that leads you to the links of organizations to support. For example, Flo Charlotte is an organization that collects and distributes menstrual hygiene supplies to those in need around Charlotte. Their mission statement emphasizes that they “focus primarily on families experiencing homeless, but [they] also support domestic violence shelters, schools, and safe havens for LGBTQ+ teens and young adults” (Flo Charlotte). They accept donations of menstrual hygiene supplies, but also monetary donations, so the posters could even have a QR code that links straight to their PayPal. It would be great to have these posters up in the bathrooms of public buildings on campus to inform people of all genders about this issue and what they can do to combat it.

References

Capozzi, Lindsay. “Period Poverty: The Public Health Crisis We Don’t Talk About.” Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia Policy Lab, 6 Apr. 2021, https://policylab.chop.edu/blog/period-poverty-public-health-crisis-we-dont-talk-about.

Flo Charlotte, https://www.flocharlotte.com/.

Griffith, Daiana. “LGBTQ Youth Are at Greater Risk of Homelessness and Incarceration.” Prison Policy Initiative, 22 Jan. 2019, https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2019/01/22/lgbtq_youth/.

llano, Alejandra De. “The Pink Tax: Why Are Feminine Products More Expensive?” CavsConnect, 10 Mar. 2021, https://www.cavsconnect.com/opinion/2021/03/10/the-pink-tax-why-are-feminine-products-more-expensive/.

Miley Cyrus: “Mother’s Daughter”

Miley Cyrus [@mileycyrus]. Instagram, 4 June 2019, https://www.instagram.com/p/ByStizPJcO6/.

Miley Cyrus is no stranger to controversy. Her 2019 song “Mother’s Daughter”, its music video, and her partnership with Planned Parenthood continue this legacy of getting her fans -and critics- talking. In these mediums she advocates for choice and bodily autonomy, while simultaneously reclaiming misogynistic epithets and portraying diverse resistance against patriarchal control.

The song opens with Miley praising that she is a “freak” and that she is in control: “Oh my gosh, she got the power, oh look at her, she got the power”. Later describing herself as “nasty” (almost certainly a reference to Trump’s comments about Hillary Clinton), “evil”, and “a witch”, Miley affirms that she is defining her own power, employing language that typically is used to demonize women. In the chorus of the song, Miley attributes her fierceness to “something in the water or that [she’s her] mother’s daughter” (Cyrus).

Continue reading “Miley Cyrus: “Mother’s Daughter”” →

Book Review: *Interrogating Motherhood*

Motherhood can be a controversial topic yet is also held as a gold standard of womanhood. This is not only complicated by diversity of individuals and life goals, but the pressure that is put on mothers and the shame associated with mothering in a particular way or rejecting motherhood entirely. Discussion of motherhood is much more prevalent than fatherhood, with discourse more strongly focused on the different aspects of what it means to be a mother. This is the case because of the widely accepted notion that women hold more responsibility as a parent while men are more or less excused. Critical discussions of motherhood can be controversial because of these norms and expectations of gendered parental roles and childcare that are entrenched in policy, history, and day to day life. Nevertheless, it is important to engage with this topic as individuals and a collective to shed light on the private and public role that motherhood plays on mothers themselves, as well as shaping motherhood down the line. 

Lynda Ross is an associate professor at Athabasca University, in Athabasca, Canada. She is a professor in the Women’s and Gender Studies department and teaches courses about violence against women, and women and psychology (“Lynda R. Ross”). A primary interest of hers is the social construction of motherhood (“Lynda Ross and Shauna Wilton”). In her monograph, Interrogating Motherhood, Ross sets out to explore and explain the context in which motherhood in Western society rests, particularly in the United States.

            Interrogating Motherhood’s central argument is that women’s lives are made more complex and challenging by motherhood, because they receive little support considering the immense physical and emotional toll they go through. Ross states that “although childbirth is a universal biological event, it is obviously not independent of the economic, social, and cultural context in which it occurs” (Ross 70), and the result is that the experience of mothering is a very isolating one (127). In her book, Ross outlines the societal structures that emphasize the values place on mothering, but not mothers themselves. Her book’s eight chapters that walk through this argument are titled “The Study of Motherhood,” “Reflections on Motherhood: Theory and Popular Culture,” “Paid Employment and the Practice of Motherhood,” “Enabling Policies: In Theory and in Practice” (guest authored by Shauna Wilton), “Mothering and Poverty,” “Mothers, Mothering, and Mental Health,” “’Other’ Mothers, ‘Other’ Mothering,” and “The Future of Motherhood.” In these chapters she outlines how attachment theory, employment of women, policies surrounding maternity leave and paternity leave, mothers who struggle with parenting because of poverty or mental health, and mothers that face additional obstacles because they fall outside of the cookie cutter “good mother.”

Ross does not employ her own methodology in this book, but rather draws information from a plethora of relevant research and literature. She weaves this collection of facts and statistics from a variety of sources together to create view of motherhood in America that has more breadth than any of the individual works could reasonably provide. Alongside other authors, she draws from four of her own papers on attachment theory and postpartum depression to contribute her own expertise to the narrative. The second chapter of Interrogating Motherhood offers a history on the theory surrounding motherhood, and in it, Ross unpacks how attachment theory has contributed to the norm that maternal selflessness and ever presence is required for the successful raising of well cared-for children (18), partially because of the way theory and the media are influenced by external societal pressures (29). She illuminates that the accepted notion of what a “good mother” is does not assist mothers but instead leaves them without support (83). At the same time, this demonizes parents who do not fit into the narrow white, middle-class, heterosexual, and married mold (104), and further perpetuating the stereotype and expectation that mothers should be the primary caregivers for their children.

Although scholarly and offering a historical survey on motherhood theory, this book is extremely accessible to readers. In addition to being available online as a free PDF, this text is well organized and covers many diverse but not mutually exclusive topics related to motherhood, parenthood, and the historical and social forces that have shaped raising a child as a highly complex and gendered process. Ross also carefully balances her evidence within larger context and narratives within each chapter to paint a holistic picture of the dynamics impacting women. For example, in the chapter “Paid Employment and the Practice of Motherhood,” Ross contrasts the United States’ minimal maternity leave with that of Norway’s (45) to highlight how the difference in policy reflects how mothers are valued. Viewing this topic through a wide lens is essential due to the interrelated nature of its content, in which Ross executes by organizing the text’s content into well-defined categories.             

However, Interrogating Motherhood is somewhat held back by its breadth; since almost all of the information brought to readers’ attention is from outside of Ross’s personal research, there are a staggering amount of topics introduced that are not given equal depth and significance in the greater context of the book. For example, her commentary on how attachment theory supports norms of gender roles in parenting involves discussion of how constructions of Western society have influenced attachment style theory (125), and how this scholarly support has helped perpetuate these norms through media (29). On the other hand, when she attempts to summarize the impacts of the “anxiety, isolation, and sense of overwhelmed” that mothers may face in general, her conclusion is simply that these feelings “are not good for women” (127). Because of this, Interrogating Motherhood is essentially a literature review on policies and norms surrounding motherhood in the United States. Compared to the depth of analysis outlined in the introduction to the book, the text fails to interrogate motherhood beyond basic facts and their immediate outcomes.

Something that could have contributed to the strength of the book is the consideration of women who feel isolated from motherhood. Ross pinpoints the forced obligation of women’s responsibility to their children that some mothers must grapple with (114), but this leaves room for discussion of women who choose not to become mothers or regret becoming mothers. In addition, this book only focuses on Western society’s motherhood norms and expectations (1). The author acknowledges this, but the book could benefit from more cultural context, particulary in the discussions of family and gender roles.

            Ross’s Interrogating Motherhood sets out to unpack the nuanced, personal, and often controversial topic of what it means to be a mother, and how the idea of a “good mother” cannot be enacted in today’s society in a way that is supportive of a mother as well as her children. She covers a lot of ground in her discussion throughout the text and provides a well-supported argument. However, her lack of personal contribution to the research discussed reveals herself in her hesitance to jump into describing a more holistic perspective on the challenges mothers face beyond her two main areas of expertise: attachment theory, and mental health in pregnancy and motherhood (in chapters 2 and 6, respectively, as well as the introductory and concluding chapters). However, her call to action at the conclusion of the book is compelling; “a paradigm shift in how we understand mothering and motherhood is needed” (124) beyond essential policy shifts that need to occur, so that mothers are able to receive support, care, and attention alongside their children.

Works Cited:

“Lynda R. Ross.” CSPI, 1 Apr. 2010, https://www.canadianscholars.ca/authors/lynda-r-ross.

“Lynda Ross & Shauna Wilton.” JourMS, 11 Aug. 2016, https://jourms.org/lynda-ross-shauna-wilton/).

Ross, Lynda R. Interrogating Motherhood. Athabasca University Press, 2016.

Progressive period products: degendering language and representation in the menstrual hygiene industry

JUNE [@thejunecup]. Photo of Model Holding Menstrual Cup. Instagram, 29 June 2020, https://www.instagram.com/p/CCCdEtTF8f_/.

One of the most recent items to surge in popularity with advocates for eco-friendly bathroom swaps is the menstrual cup. These cups are typically made of silicone and shaped like a cone or a bell and have cult followings because they minimize risk of toxic shock syndrome, can safely be used for more hours at a time, produce less waste, and are often cheaper than other hygiene products over the long term. For decades, the market was dominated by a single brand; however, in recent years there have been a handful of new brands, campaigns, and curious cup-users.

June is a menstrual cup brand that was founded in 2017, among a small handful of cup competitors. What sets them apart from many other menstrual hygiene product brands is their shift away from heavily gendered language for periods, such as “feminine hygiene”, or referring to their customers as women and girls. One of their Instagram posts during the summer of 2020 depicted a model with shorter hair and masculine features, smiling and holding a June cup. The caption of the image reads: “At JUNE, we strive to make sustainable menstrual care accessible and affordable to everyone. We’re excited to be a part of a community of inclusivity that’s always growing”. This was posted nonchalantly and without any fanfare, hashtag, or huge announcement of a related marketing campaign. The social media ad does not specify the gender of the model, and the caption only refers to “inclusivity”. Yet the post still stirred up many more likes and many more comments than is typical of their posts. Why? Because their model, Skylar, is a nonbinary trans man.

The fact is that some people who menstruate are women, some are not, and there are also some women who don’t menstruate at all. Yet having a period is often explicitly tied to womanhood and femininity, a narrative that is often initiated in health class and incessantly perpetuated through media depictions of girls “becoming women” and ads for period products. Menstruation in and of itself can cause significant dysphoria for many trans men and nonbinary folks, even without alienating advertising. For a while the primary menstrual cup on the market was called the Diva Cup- some other brands now have names like Femly, Blossom, Athena Cup, Duchess Cup, and Lily Cup. And of course, the cups come in pink and purple with cursive fonts, and the packaging is stamped with floral patterns. Doesn’t seem to welcoming and inclusive, right? The majority of the imagery and language associated with advertising menstruation products is hyperfeminine and does not present the product in a way that is inclusive of their potential customer base.

What’s interesting about June’s advertisement is that by casually introducing diverse menstruating bodies as the faces of their campaign, they are not only signaling that they are a brand that welcomes all genders, but they are encouraging people to challenge their assumptions about who menstruates and the language that they use to have these conversations. They acknowledge on their webpage that they used to use gendered language to advertise their products but have realized their error and corrected it. Of course, we have to keep in mind that June is a brand, and their number one mission as a company is to sell their product. Even if their goals and values are aligned with authentic diversity and inclusion of the LGBTQ+ community, it is difficult to consider that inclusion in isolation from their marketing strategy. Since June didn’t introduce Skylar as trans in their initial post, comments ranged to enthusiastic support, to angry bigotry, to confusion. Most of the comments were expressing support and excitement for both the model and the brand.

“Messaged yall a while back about more inclusive language and so happy to see youve done the work 🤗💜 appreciate ya!” – @ileak_balance

“thank you so much for recognizing that menstruating bodies exist outside of the false binaries we’ve been taught. Thank you thank you thank you” – @novadame

However, many commenters were expressing disgust or anger at the post. A few were initially confused as to why someone who is not a woman is representing period products but seemed to understand once the brand responded in the comments.

Screenshot of comments from June’s Instagram post. JUNE [@thejunecup]. Photo of Model Holding Menstrual Cup. Instagram, 29 June 2020, https://www.instagram.com/p/CCCdEtTF8f_/.

Since they don’t identify the Skylar’s gender, June is assuming that followers will draw their own conclusions from the image. An example of a menstrual cup brand that was not so subtle and took a much different tone was Ruby Cup, which posted an article discussing how they were going to change the language on their website to be more inclusive and started off with the words “Dear Transgender Community, Sorry for being narrow-minded and for discriminating against you”. Was June’s approach to inclusivity more powerful because of its subtlety, or was the bold acknowledgement and education that Ruby demonstrated taking more ownership?

Either way, the reality is that some menstrual health brands are shifting their brand away from ultra-feminine, binary-reinforcing language and imagery that isn’t inclusive of everyone who has a period. It is important to keep in mind that these are brands with marketing goals that are behind these changes, but the hopefully representation and inclusivity demonstrated by brands like June continues.


Citations:

JUNE [@thejunecup]. Photo of Model Holding Menstrual Cup. Instagram, 29 June 2020, https://www.instagram.com/p/CCCdEtTF8f_/.

We Need to Apologize., Ruby Cup, https://rubycup.com/blogs/news/we-need-to-apologize.