A good comment ruined by the cynical feminist wisecrack at the end.

Why on earth has anything to do with women inevitable compared negatively with what men do or don't do?

It's a shame, really. Menstruation is something ONLY females do. What on earth has it to do with us? It's among women all this is an issue, not men. It's women who think it's disgusting, not men. Take responsibility for it yourselves finally, sort it out, decide how it's to be discussed, and let's know what you decide.

I dare suggest it may be way past time women were less precious about menstruation, and about their body generally, at least tell us when you are fertile and when you're not rather than waiting until you are pregnant then trying lamely to explain it away by saying, "I made a mistake!"

Oh, great, thanks a lot, sweetheart. Now you're going to tell me you're off for an abortion, tremendous. Go for it, don't worry about us, we're just the sperm donors . . . the ATMs . . .

It's something women do need to sort out among themselves finally. Believe me, a lot of men are going to relax a whole lot more, be a lot more less cautious, a lot more friendly, with a bit of honesty and responsibility in the way women interact with men at different times of the month.

Men are never going to know unless you tell them. Is that clear enough yet?

And there are going to be a lot fewer unplanned children, a lot less 'mistakes' . . . how many times do you hear sole mothers actually saying that to their children . . . yeah, great Mum, really nice to know I'm your mistake . . . . really made my day . . . .

Maybe stop worrying so much about how inconvenient it is for you every month, as if the relevance of the female fertility cycle is the bit of bleeding at the end of it, when to the rest of us there are three stages we need to take into account if we are going to be at all intimate, the non-fertile, the fertile, and the bleeding stages.

I don't care when you are bleeding, only when to avoid your nocturnal advances at risk of yet another child that we have yet to discuss or plan for.

You completely missed the point of my comment.

You can refuse to see it if you like, but cultural attitudes to bodily functions ARE different for men and women. But I never said that men were responsible for perpetuating these differences any more than women are.

And this observation has absolutely nothing to do with your patronising diatribe that cynically positions women as manipulative sirens who want nothing more than to trick men out of their sperm.

Oh well Gil has anyone ever told you that a large percentage of women don’t know when they are ovulating? Could that be due to a significant number of women having “irregular” menstrual cycles? Of course this is of no consequence to cads or rapists who prey on impressionable young girls to have their wicked way prior to doing a runner. And why should they pay a couple of bob for a condom (or a subsequent abortion) when they can just “vanish?”

Last year investigators chasing fathers for failing to pay child support seized more than $25.5 million from men in Queensland - the nation's capital for deadbeat dads.

Almost 28,000 tax refunds owed to parental deserters for the 2010-11 financial year have been intercepted by the Australian Taxation Office in a bid to claw back money owed to families. That puts the state at the top of the league of shame for seized tax returns.

However, the national child support debt remains at $1.1 billion, with almost $880 million owed domestically and $318 million by parents who live overseas. The overwhelming majority are fathers who refuse to pay up.

Of course male chauvinists who ignore history are bound to repeat it. About 225 female thieves, prostitutes and con artists were rounded up from prisons in London and the British countryside to the failing Sydney Cove colony aboard the Lady Juliana, wrote one historian. The females were to serve two purposes - to prevent the starving and isolated male colonists from engaging in 'gross irregularities', and to act as a breeding stock for the troubled settlement.

Perhaps it’s time to speak of the other unspeakable “gross irregularity” – penopause?

Regan and Shirley,

First, there was no reason to bring men in on this argument about menstruation to start with, especially in the context of assertions that it is disgusting. It is only among women that it's considered disgusting, again something to be kept from men when I argue that in an intimate relationship it needs to be shared.

I was right to broaden the argument by pointing out that there are significant social consequences arising from all this shame and guilt and secrecy, and that women by continuing to insist among themselves that it is disgusting and should not be discussed, instead of blaming men maybe take responsibility for the harm they are doing by it.

I'm inclined to argue myself for full disclosure. I'm inclined to argue that once in an intimate relationship it is the female's obligation to keep track of her fertility, and to discuss it with her partner. Too often the excuse comes back, suggesting, well, she "didn't know." If the girl doesn't know what's happening with her own body, who on earth does know?

No, I reject such an excuse as pathetic. If the girl wants to stay single that's her choice. What she knows or doesn't know about her own body doesn't affect anyone else. When she is in an intimate relationship with a male, free to leave, not being detained forcibility or otherwise, her choice (again "women's power") and if not why hasn't she called the police tohave him charged with abduction and rape, fully aware that she is in an intimate relationship, she has an obligation not only to know when her fertile period is due but to let him know as well, an obligation to him AND to their children, all of them.

As things stand I remain somewhat sympathetic to the plight of men who did not plan to become fathers, who were not informed and were as often lied to by their partner, who had worked hard to accumulate assets and property expecting that one day they will marry and father children, happy to contribute, trying their best to do the right thing, but in the event tricked out of it, considered a threat, "not the man I thought he was going to be", then having lost his savings is then expected to continue paying up.

The situation arose from feminist assertions that this was "women's power", to which the men responded by saying, OK, if that's the way the game is to be played, if it's all only a crud power game, it's "men's power" to disagree, toi make up their own minds, and to respond accordingly.

A LOT of men rather than suffer the insult have simply given up work altogether and gone on the dole. There is a famous case in Victoria where the bloke gave away his entire and quite considerable estate, anonymously in $20-$50 cash donations to charity, rather than allow the woman one cent of it. There was nothing the court could do but place him on a twelve month good behaviour bond, while blokes all over Australia were grinning.

That's bloke's a hero in men's circles these days.

I thought it was classic, myself.

You can call us chauvinist as you will, and I will only ever reply by saying that it is women who set the rules of the game, who decided that relations between men and women are to be a power play over assets rather than being a partnership between two people devoted to one another, who care for one another.

OK, I don't like the way things stand either. In my case I raised the children by myself, in the face of women bitching about a bloke doing a "woman's job" and all the rest of it, called a paedophile and everything else they could dream up, while my wife returned to her studies hoping she would find an identity, a career, some accomplishment she could call her own rather than so totally dependent on a male, except in the event she "felt empty" and after a string of other blokes ended up with yet another child.

The pattern over here in WA throughout that long period of feminist domination in all discourse on relations between men and women, our submissions refused on the grounds of intellectual and ideological demarcation in place of emirical fact, has been women with 4-5-6 children by 2-3 different men, on every occasion relying on the argument that women and THEIR children are unsafe from men, that they "can't find a decent man".

The whole of family law in this country since Lionel Murphy is predicated on the unfounded assumption that men are inherently a threat to women and children, and it's that which rules this game, nothing else.

OK, again, I choose not to be a threat. Under the rules, the only way I can exercise my choice as a male to not be a threat to women or children is by staying away from them. Oh, but, sorry, you still want my money, you say, that I work to earn, and get nothing in return beyond still being considered a threat?

Who are all these cads and rapists preying on young girls? Please, name them, let's see for ourselves who they are. Or is this just more of the of the same old contradiction among contemporary Western women who are in fact safer than they have ever been in history - even Carmen Lawrence in her book on politics of fear raises this same point that rape is an extremely rare event - nowhere near explaining the extent of paranoia among those same women.

There is no danger. Whatever happened in history as men were pressed into the imperial service whether they liked it or not, and as an afterthought some colonial official deciding maybe they should send a few women as well (what did they expect, everyone to be celebate?), hapopened two hundred years ago.

It's preposterous that men and boys today are still being blamed for what the colonial office did 200 years ago, and worse that Australia still thinks that way, still lives with it, after over two centuries? No, get off the grass, it's unbelievable.

Back to the point I made, rather than dragging men into this business, rather than this vanity of comparison between men and women, PLEASE, girls, do make an effort finally to sort it out among yourselves.

Believe me, once that's done, men will not resent the fact they will breath a collective sigh of relief.

For my part, no I did not run away, I raised the kids myself, and even then during all those years their mother was obliged to pay nothing in their support, the moment they decided to live with her and help raise their new sister (at my instigation not hers), suddenly I have to support her, pay her, forced to do so by the Child Support Agency docking my pay.

HA! That was Keating's scam, nobody else's. It's only his Child Support Agency that calls them "parental deserters." I know a lot of men running extensive men's support networks who call them refugees. Far better for this country to have retained an idea of marriage and mutual obligation than to have ever contemplated this "women's power" paradigm with which we've been inflicted. Far better to have retained a view of the human body as something to be respected, male and female alike, not rejected as "gross irregulaity."

I'm fine with my body, thank you very much. No problemo.

In the meantime, girls, do as all a favour, please just say to your partner when your period is coming due, work on it together, decide together about having children, if for nothing else than for their sake. At least stop making all these lame excuses.

As a bonus, maybe the media comedians won't be making such jokes about it all the time.

Again, Regan, you sort it out then come back and tell us what you've discovered.

I don't know of blokes anywhere who give much of a shit either way. The cultural differences inevitabkle lie with women and their attitudes not only to their bodies but men's as well.

Line them up, it's a simple survey, run of the mill stuff, and watch the different reactions to penises and pussies between men and women. My bet is you'll find the women screeching and giggling, not the blokes who are likely to simply grin and walk away.

For the rest, the stats on sole mothers with children from multiple fathers, and as someone else pointed out the number of blokes who refuse to support them, materially, morally or intellectually, is all on the public record. Look them up for yourself.

If these women are not seeking to use men, to exploit them, what on earth are they doing? What do they intend to do, beyond what they are on record as doing?

Way past time the lame excuses were set aside for the sake of dealing effectively, finally, with has emerged as a very serious and ongoing social problem in this country.

Just feel the need to express a contrary opinion as a male.

Men are as much responsible for getting women pregnant as women are, if not more so in situations where men use physical dominance to override consent. Condoms are a much more reliable method of avoiding unwanted pregnancy, and are largely easier and more convenient in the form designed for men to use. They also have the added benefit of reducing the risk of STI transmission in many cases.

As far as representation of menstruation in culture goes, it is as much a male issue as it is a female one. Culture serves in many ways to help us understand ourselves as humans, and more importantly, helps us learn from experiences that are not our own. If culture is failing to represent diversity of human experience, we are failing to communicate our stories to each other and at risk of losing our capacity for what I consider a great virtue: empathy.

I was always rather impressed by Jared Diamond's observation that humans - alone in all the mammals - have no neon signs screaming out "come and get me" when they are receptive to fertilisation . And it's simple when one thinks about it - if one knew, one wouldn't.

This standing up business - this apish posturing that got us wandering and running about -comes with a cost especially to mothers. Big heads small pelvises. A very poorly designed bit of gear Lord.

So those who retained some mammalian signaling device to advertise their fertility would simply stop breeding - stop taking the risk - and go extinct.

I have a similar theory for why we don't have tails. Very hard to be deceptive when there is a big wagging tail flagging one's intentions.

Hi Peter

You would be accustomed to my wacky hypotheses so here’s anotheree:

Peafowls call during the mating season to attract members of the opposite sex. The peacock spreads its fan of tail feathers and then struts and displays himself to potential mates.

Human female calls (flirts) during the mating season to attract members of the opposite sex. Human male displays his “big wagging tail (ahem) flagging his intentions."

Howzthat?

Nothing wacky about that Ms B... very sensible birds. That's why there's so many of them I guess.

Here I am surrounded by large flocks of parrots - rosellas, lorikeets, sulphurs, galahs, corellas ... thery gang up and have West End Story rumbles over the right to occupy the large eucalpyt out the front. The kookaburras and magpies are doing the same thing over other trees.

Now I don't think this is about mating - at least not directly. Seems to be more like a B&S Ball sort of set up... before settling down into some sort of breeding business. All they want to do is just like you know hang out together ... like teenagers at a shopping mall.

Either way, all very curious. The flocks started assembling about a month ago and seem to be getting bigger. It's like that Hitchcock flick "The Birds"... but noisier and a lot more fun. Like The Birds starring the Three (hundred) Stooges.

Peter,

I remember reading that... but didn't he also write that the reason for mens' relatively huge penises (relax - he meant compared to other apes in relation to body size) was - wait for it - an aggression display for the benefit of OTHER MEN!

Laugh myself silly I did.

The thing about Diamond's theory is it fails to explain how, with knowledge about fertility and the ability to control it, 75% of women still choose to conceive - even going to great pans to do so. IMO that rather puts a hole in the theory.

Was it someone else who described the hypothetical situation of how society would fail to function if womens' fertility was advertised, and also if people, like all other animals, had sex in public?

Ah yes Ms J, but they - by and large - choose. At least here. But for most of human history and even for the current population, choice has very little to do with it ... blissful ignorance and random chance. And we have all sorts of legal, medical and social paraphenalia to consecrate the whole shenanigan.

But picture this: once a month Cheryl's nose turns brilliant orange and Bruce knows his time has come and makes his moves ... and we're back to 12, 14, how ever many kids before Cheryl invents nose masks.

The one undeniable outcome of having a disguised mystical arcane fertility cycle is that it works to suppress pregnancy and childbirth.... doesn't stamp it out obviously ... except maybe in Japan. Knocks one about apparently.

All up a very strange business... the whole lot of it.

I'm off to polish my lovely collection of hand-axes.

Mmmm – they say feathered blokes and sheilas mate for life so it wouldn’t be a swap meet.

They're a pretty wild bunch Ms B ... like bikies and hoodlums. God knows what they're up to. They're adolescents I think - unpaired, on the loose, sowing their wild oats, "dating" as the Americans call it.

Now I know the received wisdom suggests this life-long birdly darby and joan monogamy business ... sniff.... but I suspect it's not quite so sacred as we might like to think.

Maybe it is more accurate to say that the mated pairs bond with a specific breeding site than they do with each other ... they spend the rest of the year largely avoiding each other and team up again when the urge takes them.

Sensible huh? They had something going for them this lot to survive while all the other dinosaurs went the way of the milkman.

Good point Peter - most women *choose* to have between one and three kids, a few choose four. Very few choose more than that - certainly not 14 and most medics class pregnancy No. 6 and beyond as "high-risk".

On the other hand under hunter-gatherer conditions women aren't fertile all year due to limited food availability. There's a story about the significance of the Bunya nut season, in that the sudden influx of food energy triggered ovulation and hence a big fertility spike. So in the days when our concealed ovulation evolved we wouldn't have been candidates for 14 kids anyway. Clearly (like so, so many things) it ain't all that simple.

Now... where's that evolutionary biologist when you need him?

Bunya nuts you reckon? Not just that you had this sort of cockatoo pack business with young folks from all over the place getting about and feeling frisky?

Now this hunter gatherer condition? This would be what ... somewhere out in Red Dirt country where food was at best scarce much of the time? Like Ethiopia but with goannas? Surely not the coast where from what I can work out they lived on fish and oysters. All year. Moving around doesn't automatically imply hunger or even reduced resources, Ms J. They could be moving around for the sex AND the beer nuts.

Shocking.

Not so much about low weight as ovulation is related to fat to weight ratio. Female athletes often stop menstruating - this doesn't mean they are unhealthy, just that nature decrees a level of fat for pregnancy to occur and then reach fruition.

Personally I like how kangaroos control their fertility - and birth! Having a spare foetus on hold for the right conditions, no periods...

And I think this comment has been made up by an annoying, ever present shit-stirer.

So where is the evidence for her assertion. I can’t find anything, so she must have made it all up.

True feminism.

Dale, would you ask for evidence if Lauren said the sky was blue?

If she wanted to write something that was reliable and had some scientific evidence, yes. She could at least reference it to a source, or say it was measured with some type of instrument.

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2006/aug/02/worlds-bluest-sky-revealed

But she has referenced nothing in this article, and I don’t think she has ever referenced anything in any other article either.

A natural born feminist perhaps, but certainly not a scientist.

Hmm. Interesting. I wonder if there is some type of instrument for measuring the extent to which one's leg is being pulled.

Yes, perhaps the article could go into the category of unsubstantiated, non-referenced, non-reliable, non-scientific feminism.

The degree of misinterpretation of a 'theconversation' article is measured in Blooms. 1 Bloom is mild misogyny and 10 Blooms is interpreting an article on Particle physics as a left wing, man hating, academic assault upon Australia's manhood.

Abuse.

What else can you say?

Well as Oscar Wilde said: there's only one thing worse than being talked about and that is not being talked about.

Sean Parker
The article certainly does make the whole system of peer review in social science an absolute and total farce.

You can make any type of assertion you want in social science, and it will be completely accepted.

No reliable research needs be carried out, no reference needs be provided, just portray women as oppressed and it will be accepted.

(And you may even become a university lecturer, all paid for by the taxpayer).

I award you 3 blooms for that comment.

Sean Parker,
Please don’t tell me you are prepared to believe anything written by a feminist, and you are also a university lecturer.

Next you will be telling me you mark student assignments.

Mmmm.... Getting up to 7 blooms, misogyny and anti-academe in the same comment... Are you going for the big 10 blooms here, Dale?

Dale ...

Are you trying to say that your ongoing seeth-a-thon is in some way "scientific" - based on fact and reason.

As I've pointed out to you repeatedly your assertions - about the Family Court process, about feminism, about victimography (a new word for the complex business of feeling oppressed by life and well, everything really) are rooted only in your personal individual experience.

Now try as you might to argue that all fathers are oppressed, that the Child Support Agency is a feminist plot, that the law is designed to grind fathers down (all fathers)... you are wrong both factually and in the scale of the conspiracy.

It's just you Dale... you alone. Not the rest of us.

Get used to that word alone. If you don't learn to learn - modify your behaviour and thinking - rather than just being wronged all the time, you will spend a lot of time being alone.

God you are so right Peter.
This constant sulking is getting tedious. It is like having a teenager with in house.

On the other hand, trolling stories for or by women is an effective way to get mum’s attention.

Peter Ormonde
So where are all the peer reviewed research studies for this article? Where are the references?.

Nowhere to be found.

The author made it all up.

Dale is a serial troll. He was a constant disparager of anything remotely or directly concerning women on On Line Opinion. But, don't take my word for it, check out some of his posting history under the moniker, Vanna:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/user.asp?id=54436

The above link is rather significant as the most recent post is one where 'Vanna' announced his final post on OLO. I am sure he is 'sorely' missed.

and an earlier incarnation as Timkins:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/user.asp?id=6333

Very useful; a posting log. Helps sort out the men from the boys, or if you prefer, the women from the girls.

I am female, between the ages of 9 and 60 and I menstruate - suck it up Dale.

tell you how today's heroine manages, the keep cup! shows conventional products to be ridiculously wasteful, ineffective and embarrassing.

http://loveyourvagina.com/

Probably the only sanitary protection ad to include a song sheet. Priceless!

Thanks Toby. I haven't read it, but I found a review:

http://www.nicholaswhyte.info/sf/etq.htm

Ironically, the option not to have periods at all already exists, and has done for years. It consists of taking the combined pill and skipping the "pill-free" days (women on the combined pill don't have an actual physiological period - just bleeding in response to withdrawal of the synthetic hormones).

The levonorgestrel-releasing IUD *Mirena* also tends to prevent menstruation, although not as reliably as the combined pill.

Side-effects? More than likely - but I'll leave that to someone whose pharmacological qualifications extend beyond bottle-washing.

I had a Mirena fitted 3 yrs ago and I'm happy with it. At first I was a bit concerned about the idea of not having a period as a regular reassurance that I wasn't pregnant, but now I enjoy the freedom to make plans without having to factor periods into the equation, or pack tampons "just in case".

It might not work for everyone but it does for me.

http://therealsydney.wordpress.com/2010/05/04/surfing-the-crimson-wave-and-other-such-things/

I can't find the link to the original article - as it's not for my thesis, I ain't trying that hard - but this discusses suppression of periods specifically for "hygiene".
Scary stuff - as is the general trend to avoidance of anything seen as "ikky".

It has never been, for me, about the "ick" factor, I prefer to choose not to have a period under specific circumstances, such as trekking outback for weeks at a time, with a daily shower a simple memory.

Yes, I know women have managed for millenia without. We also managed without many of life's contemporary conveniences, so what? We have to be all stoic about having periods? Ask yourself, if men had periods would they refuse to take advantage of our wonderful modern technology?

Dianna,

I agree - I'm sure pretty much every woman who's otherwise perfectly happy having periods could point to a few "seriously - not this week!" occasions - and having irregular periods adds to the chaos. However, you can't just rush out for a pill prescription to cover those odd weeks and long-term pill-taking isn't for everyone (often on the doctor's advice).

Could that be the next medical advance - a pill taken short-term specifically to suppress one or two periods for trekkers and the like? Might even be possible with the currently available drugs.

As for men not choosing to have periods, I read something recently by a male gyno who said that if he was a woman he would certainly suppress "his" periods - I think he said he couldn't understand why any woman wouldn't (that'd be an interesting interview to unearth if anyone remembers).

So yes it's true for one bloke at least.

Lorna

I do agree that skipping periods is not an option for all. In fact, I get migraines which is why I have not had any long term contraceptive device fitted. Meanwhile I am counting down the days for menopause - another female experience shrouded in myth and misinformation; the majority of women go through menopause with few problems - despite issues of hormone therapy. Women, in general, just get on with life - as so do most men. *I am attempting to "dale-proof" my posts :)

As for the men - I don't see too many of them shunning the multitude of wonderful tech-toys, so believe I can confidently posit that most men would avoid the menses if given the opportunity.

Menopause? Isn't that a "condition" now? Aren't we trying to "cure" that business too? Pathologising human life at every stage.

As for men avoiding menses if they had the chance ... we could and we did I think.

Yes you did. Don't get me started.

Exit stage left ... smiling smugly. :)

I don't think we can allow that frankly, Peter. Who's going to keep up the intelligent male contributions now?

Or is this a signal that we all have to stop faffing and get on with some work?

To the trees for me and the books for you Ms J ... get thee to a library!

"I was stunned and horrified about how little contemporary culture admits to/allows for basic knowledge about women's reproductive cycles"

I think this is made up also.

Women's reproductive cycles and ovulation is taught in high school.

Grade 10 science normally, or earlier.

"Women's reproductive cycles and ovulation is taught in high school.

Grade 10 science normally, or earlier."

Not everyone, not everywhere. Besides do we stop discussion about a topic simply because we were given a rudimentary overview in secondary school?

This would mean we would stop discussing Literature, Maths, Science and so on simply because we studied it some of it at school.

Or are you simply trying to stifle discussion about women's reproductive cycles?

In which case you are proving Lauren's point:

"We need more stories of those women who bleed for 30-odd years without the dramas and fanfare and homicidal rages that the screen too often offers. Equally, we need tales of women who’ve gone through menopause without the craziness and the moustache and the meltdown."

Just so you don't feel left out, Dale, little petal, we can do with more stories of the male experience as well. However, Lauren was writing about the female experience (quelle horreur).

My science teacher memorably started this topic with an extensive rant about how relatively useless the information was: that it explained little if anything about how to avoid pregnancy (the 8-odd *known* pregnancies a year at the school might have been a factor in his concern); that it said nothing at all about the realities of sexual relationships between men and women; that it covered only the most rudimentary facts and over-generalised to an unacceptable extent.

But he had seniority, a PhD and chronic mercury-poisoning - I doubt most schoolkids benefit from such candour.

But presumably this science teacher fella had at least at some point actually held hands with, ahem, a person of the other gendered persuasion.

My Moment of Revelation was guided by the Holy Fathers - the blind leading the imminently blind: 7 minutes of the "bits" and the mechanics (replete with stylised diagrams), 52 minutes for Earnest Moral Instruction about the non-uses of the newfound knowledge on pain of Eternal Damnation and worse (hazards to eyesight figured prominently), and a minute for questions. Like throwing a live prawn on a griddle.

It's amazing there are so many of us really. Should put them off for life.
Doesn't seem to though. As for me, twice was more than enough.

Dianna Art
"Not everyone, not everywhere"

Every student in Australia is given education regards human reproductive systems, as a part of their junior certificate.

I can also remember it being taught in primary school.

But back to the topic, where are the reliable studies and references to support the author’s statements, or was it all just made up by a feminist?

Lorna Jarrett
“But he had seniority, a PhD and chronic mercury-poisoning”

If the teacher had chronic mercury-poisoning, he would not be teaching in a school, and would probably be in a bed. So you have made that up.

Making things up seems to be contagious, so I would like to ask “where were you taught to make things up?”

Or, "who have been the people who have inspired you the most to make things up?"

"If the teacher had chronic mercury-poisoning, he would not be teaching in a school, and would probably be in a bed. So you have made that up".

Just because someone finds something hard to believe doesn't mean it's been made up. It can also be a symptom of having too narrow a range of experiences and a lack of imagination.

You accuse people of making things up an awful lot.

Incidentally, my science teacher wasn't the only one.

http://bctf.ca/publications/NewsmagArticle.aspx?id=7338

Fyi I wasn't talking about the need for education. It might be a little hard to articulate in this context what is the difference between understanding intellectually how an egg is fertilised and attitudes towards -- as well as experience of -- this aspect of (most) women's lives. I could go into all sorts of seemingly trivial nitty gritty from fluctuating amounts of mucus to migraines. Some women spend their lives in astonishing ignorance of how what their bodies are actually doing -- and it matters!!!

Lorna Jarrett
I am quite aware of toxicity levels, and aware that if the teacher had chronic mercury poisoning he would not have been physically able to teach a class of students.

So you made it up.

I would ask you some more questions:

“Do you think it suitable for an academic to write an article and never reference anything, or never refer to any reliable evidence or research?”

“If so, when should universities be shut down as useless and a waste of money?”

Melissa Raine
"Some women spend their lives in astonishing ignorance of how what their bodies are actually doing -- and it matters!!! "

I find this hard to believe, and I think it all made up.

I typed "menstruation” into a search engine and got 14 million hits.

“menstruation symptoms” got 7 million, and “menstruation problems” got 9 million hits.

A qoman could also ask their doctor, or go to the library and get a book about it.

There is no lack of information regards menstruation.

"if the teacher had chronic mercury poisoning he would not have been physically able to teach a class of students.

So you made it up."

Wow - I hacked the Britich Colombia Teachers' Federation website and posted a fake story!

And there was me thinking I didn't know dreamweaver from html!

Evidently I'm *even* more talented than I thought I was. Who'd have thought?

It's a cultural thing I think Dale. And it's true that you can use 'oddities' to suppress and control someone as a group. there is also a natural difference I suspect between men and women, although it dynamically change with age and experience, as we live together. It's like everything else, nobody is dominant in all situations and times, excepting those cases where people want to be dominated. It's a strange and multicolored world we live in, but that's also what keeps it interesting.

Yoron Hamber
I don’t believe it is culture

It is a myth or piece of misinformation that mensuration is a “taboo”, or “hijink” as described in the article.

In reality, menstruation has been intensively researched and well understood.

http://www.medicinenet.com/menstruation/article.htm

I think the article shows just how much social science is now removed from just about every other area of science, and probably the last person anyone should contact regards any issue would be a feminist within social science, or outside of social science.

Dale

"A qoman (woman?) could also ask their doctor, or go to the library and get a book about it.

There is no lack of information regards menstruation."

And people can discuss menstruation on open forums like this.

I have learned a lot already from various comments and links left by other posters - both male and female. Clearly women's fertility is not a subject to be whispered about among only women.

Dale, if even you think about the topic for long enough, surely a little light will brighten your neurons and you will understand that what effects women effects men as well (and vice versa).

You have such unbelievable problems with public discussion about anything 'la femme', here is what you can do to limit the angst this causes you:

Refrain from entering into these discussions.

Reasons?

* You are not happy with what is being said
* You try to dismiss every point raised as a lie
* You try to shut down discussion (didn't work on the rather right of centre Online Opinion - won't ever work here).

And you attempt to use hits on Google as some sort of scientific evidence, when it is not. Nor do the number of hits indicate actual solid knowledge - in other words; FACTS. You learned nothing from the fact that the number of hits for "troll" is far in excess for those on menstruation? Well, we did learn one thing, there is more interest in trolls than menstruation. Who'da thunk it?

I should have made what I meant clearer there Dale :)

It reminded me a little of the story of this well brought up Chinese girl that was taken to a astrologer? Don't really remember what he was but apparently she got pregnant with him, not understanding the mechanism behind it as it wasn't proper for her to know. It's true, the story I mean, and not that old either. A lot of the stuff we do that seems perfectly normal to us may well be seen as lunacy if looked at from a different upbringing and culture.

And in some weird way men and women have 'different' views on life too, and certain things, as menstruation, becomes 'secrets' only vaguely known by most men. That you can find most anything on the Internet those days doesn't certify that people will look it up, or even know that it exist. humans are very socially structured animals as I think and we do what our neighbors do. there's nothing worse than to be pointed out publicly as being 'odd' :).Most people tend to go a far way to avoid that.

My five cents :)

I think men understand mensuration well enough, and if a woman ever had any problems regards mensuration, the worst possible thing she could do is buy a book on mensuration written by a feminist.

She will likely get every type of myth, misinformation and piece of bad advice, and eventually, she will likely have even more problems regards mensuration, and then those problems also become the problems for anyone who has to live in the same house.

Dale

"I think men understand mensuration(sic) well enough"

But not well enough to even spell the word.

M E N S T R U A T I O N

Truth is Dale, you don't WANT to know. Hence your persistent obstruction and deliberate obfuscation.

Of course, Dale if you believe that menstruation is a unit of measure for say 'months', perhaps "mensuration" wasn't such a mistake on your part.

Diana, an antidote for dealing with the ugly underbelly of humanity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=GBaHPND2QJg

It has been very amusing to see this article fully and completely accepted by social scientists, while ignoring the fact it does not reference any scientific research, or even reference a single peer reviewed research article.

Welcome to the future of education. A totally feminist run system, where anything at all is allowed, and no student is ever failed, as long as they portray women as being oppressed.

And no academic will ever oppose it, because they are such complete cowards, they are too afraid of a feminist.

Dale ad nauseam

Dale's unfailing wailing
through this tempest which he's sailing,
leaves me clutching at the railing
turning green and sadly paling,
while Dale maintains his bailing
as my dinner floats away.

Nothing else to add really.

Peter Ormonde
Are you affraid of a feminist as well. You seem to provide every excuse for them.

Next you will be saying everything said or written by a feminist must be believed by the public, no matter what.

That would be where social science and universities are at.

Dale,

Would this be any stranger - more bigoted - than saying anything and everything written by a feminist is a lie?

I'm not afraid of feminists Dale.

And I can see you're not afraid to take on any woman here in the dark secrecy, at a distance, from behind a veil. Do you really think this ranting brow-beating of yours is an effective means of discussion? Do you think you convince anyone by heaping allegations and abuse?

Look where it's got you Dale.

Everybody - well all the women you meet - seem OK at first but then they all turn out to be feminists ... they tend to object to being beaten about the ears with bombastic diatribes and ignorant rants. 2 dates and it's never again. People run away.

And you reckon it works? This gives you what you're looking for?

Aren't we a curious species?

Completely ad hom, i know, but do you reckon DB is single?

Dale,
What happened to you? Rejected by women one too many times? Someone kicked sand into that one functioning eye of yours? Given a bad grade by a female lecturer? What tortures that soul of yours that you must pollute this space with your rancour?
Go back to your lab and analyze why your academaphobia and misogyny manifests in such bilious effluent.
Play golf, walk on the beach.. Hay talk to some women... You may find that they're not the oppressive, lascivious, bestial misandrists you might think...

Sean Parker ,
Same old, same old.

Everything said by a feminist must be completely accepted, and if someone does question anything, they must have had some bad experience with women, or they must be a woman hater.

Thus system allows feminists to make any statement they want, and nothing at all can ever be questioned, and everything said by a feminist must be accepted as being true.

Feminism has now made social science into a complete and total farce, and is systematically making the rest of so-called peer reviewed science into a complete and total farce also.

"Everything said by a feminist must be completely accepted, and if someone does question anything, they must have had some bad experience with women, or they must be a woman hater."

No Dale, there is a difference between "questioning" something and denouncing it as lies and fabrication.

If you have evidence - a rational reasoned argument - then put it up ... a sprinkling of facts doesn't hurt, or throw in some reading to show you do more than "make stuff up" yourself.

See five days ago you began your "contributions" to discussion here with this: "So you want menstruation to become a giant whinge fest?"

No this isn't "questioning" Dale ... this is a challenge, a dismissal and is designed not to have a discussion but to end it - to turn it into a slanging match. This says - I don't care - shut-up already - yeah whatever.

Don't you have any friends at all to talk to you about this business?

Dogs are good. But you might have to tie it up.

Peter Ormonde
Same old, same old.

A feminist says something, other feminists repeat it over and over, and everyone has to believe its true.

But what is now occurring, is when the first feminist does carry out any type of research, and has nothing peer reviewed, but just says it.

Find the research and references in this article. There are none.

That is the way social science has evolved, and the rest of science will probably head in that direction also, unless scientists begin to outlaw it.

Aw heck Dale can't you find some woman to brow-beat....

The rational end of the Conversation has explained tis to you already ... try and take it in:

Not all stories need footnotes and references. Some are just opinion pieces by people who read and think. It is called informed opinion.

Now you can disgaree with this opinion. You can say: No No No I don't agree. I think you are wrong. This is why ...

You do not. You just chant - you are a feminist- it is therefore not true. Everything you say is not true. You do not offer facts or even argument to support your case. Just disagreement and accusation. Do you read anything at all that gives substance to your outrage? You are an empty vessel Dale without some facts and arguments, making noise. Like my chainsaw.

Were you bitten by a feminist as a child or something to leave you with such a lingering phobia?

Now I don't agree with some feminists at all - I am particularly annoyed by the middle class individualistic neo-libertarian - it's all about me - school of thought. I also find that I have limited patience with those who want the equality to act like mongrels too... for example by becoming company directors or Maggie Thatchers. Equality is not enough!!! It is about changing the game.

The political is personal - but the personal is not necessarily political. It's not all about "you" Dale.

And it would be nice to be able to discuss these issues in a civilised and respectful way. But we can't because anytime someone approaches these issues, out from under the bridge trudges old Dale, swinging his gnarly club and scraping his knuckles. Or worse the discussion is "terminated" after five comments at the behest of the author!

Now just go and find something to do outside and leave the grown-ups to get on with having a chat.

Lorna

I am currently reading the book series. You recommend the DVD?

Hi Dianna,

I haven't read the books but several people I know have, after watching the series. I don't know what it'd be like to read the books first then watch the series - it's so often disappointing. But the series is hugely popular in the nerdosphere so perhaps they've done a decent job this time.

I raced through the first 3 books and am halfway through the fourth. The author, George R R Martin will kill off characters you least expect to go.

Would rather deal with the occasional online troll than be a woman in the Game of Thrones. But fantastic fun to read. Yes, the nerd approval rating is high, so I will probably invest when done reading the entire quintet.

How did women ever cope with the monthly bleed in times less amenable than now?

Lorna Jarrett
"And run by a bloke". So?

Enter "research + menstruation" into a search engine.

I did, and got 24 million hits.

Women's reproduction systems must be one of the most widely studied aspects of human anatomy, but some posters believe it is not understood.

I wonder where they learnt that false belief from.

Or, who would be the most likely person to teach women false beliefs, or teach women to make things up.

I put "troll" into Google and got 137,000,000 hits.

The website says “Academic rigour, journalistic flair”

So the website is a mixture of both. I would think that what is missing is the category of “Opinion” for articles such as this, that are not attached to any scientific evidence, but based on myth, misinformation and feminism.

At least The Age included the article under the specific category of “Opinion”.

A good start would be for you, Dale, not to rely on Google hits as 'evidence.'

Projecting onto others much?