The menstrual cycle, science and femininity: Assumptions underlying menstrual cycle research

Paula Nicolson

Social Science & Medicine, 1995, vol. 41, issue 6, 779-784

Abstract: This paper examines the relationship between popular knowledge of menstruation and scientific research. It suggests that despite evidence to indicate that pre-menstrual cognitive, behavioural and emotional 'impairment' is relatively rare, the popular notion that PMS routinely affects many women adversely is difficult to displace. It concludes that mainstream menstrual cycle research is subject to the influence of misogynist methology upheld as staunchly by women influenced by patriarchy as by men. Reasons are suggested which lie in the differential power of claims to knowledge.

Keywords: menstrual; cycle; popular; knowledge; femininity; power; PMS (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 1995
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(95)00044-8
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:socmed:v:41:y:1995:i:6:p:779-784

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
http://www.elsevier. ... _01_ooc_1&version=01

Access Statistics for this article

Social Science & Medicine is currently edited by Ichiro (I.) Kawachi and S.V. (S.V.) Subramanian

More articles in Social Science & Medicine from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().