- Alison Bechdel (Dykes to Watch Out For) tells Jezebel what reaching menopause on one’s 5oth birthday is like: “I feel like every joke about menopause ever.”
- German manufacturers of thalidolmide, widely prescribed to pregnant women for morning sickness in the 1950s and 1960s, issued a belated apology last weekend, fifty years after pulling the drug from the market.
The drug was never available to pregnant women in the US, thanks to Frances Oldham Kelsey, M.D., Ph.D., who was director of the FDA in 1960. She refused to grant approval of the drug in the US due to her concerns about its safety. Despite pressure from the manufacturer, she insisted that further testing was needed.
- Most women trying to conceive need better education about menstruation, not assistive reproductive technology.
- A small study recently published in Headache shows some success reducing frequency of migraine with aura and menstrual migraine by using the extended-cycle vaginal contraceptive ring.
- At RH Reality Check, doula Lauren Guy explains why pro-choice critics should stop referring to Arizona’s new abortion ban as the “Pregnancy Begins Two Weeks Before Conception Act”.
- Naomi Wolf’s new book, Vagina: A New Biography, is scheduled for release next week. Judging from the early reviews, it’s cringe-worthy, wincing-awful, on several levels.
- In an effort to understand the popularity of vaginoplasty and labioplasty, Melanie Berliet pretends to be a patient to a surgeon who specializes in those procedures.
- We thought this story had been put to rest ages ago, but it keeps popping up: A report published earlier this year by Kerry Gunther, a bear biologist who leads Yellowstone’s bear management program, states that “there is no evidence that grizzly and black bears are overly attracted to menstrual odors more than any other odor.”
4 responses to “Bad Reviews for Vagina Biography and for Vaginoplasty, an end to Bears and Menstruation Mythology, and More Weekend Links”
Readers should note that statements published in Menstruation Matters are those of individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of the Society as a whole.