Conflicted - whether to support period charity that uses ‘menstruators’

There's also local ways of addressing period poverty. (And I do - unlike other women here - think period poverty is a thing. There are so many women who limit the family money they spend on things they need, in order to provide for their kids. Pads are one of those things.)

If you work in a public-facing area, or are part of a church, or have a local community hall, you can persuade the operating body to have free pads available in the loos - I've done this with my church, and it's been very straightforward. Lots more people than just our church use the building, and since it's often low-income groups and charities that use church halls, it tends to reach women who need it. And it isn't a big drain on funds - the pads disappear, but not at a rate that costs us more than a very small amount.

It could down to - bleeding from between your legs? If you are not a woman, 100% get to the a&e. If you are a woman - probably a period.

I dislike the 'women and' approach as it gives away the meaning of the word women. Only women menatruate.

By talking about people rather than women it looks like it is far less of an issue as suddenly statistics are halved. It also draws away from the fact that many of those who don't menstruate have suffered period poverty (aka poverty) or will do in future.

YY, lonel, exactly. Complain every time. Don't make it easy for them to pander to trans activists at the expense of women and girls. Call them out on social media. Sometimes it works.

I think organisations need to be held to account. Calling women menstruators should not be seen as the easy, neutral option. They should know that it is offensive to many women and it will affect donations.

Ask them why, ask them if they will change because of all the points made - there are other charities who don’t play this game (the ones who seem to care about the girls and women, not about playing gender games for show).

I don't think those setting up campaigns such as this have spent much time considering the whole life of women. In my opinion its shallow and often more about wanting to be activists than really engaging in girls and women's lives.

YY, I completely agree with this. And we know TRAs often join these lightweight, attractive campaigns with the expectation of furthering their agenda, because they've admitted it before.

No I would never support any organisation which describes women as menstruators.

To the other points re poverty, they definitely talk about poverty more broadly and there’s a lot of mention of kids missing school due to lack of access to period products.

Its only girls who would miss school through lack of sanpro.

Just to add on to some very well put points, one thing to note about the word "menstruator" is how many of the activists who favour it can't spell it themselves.

But a teenage immigrant who doesn't speak English (and who might be here because she's a refugee with all the educational interruptions that might mean) is supposed to just learn it and cope.

💡 moment for me... @WorkingItOutAsIGo thank you!

I won't donate to any charity that erases the word woman & replaces it with anything else & that includes adding the deeply offensive cis on the beginning.

If they want to have people actively avoid donating because they are more interested in pandering to men than supporting women then they should keep their nasty language.

I only support charities that know what women are & none of them have had to transition to become women.

It is dehumanising language and it is completely inappropriate. Shocking, really, considering women and girls are dehumanised due to having periods in the first place. You'd think they would put two and two together.

Got it in a nutshell.

Sorry also meant to add this. I am assuming you are in an English speaking country? This charity need to be mindful of the fact that many people in poverty are migrants, they don't have English as a second language but they will know what a woman is, they won't have a clue what a menstruater is.

Surely as a charity they need to reach those most in need.

I think your reply is good because anyone who donates to charities who do this is reinforcing the language they use and you are refusing to do this.

Doing nothing in these situations isn't an option, something has to be said. I have started emailing and pointing things out to organisations that I come across and have managed to get a few things changed already. These little steps all make a difference.

Serious question: what is "period equity"? I thought that was about removing the tax on tampons? Which already happened on 1/1/21.

Agree that I wouldn't support a charity which describes its potential beneficiaries as "menstruators". It's demeaning. Why insult something in the order of probably 99% of girls and women, just to save the feelings of a small subset of transmen and people claiming various other gender identities?

Perhaps if enough people (of either sex) make a stand and refuse to support charities using these kinds of phrases or to buy goods from companies which use this kind of terminology, they will finally start listening.

I would pull them up on their use of ridiculous terminology and once it's been changed to the correct wording, I may consider a small donation.

I always worry , when schools or whatever sign up to these projects to help theor students , what do they do with the stuff.

I mean its not am endless supply is it. Will these very needed products get to those who need them or are some wasted by being shoved in a basket in the boys toilets.

How can they smash period stigma if they erase the humanity or woman and girls by removing our names, language and dignity.

They have clearly forgotten that there is a whole human being that surrounds the menstrual process?

I say that as a woman who should menstruate - but doesn’t due to medical reasons.

I would say something too

Allow them to keep the annoying “people who menstruate” phrase but ask them to include the word women too.

Great thread with so many insightful comments.

Its such an important point, that use of inaccessible language eg "menstruators" is exclusive. Woman and girl are both high frequency familiar words. The language of gender ideology comes from the middle classes and university campus. Many of those who do not speak English as a first language and/or have limited literacy skills will be excluded and campaigns that have not considered this are revealing their own limitations.

I'd email and tell them.

Poverty is a vicious cycle as a result of and because of poverty many of those who suffer are those who are lacking in education/literacy/access to information so language needs needs be plain, simple and factual to ensure those affected understand that the help is for them. Those so poor they can't afford pads will not be worrying about their gender presentation it will be so low down on the list of concerns, so this is done to appease people that period poverty doesn't even affect

I wouldn't support a charity that can't eve name who it supports. And 'menstruator' isn't even a dictionary defined word.