Last edited Wed May 14, 2025, 03:39 PM - Edit history (1)
Government-funded menstrual education? As a way to encourage women to have more babies?
The Trump administration’s latest pro-natalist agenda includes a pitch for government-funded menstrual education. At first glance, this sounds like a step in the right direction: Actual, factual education about menstruation would be a meaningful reform in a country where shame and misinformation still reign supreme.
I fail to see how attaining a better knowledge of one's menstrual cycle would cause women to decide to produce more children. Yes, those who want to get pregnant will find it useful to figure out when they are most fertile, but people can and do use the same knowledge to avoid pregnancy (and rightly so).
I can think of many things the government could do to encourage an increase in the birth rate. Many of the reasons for putting off child bearing or avoiding it all together are economically based, from the medical costs of giving birth to the high cost of child care and preschool, not to mention the expenses involved in feeding, clothing, and sheltering a child and providing health care for at least 18 years, never mind educating that child beyond the years of high school.
Also, I'm sure Schlump's government would prefer to encourage women to stay home to raise their children, but the percentage of the population that can afford to support a family on one income is limited and getting smaller all the time. Yet it doesn't seem to have occurred to any of those tone deaf ass clowns to look at ways to make child bearing and parenting more affordable, much less lower the cost of higher education. Imagine that!
Nice going, numbskulls.