The Female Role and Menstrual Distress: An Explanation for Inconsistent Evidence

Abstract

Numerous studies of either sex role behavior (masculinity/femininity) or women's role attitudes (contemporary/traditional) as related to menstrual distress have amassed inconsistent and contradictory results. It was proposed that these two role variables may hold an interactive relationship with menstrual distress, and their study in isolation may have provoked less reliable results. An interaction was found with masculine women preferring a contemporary role and feminine women committed to traditional role values reporting greater menstrual and premenstrual distress. Feminine Contemporary and masculine traditional women revealed less distress ássociated with the menstrual cycle.

Constructions of Femininity and Experiences of Menstrual Distress

“…This finding is consistent with the findings of other researchers (e.g., Chrisler, 1988;Heilbrun, Friedberg, Wydra, & Worobow, 1990;Stout & Steege, 1985) who have found a relationship between strong endorsement of the traditional feminine role and menstrual distress. Unfortunately, most menstrual cycle research utilizes a biomedical framework that assumes that menstruation is a 'pure' physiological phenomenon, unrelated to constructions of femininity or cultural myths about menstruation (Laws, 1990;Walker, 1995).…”