Can trans women have periods? Bullsh1t like this litters the interwebs and clutters the media. The misinformation flows continuously, it feels like the annoying drip drip drip that eventually becomes torment—the dripping machine. Hippolytus de Marsiliis observed the hollow which formed in a rock, caused by the slow dripping of water and this inspired him to make his dripping machine. During the Spanish Inquisition, tormenters strapped down their subjects, and the dripping would begin—on the forehead, being a sensitive area of the body having proximity to the brain. The constant dripping, together with being immobilised, led to mental deterioration and eventually insanity. Misinformation, the misinformation of propagandist campaigns waged by the media, feels like water torture, doesn’t it?
The barrage of inaccurate writing and reporting never ends. We live in an ever present tidal wave of lies wrapped in truth, or truth wrapped in lies. How does average person even tell fact from fiction at this point? My last missive addressed a report filled with misrepresentation and defamatory claims, a report published by the largest private media broadcaster in Canada. How do ordinary people get the straight facts when this sh1t masquerades as journalism?
Let’s address the latest fantasy—that men can have periods when they take cross hormones.
Bluntly—no. Members of the male reproductive system can not menstruate, regardless of how they identify. Taking exogenous estrogen does not enable a male human to menstruate. Menstruation requires a uterus and ovaries. No female equipment, no menses. It is that simple.
So, we go from the title, can trans women have periods, to this sentence: In this article, we discuss whether trans women can experience symptoms similar to those of PMS.
This woke propaganda piece essentially equates the common side effects of menstruation with menstruation itself. Men who take cross hormones may experience side effects of exogenous estrogen introduced into their male physiology. These side effects may resemble what many female people commonly report as side effects of their menstrual cycle. So the author conflates experiencing symptoms that resemble what we commonly call PMS or PMDD (these are pathologising words to describe the fact that some women are highly sensitive to the hormone fluctuations produced by the menstrual cycle) with experiencing actual menstruation.
Now we get to the tired description of menstruation as bleeding. This is an NHS description: a period is the part of the menstrual cycle in which blood, comprising uterine lining, leaves the body. Ok, the uterus is not a wound, and menstrual discharge is not bleeding, it is the sloughed lining of the uterus, which happens when the ovum released has not been fertilised.
I wonder how much of the way we describe menstruation has connections to how society has stigmatised it. I find it interesting that menstruation is cool for men who feel like women, and still deadly for women who live in parts of the world where period huts exist. And I wonder how much of this affirmation of male genderist fetishisation of menstruation reflects the deeply misogynist undercurrent of genderism.
People who do not have ovaries and a uterus do not experience periods.
However, PMS and PMDD are terms that refer to the physical and emotional symptoms that people may experience before their period begins. These conditions occur due to fluctuations in hormones.
Ah, that word—however. We use however when we intend to challenge or contradict something previously said. However implies opposition. However introduces contradiction.
So, the author is saying yeah males can’t menstruate because they don’t have female reproductive organs, but what if they do when they take cross hormones because, look, they even get PMS/PMDD!!
So do female people who menstruate without any PMS/PMDD actually menstruate? Do PMS and PMDD now stand as the sole criteria for determining menstruation? What deranged minds think like this, and why? Do people actually believe this, or is this a kind of placation to narcs? This is fetishisation masquerading as reproductive health care information.
The author goes on to list the side effects, physical and non physical, that males experience when they take cross hormones. The repeated use of the word trans woman/women has effect—remember when we tell a lie often enough it becomes the truth. Many unsuspecting folks are duped into thinking men who identify as women are women when we call them trans women. This short piece I am critiquing uses the words trans woman or trans women 12 times. It feels like a kind of social conditioning or indoctrination to see this repetition—reminds me of being a wee grrl and learning The Apostles Creed in catechism classes.
The piece never provides any solid evidence that men who take cross hormones menstruate, obviously because none exists, and none exists because men do not menstruate. The entire point of this piece seems to draw people away from the actuality of menstruation as a physiologic process and phenomenon toward a conflation of period with common symptoms female people may experience during their luteal phase. Note the choice of the word period, as opposed to menses—again to get away from the biological reality of female reproduction and turn it into a validation game for genderists. Menses implies a complex physiologic cycle, whilst period implies a serial affliction of unpleasant symptoms.
The latter half of this poorly written piece essentially consists of the genderist sermon to the unsuspecting masses, instructions on how to be an ally. Again, I am reminded of catechism class and religious preaching when I wade through this stuff. Gender catechism, catechism meaning religious instruction, has essentially begun to replace information about reproductive health.
Given the rabid misinformation present in genderist information resources that discuss reproductive health, it does not surprise me that young people have such extreme views. How do we create extremism? By depriving a population of access to balanced and accurate information. By misrepresenting the truth, by imposing dogmatic ideas onto fact, by manipulating language, by focussing on reward and punishment, by weaponising fear—this is how you create a population incapable of reasoning, critical thinking, or rational problem solving.
In the end, the author never succeeds in answering the question the title poses, leaving us to take a leap of faith. Once again, I am reminded of the catholic response to saying that some things, such as the trinity and the whole notion of the crucifixion, never made sense to me—you have to have faith, my child, some things are a mystery. This never satisfied me and still doesn’t. I reject the genderist expectation that I have faith in their ridiculous nonsensical mythological tale.
This is just one document, and one that apparently has been reviewed by a medical professional. I seriously hope to never have to be treated by any medical professional with such a poor understanding of female physiology, or who is so unethical as to be willing to discard realty to placate the genderist mob. How many other bullsh1t pieces like this one exist? Is this where young people are getting their information? How can we cope with this tidal wave of propaganda and misinformation, created to exhaust our critical thinking skills, as Gary Kasparov has tweeted from time to time.
The illustration above is by me and you can get the giclée print here, in my Shoppe.