- Suzie Shefeni
A few weeks ago, I found myself on the controversial and influential local gossip page, Omajuices. There is much to be said about the social power of gossip, but those are ruminations for another platform. For those who are unfamiliar with the modus operandi of the page, Omajuices functions in one of two ways. The page’s moderator can prompt a public dialogue based on popular culture or news, and invite readers to engage with the topic through direct messages, the best of which are reposted. Other times, a reader may prompt a conversation through the direct messages and if the moderator finds it interesting, they will share it and once again, initiate public dialogue.
This particular day, a conversation was prompted through the second pathway. A reader sends in a comment about Dillish Mathews. Dillish is a big deal, a household name and winner of the eighth season of Big Brother Africa: The Chase in 2013, when I myself was a 13 year old girl trying to figure out what was cool, hip and cosmopolitan. The reader expressed their frustration with Dillish and how she openly shares about her menstrual cycle. I cannot quite remember the exact wording but it was something akin to: “must she really tell us whenever she is on her period?”
What ensued was a lively discussion about whether we need to destigmatise menstruation. Some shared the original commenter’s sentiments: why should a woman of class and status talk about her bodily functions? And why would she subject her male followers to information surrounding what is considered to be in the domain of women? Many others reflected on how important it is for influential and prominent women to share openly about something that has been structurally and socially deemed as dirty and private.
We all know that these conversations are not new.
There has been a historical and ongoing tendency to frame the natural, cyclical process of menstruation as a disorder, illness or ‘problem’ that requires control or suppression. In the social sciences, this is commonly referred to as the pathologisation of menstruation.
This pathologisation can be seen in various socio-cultural manifestations. For example, Afrobarometer data shows that the vast majority of Namibians identify as Christian. The Bible states that “when a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening” (Leviticus 15: 19). One could safely assume that, in one way or another, the majority of Namibians have been faced with stigmatising ideas about menstruation.
And as with most things, this pathologisation has grown into a multi-million dollar global industry. This industry develops and sells disposable menstrual products that serve as a solution for the hygiene ‘problem’ that needs to be both hidden and managed. Products are marketed for their discretion and the ways in which they allow those who menstruate to ‘function normally’. They put a price on shame and attempt to conceal the vast changes that women undergo as they progress through their cycle.
It is an important caveat to consider the many ways in which menstrual products benefit women. Widening access to menstrual pads and tampons allows young girls to have access to education, a reality that initiatives like Power Pad Girls have highlighted. Furthermore, the introduction of a broad range of products, including diva cups and period panties, allows women in various contexts to experience more ease during their periods.
The danger exists at the intersection of pathologisation and the industrial complex. Risk festers in silence.
Recently, a study called “The presence of endocrine disrupting chemicals in sanitary pads” from the University of the Free State (UFS) was published in the journal Science of the Total Environment. The study analysed 16 brands of sanitary pads and eight types of pantyliners sold at popular South African retailers, spanning a range of prices and including products marketed as “organic”, “plant-based” or “free from harmful chemicals”. These products were screened for three major classes of endocrine disruptive chemicals: phthalates, bisphenols (including bisphenol A, or BPA) and parabens. These chemicals can mimic or interfere with natural hormones in the body. Increased exposure to these chemicals have been linked to endometriosis, contact dermatitis and ovulation disorders.
In a society where menstruation is already pathologised, women are not encouraged to interrogate the relationship between our bodies and the products sold to us to deal with the ‘problem’ of menstruation. In addition, women are discouraged from discussing menstrual health widely and publicly, as demonstrated by the case of Dillish Mathews on Omajuices.
So if you are a local celebrity or a woman wondering whether your period is worth talking about on social media, or with your friends or family, I say: yes!
In Namibia, talking about periods paved the way to an amendment to the Value-Added Tax Act of 2000. In 2016, Popular Democratic Movement leader McHenry Venaani broke the taboo and tabled a motion in parliament prompting the consideration of the high cost of sanitary pads and their impact on girls’ education. A few years after that, the Ministry of Finance under the leadership of Ipumbu Shiimi held budget preparation consultations where the issue of sanitary products tax was addressed by civil society. Finally, another similar motion was tabled in 2021 by then deputy information minister, Emma Theofelus. Various voices came together to advocate against period poverty and as a result, the Value-Added Tax Amendment Act of 2022 came into effect on Sunday, 1 January 2023, removing the 15% tax on menstrual products.
Towards the end of last year, I was also conscientised by another public conversation surrounding menstruation. A viral video showed a woman’s concern when holding her Always-branded pad under a lamp revealed dark particles and discoloured patches. Many women, including myself, shared her concern – so many of us had never even wondered what was inside a product that was so ubiquitous in our lives. What followed was not only a conversation about the benefits and features of various menstrual products, but also a brilliant educational response by the brand. The response explained what features of their product result in the pad’s discoloured and patchy interior including light transmission patterns through white virgin pulp.
Notably, the UFS study and researchers do not only raise concerns. They also provide practical recommendations for consumers of menstrual products who are seeking safer alternatives. Consumers can choose products certified under the OEKO-TEX Standard 100: an internationally recognised independent testing and certification system for textile and leather products, focusing on safety and sustainability. Menstrual products certified under this standard have strict restrictions on hazardous substances.
The conversation needs to shift away from how unspeakable it is for one to discuss their own period, and towards democratising access to information about menstruation, the various ways in which menstruation intersects with capital and the social structures which we bleed within.
- Suzie Shefeni is a feminist and serves on the board of Sister Namibia. Read more of her work on Substack.
