Women Should Never Be Reduced To "Bleeders," No Matter How Much The Feminine Hygiene Companies Try

It’s ridiculous that our society is inundated with gender-neutral language to describe extremely gender-specific things, but now our inherently female capabilities – childbirth, breastfeeding, menstruation – are relegated solely to their anatomic function, stripped of the weighty connotations they once held.

The absurdity of this debate has gotten more and more blatant. Now, corporations attempting to signal how inclusive they are (by means of excluding half of the population) are marketing their products to “chestfeeders” and “bleeders.” We don’t see the same amount of energy geared towards the erasure of male-specific terms for some odd reason, but regardless, the time to put a stop to this insanity is now or never. Women shouldn’t be called “bleeders,” not only because we are so much more, but because the logic behind using such a term has no grasp on reality.

How Corporations Are Erasing Women

You might recall that last year, a reputable British medical journal called The Lancet referred to women as “bodies with vaginas” in an effort to be more inclusive to transgender individuals. The issue in question bore the words, “Historically, the anatomy and physiology of bodies with vaginas have been neglected.”

First of all, what does that even mean? For a medical journal, this kind of language is, at best, mildly disturbing, and at worst, intentionally dangerous. Though the journal ended up apologizing (sort of) after the backlash, the damage had been done, not only to their credibility but likely also to the feelings of their readership.

We want to buy tampons without being called “bleeders” or “menstruators.”

Medical journals are just the tip of the iceberg. It’s one thing for the ideology-ridden halls of academia to adopt this madness, as is expected, but it’s another for the corporations who make the products we use each and every day to decide to jump on the ephemeral marketing bandwagon of advertising to a voter base instead of consumers.

Woke corporations have made inclusive language the name of the game. Notice that they’re not targeting men with these hamfisted marketing tactics, just women. (I’ve never seen a “bodies with penises” slogan, have you?) Daniella Peri, the founder of the London-based feminine products company Yoppie, drew ire on social media after referring to women as “bleeders.” 

Instead of apologizing, the brand only doubled down, saying, “We strongly believe all women, girls and people with a menstrual cycle should feel welcome at Yoppie. We also understand there are many women who don’t have periods, and some people who menstruate who are not women. We’re proud to host a safe space for anyone wishing to take charge of their menstrual health.”

We Should All Defend Biological Gender

Brands may be striving to carve out “safe spaces” for “people who menstruate who are not women” (which is an oxymoron), but if anything, their radicalism is alienating their customer base. Imagine you’re strolling through the drug store to pick up tampons or even a pregnancy test, and the products are targeted not towards women, but towards “menstruators” or “people with vaginas.”

Let’s also imagine that you’re a young girl, an athlete, with dreams of reaching the upper echelon of achievement. You sacrifice blood, sweat, and tears, as does your family, to be able to compete – only to have that hard work and dedication ripped away by someone with a biological advantage over you. 

Relying on anatomy alone erases other innately female attributes like being maternal.

When we relegate women to only their biological functions, we’re operating on the misconception that anyone can do what we do. That just isn’t true. Notice also that this entire movement relies on anatomy, with no reference to other innately female qualities or attributes like femininity or inherently female characteristics, like the desire to nurture or be maternal. Erasing these characteristics – which feminism has been doing for a long time – attempts to completely blur the lines between genders, which is not only inaccurate but harmful. 

Men and women each have different qualities that make them successful and compatible with one another, and erasing those or simply pretending they don’t exist attempts to change the manner in which civilization has functioned for millions of years.

As Long As There Is Outrage, We’re Doing Okay

There is an active attempt to erase women, and that isn’t acceptable. But as long as we’re still seeing outrage, there’s still hope for the future.

A future without biological gender or with thousands of genders is possible; it’s the future this type of movement wants. Coincidentally, the same movement also seeks the destruction of the nuclear family, the minimization of the roles of fathers and mothers, and the construction of an apparent utopia in which entire communities raise children instead of their parents. 

When we see women only as people with uteruses, we actively remove our humanity and dignity.

But many of us don’t want our daughters to be told they were born in the wrong body because they’re tomboys, or our sons to be told that all manifestations of masculinity are toxic to society. We want our daughters to be given a fair shot when it comes to competing athletically. We want to buy tampons without being called “bleeders” or “menstruators.”

It might be possible in the not-too-distant future that this Orwellian nightmare could come to pass. But as long as we speak up for biology, as long as we push back on woke corporations trying to sell genderless products, as long as we defend our daughters in women’s sports, we’ll be okay. It’s only when this pushback completely disappears and a passive acceptance for this movement becomes the norm that we’re in serious trouble.

Closing Thoughts

The problem with genderless language is that it doesn’t just stop at menstrual products. 10 years or even five years ago, most of us would have never imagined a biological male competing in women’s sports – now, one such individual recently won the NCAA Division I title in women’s swimming.

Many scoff at the idea of a slippery slope, but we’re seeing one happen in real-time. What starts with genderless parenting or marketing products to “bleeders” turns into potential SCOTUS judges refusing to define what a woman is – all of which eventually results in actual consequences that are damaging to women. When we see women only as people with uteruses or people with vaginas, we actively remove our humanity and dignity. When we erase gender, we act as if the miracles of biology – like childbirth – are as commonplace an act as buying groceries or putting gas in the car.

Women are innately gifted with attributes, qualities, and abilities that only we are able to perform, which make us uniquely qualified as individuals and differentiate us from men. No amount of advertising or marketing campaigns can change that, and even if it’s something as innocuous as a pad or tampon, we should push back on these narratives when we see them.

Readers make our world go round. Make your voice heard in the official Evie reader survey.