- Anne Firth Murray is teaching an open online course (often abbreviated as a “MOOC”) about International Women’s Health + Human Rights online, right now. The course started July 10, but you can still join the course and get caught up with videos and readings.
- Raise your hand if you’re shocked: The leadership of companies that sell products to women – from cosmetics and household goods to pads and tampons – is largely male.
- The makers of Kindara, one of our favorite iPhone apps for period charting, is seeking beta testers for the forthcoming Android version.
- In traditional Iranian medicine, myrtle fruit syrup has been used as a treatment for heavy menstrual flow, or menometrorrhagia, as it’s known clinically. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study was conducted by researchers at Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences in Tehran, and the researchers found that menstruating women using the syrup experienced fewer bleeding days, used fewer pads, and reported higher quality of life scores than those in the control group. The study is reported in full in a recent issue of DARU Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences.
- At Natural Fertility Info, Kathryn Cardinal explains how charting your cycle can help you identify common health concerns you might otherwise miss, such as thyroid imbalance or PCOS (polycystic ovarian syndrome).
- Nicole Jardim wrote a longer-than-140-characters response to Lena Dunham’s tweet , explaining why Lena Dunham is wrong about birth control.
- Our Bodies, Our Blog reviews and re-considers the new American College of Physicians recommendation that healthy women do not need annual pelvic exams.
- In a long-form piece from Macleans earlier this year, Anne Kingston explains that infertility isn’t the reason fewer women are mothers than in previous generations.
- Be Prepared Period offers their Better Period Action Guide, absolutely free.
- Did you happen to see Bitch Media‘s post of this not-at-all-fake DIY birth control tutorial from a Hobby Lobby employee?
Guest Post by Jennifer Aldoretta
In my line of work, I talk and write a lot about the female reproductive system. It’s no secret…I’m pretty vag-savvy. I don’t randomly walk up to strangers and start talking lady parts, but I certainly don’t hesitate to share repro info when the topic arises or when people ask me what I do for a living.
While some people constantly look like they are secretly planning an escape from the conversation, more often than not, the folks I’ve encountered are genuinely very curious and inquisitive about female reproduction. After all, it’s something that most of us have never really been taught. One big thing I’ve noticed is that talking about the topic like it’s no big deal makes people a lot more likely to truly engage. Having frank conversations rather than ones riddled with “ewws” and “yucks” goes a long way toward helping people break down internal menstrual stigmas, and it’s an awesome thing to be part of.
I recently spent some time in Chicago visiting a friend, and while I was there, we went out to dinner with her friends. Then comes the obligatory question about what I do for a living. To this day, when someone asks me this question, I still have moments of mild internal panic, wondering how they will react. I would imagine that when most of us ask this question, we’re not expecting to be faced with a deeply personal, and often polarizing, subject. So, in some ways, I can totally understand the initial shock-factor that some people experience. But I somehow always manage to answer very matter-of-factly, and on this particular day, it couldn’t have gone better.
One of the women in the group, after hearing that I specialize in lady parts and natural fertility management, mentioned that she was really struggling with the birth control pill and had been thinking for a while about stopping. And she asked for my advice. I’m always very careful not to say “this is what you should do,” because autonomy is incredibly important and I’ll never claim to know the best birth control option for someone…especially someone I just met. So, instead, I opened up about my personal experience with the pill, my hesitation in deciding to stop, my work with Groove and fertility awareness, and what it has all meant for my life. I wasn’t surprised that she was interested in my story (it’s always nice to know you aren’t alone), but I start to get pretty giddy when others jump into the conversation, too. Which is precisely what happened.
I was in mixed company and everyone in the group was actively engaging in a conversation about periods, birth control, and cervical fluid. Not a single person murmured an “ew,” and I (of course) was thrilled. There were a lot of wonderful questions asked, a lot of great dialogue about how the female reproductive system works, and even some thoughtful critiques of modern birth control methods. In the end, the woman who initially asked for my advice said that she found my experience both validating and reassuring, and she mentioned that she planned to stop the pill. But even if this hadn’t been her decision, the conversation was still a wild success.
Any initial hesitation felt by the individuals in our group quickly dissipated after the conversation began. In the end, there was no shame, no embarrassment, no stigma. This is precisely why I do what I do. If I can help even one person overcome female reproductive stigmas, then I consider my work a success. On this day, I felt enormously successful.
Women’s Need for Accurate Information About Birth Control Gets Lost in Controversy over Zimbabwe Official’s Speech About Dangers of Birth ControlJuly 18th, 2014 by Saniya Lee Ghanoui
Guest Post by Carol Downer
One side of the population controller establishment, the “pro-natalist”, says they’re concerned about our health, when, in reality, they just want us to have more babies; the other side, the “anti-natalists”, says they’re concerned about our health when, in reality, they want us to have fewer babies. Who’s “facts” do we believe? Or, whether we believe their facts or not, do we believe they’re concerned about our health, or that they’re cloaking their national and international policy debates about the impact of birth rates on national aspirations or economic growth in the neutral garb of a discussion about women’s health.
A recent flurry of supposedly neutral health discussions and commentary was provoked when a pro-natalist Zimbabwean official told his countrywomen “to multiply” in order to be a “superpower” and warns that birth control can cause cancer, a supposedly objective “fact checker group”, Africa Check, rushed to allay women’s fears about oral contraceptives and cancer, and Bustle.Com chimes in support.
Africa Check wrote a critical article about two main assertions by Zimbabwe Official Tobaiwa Mudede on May 25 at the celebration of Africa Day. It ignored his first assertion that the promotion of birth control is a ploy by western nations to retard population growth in Africa, and then it found that when he says that contraceptives can cause cancer, his facts are right, however his advice to women to stop using contraceptives were “misleading and alarmist”.
They rely on WHO’s cancer and research agency, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), who confirmed that there can be a link between the use of oral and injectable hormonal contraceptives and particular types of cancer, increasing the risk in some cases and lowering it in others. Dr. Elvira Singh of IARC concluded that Mudede’s comments are “alarmist”.
Shortly thereafter, Abby Johnston of Bustle.com, sums up the WHO’s position as “the benefit far exceeds the risks” with contraceptive use, and mis-quotes Africa Check in saying that “the higher the birth rate in a country, the higher the maternal mortality rate”. Fact? Africa Check said that the UN only said the dangers of having more children could result in increased mortality rate. Johnston reveals her true concern, which is that African women are having too many babies in her statement, “Access and education on birth control is particularly important in areas facing overpopulation.” She presumably means Africa. African women, just as much as other women, need to have an unbiased comparison of all methods of birth control; www.birth-control-comparison.info
Methinks that the reason that Africa Check didn’t check the facts concerning Mudede’s allegation that “there are those in the West that push birth control is because they fear population growth in Africa” is based on fact, as the Bustle.com article reveals.
There isn’t much written about or by the population control establishment for the general reader. (There is an extensive scientific literature published by demographers -demography is the study of populations, including birth control, migration and immigration). I urge supporters of women’s reproductive rights to read “Quiverfull” by Kathryn Joyce, a contributing reporter for Nation Magazine. Joyce gives a road map to the Christian Patriarchy Movement” in America that forms the popular base for the pro-natalist politicians. Given the tidal wave of T.R.A.P. laws (Targeting Abortion Regulation Providers) in various states, and the recent Supreme Court decisions that promise to sharply restrict accessibility of abortion, I think it is important for us to face the influence of the growing pro-natalist movement in the United States. At the same time, I think we need similar research and analysis of the antinatalist movement, both national and international, who oppose it. My review of Quiverfull is at femwords.blogspot.com.
Always™ and its corporate owner, Procter & Gamble, have been receiving a lot of praise around the interwebs these days for their #LikeAGirl campaign, launched June 26, 2014, with a video produced by Lauren Greenfield. The video has been viewed 37 million times and counting. Last week, HuffPo actually called it “a game changer in feminist movement”, which I suppose reveals how little Huffington Post knows about feminist movements, more than anything else.
But before you applaud the efforts of Always to raise girls’ self-esteem, remember that they’re also the people who bring you these ads. Because that stench of girl never goes away, and you can’t spend all day in the shower, use Always.
Guest Post by Jen Lewis
“Widening the Cycle: A Menstrual Art Exhibit”
Menstrual Health And Reproductive Justice: Human Rights Across The Lifespan
Submission Deadline: November 1, 2014 11:59PM (MST)
Exhibit Dates: June 4-6, 2015
Event Co-Sponsors, the Society for Menstrual Cycle Research (SMCR) and the Center for Women’s Health & Human Rights (CWHHR), seek visual art to enrich and further strengthen the multidisciplinary focus of the upcoming conference Menstrual Health and Reproductive Justice: Human Rights across the Lifespan. Art has the ability to challenge society’s deepest assumptions by sparking new ideas, catalyzing critical thinking, and inspiring individuals to take steps in new directions that facilitate social change. “Widening the Cycle” will explore visual art’s ability to alter social perceptions and reactions to menstruation with a particular interest in art created using menstrual fluid.
For more details, including eligibility and submission guidelines, please visit: http://www.
Guest Post by Jen Lewis
A noteworthy addition to the menstrual canon was published last year by Sara Read, a professor in the Department of English and Drama at Loughborough University in England, titled Menstruation and the Female Body in Early Modern England (Palgrave Macmillan). As the title suggests, the book delves into the menstrual ecology of 16th and 17th Century England in order to discover the nature of attitudes and practices of the time. Given the fact that the prejudices, myths, taboos, and emphasis on discretion and even secrecy were present as they are today (though sometimes taking different forms), it is a daunting challenge to unearth evidence of how the menstrual cycle was viewed centuries in the past. However, despite the secrecy surrounding the topic, Read has unearthed nearly 150 primary sources ranging from journals, sermons and letters to midwife instructional manuals which she subjects to close analysis assisted by more than 100 secondary scholarly references. In doing so she has revealed a complex set of social practices and has critiqued them with insight.
There is a striking symmetry between Sara Read’s documentation of Early Modern menstruation and Lauren Rosewarne’s Periods in Pop Culture (Lexington Books) published the previous year. Though they examine eras separated by 400 to 500 years of history and vast changes in practices and attitudes, their projects compliment each other in surprisingly felicitous ways. Both authors capture the nuances of the subject in their respective realms and invite readers to think more deeply about how menstrual values are formed.
Following the publication of Read’s book, she is one of the organizers of a conference in July at her home university titled “Early Modern Women, Religion, and the Body” that will include several presentations with menstrual themes, including my own paper titled, “The Early Modern ‘Period’ and Biblical Stories of Menstruating Women.” A report on the conference will be posted after its completion.