When Did a Woman’s Cycle Become a Problem?

I have been thinking about how something as fundamental to womanhood as the menstrual cycle can so easily be viewed and experienced as an inconvenience.

A period that needs to be hidden.
Fatigue that needs to be pushed through.
An emotional reaction that needs to be controlled.
A mood that needs to be explained.

A few days each month that we are expected to behave as if they are no different from any other days. And when they are different, we often look for what is wrong.

Is it PMS?
Is it hormones?
Is it stress?
Is it a disorder?
Do I need to fix something?

I am not questioning the importance of medicine. There are very real menstrual and hormonal disorders, and women have historically been dismissed when they needed medical care. Pain, excessive bleeding, PMDD, endometriosis, infertility, and many other conditions deserve to be taken seriously.

What I am interested in is something slightly different.

How did we move from experiencing the menstrual cycle as part of female life to experiencing its variations through the lens of medicalization — as something that needs to be fixed, managed, corrected, or suppressed?

From mystery to medicine

For much of human and man-made history, menstruation was surrounded by cultural, religious, and sometimes frightening explanations. Blood was mysterious. Women's reproductive capacity was mysterious. Pregnancy, birth, menopause, and the recurring changes of the female body were not understood in the way we understand physiology today.

Modern medicine changed that.

We learned about hormones, ovulation, the ovaries, the endocrine system, and the menstrual cycle. We learned how to diagnose disease and treat suffering.

But something else happened along the way.

As the female body became increasingly understood through medicine, female experiences also became increasingly described in medical language.

The vocabulary changed.

Instead of simply being tired after too many tasks, a woman could have a symptom.

Instead of experiencing a recurring emotional change, she could have a syndrome.

Instead of internally changing across the month, she could be described in terms of what was happening to her.

Again, none of this means that medical diagnoses are imaginary or unnecessary. The distinction I keep coming back to is between medical care and medicalization.

Medical care helps us recognize and treat something that is genuinely causing harm or dysfunction.

Medicalization happens when experiences that fall within the range of ordinary human variation increasingly become understood primarily as problems to be diagnosed, managed, or corrected.

And women's bodies have a particularly long history of being viewed through that lens.

The problem with being "hormonal"

There is another layer to this.

For generations, women have been described as hormonal, emotional, unstable, irrational, difficult.

The irony is difficult to miss.

Women's hormones are real. Their effects are real. The menstrual cycle is real.

But the cultural meaning attached to those facts has often been something else entirely:

Hormonal = unreliable.

Emotional = irrational.

Cyclical = inconsistent.

And eventually, generation after generation, a woman learns to make the same interpretation of herself.

This is where external judgment can become internal — a part of the broader issue of internalized misogyny that we still have to recognize and unlearn.

She gets angry and thinks, I'm just hormonal.

She becomes more sensitive and thinks, I shouldn't be like this.

She needs to withdraw and thinks, What's wrong with me?

She feels different before her period and immediately begins searching for a way to make herself feel the same as she did two weeks ago.

Learning to distrust the cycle (or not take it seriously)

I don't think most women consciously decide that their menstrual cycle is a problem.

We absorb it.

We grow up learning that menstruation is something to conceal.

We learn how to make sure nobody sees or hears a pad in a public bathroom. Heck, I still do it sometimes.

We learn not to mention that we are bleeding. We learn that PMS is a joke.

We learn that a woman being emotional can and will be used against her.

We learn that productivity is good and slowing down is suspicious.

And eventually, we may begin to experience our own cyclical changes as an interruption to the convenient and productive person we are "supposed" to be.

The problem isn't simply that somebody told us our cycles were inconvenient.

It is that we may have learned to measure ourselves against a version of womanhood that leaves very little room for cyclicity.

The version of womanhood rooted in testosterone-driven linear standards.

A body expected to behave linearly

There is something particularly interesting about this when we place the menstrual cycle next to modern life, built around linear, man-made routines.

Our schedules are linear.

Our workweeks are linear.

Our productivity is measured in output. The steadier, the better.

We are expected to show up with roughly the same energy, concentration, sociability, and emotional availability regardless of where we are in our cycle.

But the female reproductive system is not organized around a perfectly linear pattern, where every morning represents a new surge of energy, as though we lived in a testosterone-driven world.

Its landscape changes over the course of days.

Hormones rise and fall, and with them can come changes in mood, energy, concentration, appetite, sleep, sensation, and social experience.

The body prepares for ovulation, then for a possible pregnancy, then moves toward menstruation when pregnancy does not occur — only to begin building itself again.

These physiological changes can coexist with changes in energy, appetite, sleep, sensation, mood, and social experience.

They are not necessarily dramatic. They are not identical for every woman. And certainly, they should not be used to stereotype women.

But they are worth noticing.

We don't need to choose between science and cyclicity

Instead of:

"I do not want my cycle to interfere with my life. It's an inconvenience."

we could say:

"I want to understand its cyclical flow and make it a part of living whole, while addressing debilitating and painful symptoms."

Cycle awareness should not become a rejection of medicine.

There is no contradiction here.

Debilitating symptoms deserve attention. Severe pain is not something a woman should simply accept because "that's part of being female."

And sometimes medication, hormonal treatment, surgery, contraception, or other medical interventions can give a woman her life back.

The goal is not to replace medicine with cycle awareness.

It is to add another layer of understanding.

To know the difference between something is wrong and something is changing.

To recognize when a symptom deserves medical attention without automatically interpreting every change in ourselves as dysfunction.

Perhaps the shift we need is linguistic

Maybe part of reclaiming cyclicity begins with the words we use.

Not every change is a symptom.

Not every emotional shift is a disorder.

Not every need for rest is weakness.

Not every period is a medical event.

And not every woman experiences her cycle in the same way.

But a woman should be able to know what is happening in her body without immediately being taught to distrust it.

For me, this is what makes cycle literacy and awareness interesting.

It isn't about becoming ruled by your hormones. It isn't about blaming every feeling on your premenstrual phase. And it isn't about pretending that medicine has no place in women's lives.

It is about developing enough awareness to recognize your own patterns.

Because perhaps the opposite of medicalization isn't ignorance.

Perhaps it is literacy.

Learning the language of your own body — and the language to speak about it — rather than accepting the language a man-made world has created for it.

Learning what is ordinary for you.

Learning what is not.

And, eventually, being able to tell the difference between a body that is asking for medical attention and a body that is simply moving through its rhythm.

Flowing.

That distinction can change the way a woman sees herself.

And maybe, before we try to change the cycle, we should first learn to see it.

Back to Blog

Connect