Talk:Free bleeding
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
[edit]
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mandehm, Elobiond, Rabia256, Gurbani6721.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Infectious disease risk
[edit]- ’’While free bleeding may help you feel less inhibited, medically, it is not the best option for handling menstruation. Any blood that gets left behind on public surfaces has to be treated as potentially infectious. Several viruses, including hepatitis, can live in dried blood for up to 4 days. Any area where you were free bleeding in public would need to be disinfected. Also, you might find yourself invited to a lot less dinner parties after the first time you sit on a friend’s white couch while you are menstruating.’’
It’s surprising (and somewhat dangerous) that the medical risks of free bleeding cannot be found in this article. Viriditas (talk) 19:17, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that leaving bloodstains in public places is characteristic of the movement. These sources indicate that the free bleeding movement is a rejection of tampons, but not necessarily to the extent of making a mess for other people to clean up:
- "Free bleeders are women who don’t use tampons during their periods and protest with blood-stained clothing on behalf of certain causes, such as ending the tampon tax. Actually, free bleeding apparently started as a joke hatched by Internet pranksters to see if they could get women to rally around a cause that would expose how ridiculous feminists can be. The thing is, some feminists realized the idea made sense on some level — certainly to get attention."
- " the free bleeding movement, in which women go without tampons, pads or other fluid-barriers and let their period blood flow.... Still – why do it? For many free bleeders, the answer is three-fold: they don't like the feeling of wearing pads or tampons, they want to help the environment by avoiding disposable products and they want to normalize menstruation, forcing society to get comfortable with the fact that women bleed from their vaginas.... To manage blood at home, Barron sits on a towel and changes their underwear as needed. When leaving home, they wear a reusable menstrual cup to catch the blood."
- WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:02, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
- The quoted criticism up above about the risks of free bleeding comes from gynecologist Heather Rupe.[1] This is an old topic and is properly discussed under the encyclopedic subject title of menstrual activism. I’m entirely convinced this short article should be merged into that parent topic on the basis of coverage and relevance. The infectious risks of free bleeding are known and discussed by relevant experts. Viriditas (talk) 23:19, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Proposed article mergers might be appropriate.
- A blog by a doctor isn't a suitable WP:MEDRS source for making a medical claim about disease transmission. The claim in the blog that blood "has to be treated as potentially infectious" is because society chooses to undertake universal precautions, not because anyone's ever proven that menstrual blood stains are an effective method of transmitting hepatitis. (Also, she's wrong with her dates: Hep C can survive at room temperature on some surfaces for several weeks, and Hep B for at least one week.)
- To put it another light, the same type of professional who say that nobody has ever caught these viruses by using public toilets (although it's at least theoretically possible) are the ones that are hinting in that blog post that you are going to catch them by sitting fully clothed in the same chair that a woman sat in while on her period (presumably assuming she's one of the small percentage of women who have one of these viruses in the first place, because most women don't). This does not strike me as a credible claim. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:36, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
- would agree w/ WAID-Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 22:53, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
- I do agree that a merge to menstrual activism is appropriate. Two of the sections of this article - "Menstrual practices in India" and "Practices in Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea" - have nothing to do with free bleeding. The remainder of the article is very brief. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 23:04, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
- The quoted criticism up above about the risks of free bleeding comes from gynecologist Heather Rupe.[1] This is an old topic and is properly discussed under the encyclopedic subject title of menstrual activism. I’m entirely convinced this short article should be merged into that parent topic on the basis of coverage and relevance. The infectious risks of free bleeding are known and discussed by relevant experts. Viriditas (talk) 23:19, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
Unrelated Content
[edit]The majority of the content on this page is unrelated to free bleeding. Specifically the last 3 sentences of the History section, "Menstrual practices in India," and "Practices in Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea." A merge with menstrual activism seems reasonable. YellowBlack (talk) 21:34, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
- Good point. As I see no objections here, and your logic looks sound, I'll remove these unrelated sections. Thank you for the suggestion. Rklawton (talk) 00:04, 6 June 2023 (UTC)