|
|
Foreword to Last Word in
“Is Menstruation Obsolete” – Comparing Oranges to Apples? |
|
‘In a MOLT minute’ ~ Just because a woman writes the intro to a book...doesn’t mean she speaks for all women. |
Below is the last
paragraph from ‘Is Menstruation Obsolete’s’ Foreword:
“This is a message whose time
has come. Fifty years ago women and men
lived with certain immutable assumptions about the reproductive process: that human eggs could not be fertilized
outside the body, that a woman’s pregnancy must involve her own egg, than an
anovulatory woman could never conceive, etc.
By now, these medical barriers have all been broken, and their use by
individuals and couples have found gradual acceptance in society. This book’s conception of menstruation is
perhaps another example of the medically “immutable”
rendered healthfully under the control of individual women.”
-- From
the “Foreword,” xi, Kate Miller, MPH University of Pennsylvania, USA
And then, the last paragraph of
‘Is Menstruation Obsolete?’s Conclusion, over 100 pages later:
“The transition to a new
reproductive paradigm cannot be achieved overnight, but by the gradual
transformation of the old. In this book
we propose the abandonment of the traditional paradigm, ordained by Hippocrates
in an era of medical naiveté, that regular menstruation is good for women. Understanding why cyclical bleeding is
unnecessary would be the next step.
This would be followed by more women becoming comfortable with the idea
of not menstruating. With the
cooperation and supervision of their physicians, women would use currently
available means to stop menstruation for several months and, growing more
confident, would lengthen the menstruation-free interval. As the benefits become evident, other women
would be encouraged to try this procedure and medical researchers would be
motivated to find more advanced methods to control menstruation. This would forge a major
advance in women’s health, led by women. Today’s proposal would become tomorrow’s new paradigm. The pioneer feminist Margaret Sanger wrote,
“No woman is completely free unless she has control over her own reproductive
system.”
Let this new freedom begin.”
-- From the
“Conclusion,” 163-164,
Elsimar
Coutinho, MD, Federal University of Bahia School of Medicine, Brazil
It is pertinent that the
reproductive breakthroughs listed by Kate Miller, MPH, are certainly not ones
that the majority of “individuals and couples” avail themselves of – rather,
they are ‘last resorts’ when reproductive difficulties are encountered. [Why not do an Internet search to determine
the exact percentages of individuals and couples availing themselves of the
reproductive technologies listed? Are
these the percentages that Coutinho envisions embracing menstrual suppression?]
’Last resort’ reproductive technologies do not “a new reproductive paradigm”
make. And that is exactly what Elsimar
Coutinho, MD, in his closing paragraph is arguing for. Whereas Coutinho envisions a ‘domino effect’
taking place, with women inevitably
deciding to become menstrually suppressed, Miller presents menstrual
suppression as something “rendered healthfully under the control of individual
women.”
Control implies choice, and
choice implies a variety of responses – yes; no; maybe; now but not later; when
I have the money; when I’m ready; etc.
For example, perhaps a woman would be menstrually suppressed for a dozen
or so years – but when her daughter goes through puberty, she might decide to
start menstruating again, in order to strengthen her relationship with her
daughter. [What other possible
scenarios can you think of?]
As well, Coutinho apparently
casts himself in the role of the new “Hippocrates,” “ordaining” a new
“reproductive paradigm.” Again, this
goes against the claim made by Miller that menstrual suppression is something
“rendered healthfully under the control of individual women.” If women have control of their decision to
embrace or reject menstrual suppression, they also have control of their
decision to embrace OR reject Coutinho as the ‘father’ of a new “reproductive
paradigm.”
Coutinho also contradicts
himself, by casting himself as the one to “ordain” a new “reproductive
paradigm,” and yet in the same paragraph claiming menstrual suppression to be a
“major advance in women’s health, led by women.” Obviously, as Coutinho has the last word in “Is Menstruation
Obsolete?,” rather than women
(plural, not singular), he is leading the charge. That a quote from “pioneering feminist Margaret Sanger” is tacked
on at the end, does not diminish the fact that it is Coutinho, a man, who is
doing the tacking on.
~
Whew! And that’s just two paragraphs!
Obviously, as you wend your way through “Is Menstruation Obsolete?,” you
may want to keep a notebook handy, jotting down the various claims made at
various points in the book (hint: don’t forget to include page numbers). You may be astounded by the number of
“oranges and apples” that can be packed into a mere 164 pages!
|
Go to SMCR Position Statement on
Menstrual Suppression |
||||||||
|
Return to "Write Your Own Intro
Index" |
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
X
|
From Protection to
Expression: The Future of Menstrual Advertising |
Menstrual Monday |
Broken Tampon Memorial
Fountain |
|||||
Menovulography:
the years from puberty to menopause, told as a story with pictures
|
||||||||
|
|
Contact MOLT
|
|||||||
“MOLT minute” graphic courtesy of http://www.clipart.co.uk/