Peony in a Coffee Cup: The Problem of Secondary Utility

‘In a MOLT minute’ ~ Whether regular menstruation is “useful” or “useless” is ultimately a decision made by individual women - sometimes more than once, over the course of their ‘menses-capable’ years.

	“In the United States, the world's leading coffee importer, per capita consumption is 9 pounds (4.2 kilograms) each year, according to the International Coffee Organization (ICO)...” John Roach for National Geographic News, 4/24/03
hasslefreeclipart.com

Despite the above statistic, there are those who don’t drink coffee – who don’t like coffee, and couldn’t imagine consuming 9 pounds of it in a lifetime, much less in a single year.

Yet, more than likely, some of the coffee-avoidant do own a coffee cup. One scenario might involve a 30-something receptionist in a Chicago suburb, whose favorite poem happens to be “Peonies at Dusk” by Jane Kenyon, which ends:

“In the darkening June evening I draw a blossom near, and bending close search it as a woman searches a loved one’s face.”
	Courtesy Baumgarten About.com walking guide

Our hypothetical receptionist thus calls her coffee cup a peony cup, floating a peony blossom in it throughout the summer months (to the delight of corporate visitor and employee alike).

So, a coffee cup is being used as a flower vase: simple enough. But let’s say we want to extract a general principle from this specific (though hypothetical) example. We could do this by designating “something to drink coffee out of” as the primary use, or utility, of a coffee cup, and designate “holding a flower” as its secondary utility.

Obviously, a coffee cup can be utilized in a number of different ways; thus, we can number all the possible secondary utilizations, su₁, su₂, su₃...su_N.

Object	Primary Utilization	su1	su2	su3	...suN
coffee cup	something to drink coffee out of	vase	scoop dog food out of a bag	make broken pieces into a mosaic

What is the limit on the number of ways something can be secondarily utilized? Only human resourcefulness and need. Or, to update the cliche: “Necessity is the mother of secondary utility.”

MOLT borrows the distinction between primary and secondary utility from the field of evolutionary biology. An organ may have evolved to function in a certain environment one way, only to function differently when that environment changes. For example, a fin for swimming being secondarily utilized as a leg on dry land.

Fins, legs; coffee cups, vases – what’s this got to do with menstrual suppression?

By analyzing arguments for and against menstrual suppression in terms of utility, we accomplish three things:

1. Escape the self-referentialty of “taboocentric” reasoning, a common (albeit unacknowledged) pitfall of menstrual research.

Rather than menstrual suppression being debated only in gender and physiology-specific terms, we can broaden the debate by viewing it as one instance of an extremely common phenomenon – secondary utilization.

We can then ask:

Are there other instances of secondary utilization that are equally contested?

If we claim there is no secondary utility in regular menstrual cycling, does this imply the same for regular semen production, in the absence of a desire for conception? What about other bodily fluids?

If regular menstrual cycling is being secondarily utilized to fulfill emotional and/or cultural needs, how does this compare to alimentation (i.e., eating and drinking), for instance, being put to similar ends?

And, referring to the previous MOLTXIBIT:

Does the menstrual suppression debate rest on an assumption that women engage in secondary utilization less often then men do, or, to put it another way, that human females exhibit less cognitive and behavioral plasticity than human males?

2. Move away from blanket prescriptions directed at all “menses-capable” girls and women:

“There’s no need to menstruate.”

-- Beverly Strassmann

“Menstruation is an unnecessary, avoidable byproduct of the human reproductive process.”

-- Elsimar Coutinho

“Menstruation: The Fifth Vital Sign”

-- Society for Menstrual Cycle Research

Conference title, 2005

“It is important to explain menstruation as a normal biological function...It is one of the normal biological rhythms.”

-- Siobhan Harlow

“Menstruation...is the essence of all women.”

-- DeAnna L’am

And towards a more complicated (and hopefully, accurate) description of what “su₁, su₂, su₃...su_N” refer to, in terms of both regular menstrual cycling and regular use of menstrual-suppressive contraception.

A. Regular Menstrual Cycling

Object	Primary Utilization	su1	su2	su3	...suN
endometrium	site of implantation of fertilized ovum	osteoprotective, cardioprotective	reinforce gender identity throughout cycle	opportunity for self-care: vitamins, exercise, diet
		su4	su5	su6
		reminder to “take a break” when shed	sense of connection with other cycles: seasons, life cycle, business cycle	experience of the “sacred feminine” throughout cycle

B. Regular Use of Menstrual-Suppressive Contraception

Object	Primary Utilization	su1	su2	su3	...suN
endometrium	site of implantation of fertilized ovum	__ __	__ __	__ __	__ __

AND

Object	Primary Utilization	su1	su2	su3	...suN
menstrual- suppressive contraception	prevent pregnancy	reduce risk of reproductive cancers	reduce rates of anemia	eliminate menstrual- related migraines
		su4	su5	su6
		reduce workplace absenteeism	eliminate PMS, cramping	eliminate endometriosis

The above charts are open-ended and descriptive, rather than exhaustive and prescriptive. Taken collectively, they do not imply that women should find secondary utility in their menstrual cycles or in menstrual-suppressive contraception; rather, that the menstrual suppression debate is more properly visualized as a decision-making tree with numerous branches, rather than a simple two-pronged fork.

3. Move away from a simplistic definition of “medically meaningful,” as put forth by Kate Miller in her foreword to “Is Menstruation Obsolete?”:

“...Clearly, something about this mysterious monthly discharge of the uterine lining affects us deeply. The history of menstrual beliefs and attitudes is rich, and its legacy leaves some contemporary women with a particular attachment to their menses. These beliefs are part of our shared experience, and are meaningful in their own right.

But they are not necessarily meaningful medically.”

As well as from the book flap:

“The authors [of “Is Menstruation Obsolete?”] maintain that while menstruation may be culturally significant, it is not medically meaningful.”

Quite obviously, any of the “su’s” of regular menstrual cycling listed above do not depend upon awareness of Miller’s (assumed rather than demonstrated) “history” of “menstrual beliefs and attitudes,” or “its legacy.”

That some women do have spiritual practices centered on the menstrual cycle, which they believe to be derived from an ancient goddess-centered religion, does not imply that all women who secondarily utilize their menstrual cycles do so for that reason, or even that all women who find spiritual meaning in regular cycling, do so because of some “shared experience” of a supposedly “rich” “history” and its “legacy.”

The “legacy” that most women “share” actually derives from educational materials, advertising and now web pages created by tampon and pad manufacturers, and is more properly described as “ahistorical” and even “shallow,” rather than “rich.”

If there is any “mystery,” it is not, as Kate Miller suggests, the “monthly discharge” which she claims “affects us deeply.”

It is how to effectively intervene in what does affect women deeply, and is medically meaningful, that is, the complex interplay between:

body image gender identity social, reproductive and relationship status beliefs and attitudes about menstruation, sexuality and reproduction mass media imagery and narratives

AND

diet and exercise sleep hygiene stress management educational and job opportunities access to health care smoking history drug and alcohol history safe sex practices abuse history

WRITE YOUR OWN INTRO:

1) The “women of menstrual suppression.” The book “Is Menstruation Obsolete?” gives examples of women who find secondary utility in regular use of menstrual-suppressive contraception. In your intro, create alternative scenarios for them, in which they find secondary utility in regular cycling.

2) Imagine that it is now the year 2105, and you are writing the intro to the 100^th Anniversary Edition of “Is Menstruation Obsolete.” Great strides have been made medically, both in terms of clinical outcomes and access to care. Describe a few possible breakthroughs relating to women’s health, and how they might impact the menstrual suppression debate.

Go to "Physics Envy: Reproducin' Relativity" Part I