As a woman, I never really thought about how menstruating could empower men if they actually went through it. When I would think about men going through a monthly cycle, I could only think of how much of a pain it would be for them, as it can sometimes be for females, but Gloria Steinem takes on a creative perspective in her article If Men Could Menstruate (1978).
“Menstruation would become an enviable, boast-worthy, masculine event: Men would brag about how long and how much. Boys would mark the onset of menses, the longed-for proof of manhood, with religious ritual and stag parties,” Steinem says (p. 209). Upon reading this quote, I couldn’t help but laugh at the idiocy and truthfulness of the fictitious situation. I just could not wrap my mind around how the negative connotation of it all could be completely erased.
Not only would the physical aspect of menstruation be held to a high status, but Steinem also joked about how the hormonal and emotional side of menstruation would be something that creates power and strength. She said that politicians would argue that menstruation makes males more aggressive, therefore allowing them to be better leaders than a non-aggressive woman that lacked the “steadfast cycle governed by the planet Mars,” (p. 209).
I could not agree more with that hilarious assumption; with the way that our patriarchal society already operates, why wouldn’t menstruation also be viewed as something men should use to view themselves as better than women. Steinem talks about how women would try to compensate for their biological inferiorities by doing things like lying about having a menstrual cycle, or even sacrificing large amounts of blood each month in order to create equality between the sexes.
I could definitely see that happening, because menstruation is considered to be something that women should keep to themselves in today’s society, and that is only because men don’t have to go through it. If men could menstruate there would be hundreds of ads for sanitary products and even merchandise; maybe even something like a line of red-stained pants wouldn’t be thought of as completely absurd.
There would be a never-ending list of things that society would do to accommodate these menstruating males and there’s really nothing wrong with that until you look at how little is done to accommodate menstruating women.
When a woman is on her period, she’s automatically coined as being “emotionally unstable,” and every decision made by her shouldn’t be taken seriously because there’s always the chance that her body is making her crazy. It’s very demeaning and unfair to assume that, especially since there isn’t any statistical evidence to prove it. It’s just an excuse to validate the opinions and arguments of men by being able to say things like “well, you’re probably on your period, so you’re just angry.” In retrospect, Steinem gives an example of something a newspaper might say in a world where men could menstruate: “JUDGE SITES MONTHLY STRESS IN PARDONING RAPISTS,” (p. 209-210).
This statement completely enraged me. I felt that way because I am so sick and tired of hearing about men being pardoned for their irresponsible behavior, claiming that they cannot help it, when there are millions of cases of other men in the same position not making bad choices. I don’t understand why something like that could ever be justifiable for men when it wouldn’t even be considered for women, nor that it should be.
I believe that this was the exact point that Steinem was trying to make. Menstruation would just become another excuse for men to get away with treating women as an inferior species, doing terrible things, and trying to make sure that the entire world will always revolve around them. I truly do agree with Steinem’s take on how different the world would be if men could menstruate. She made it clear that even in an alternate universe, where men had the characteristics that are considered to be “flaws” for women, patriarchy would prevail.
