Cycles of (in)visibility: evolvements, constancies, and frictions of menstrual cycles at work

TL;DR

This paper explores how menstrual cycles and transitions like menopause affect work and argues for cycle-sensitive workplace policies to support diverse bodily needs.

Contribution

The study introduces a cyclic perspective on menstrual embodiment in work organization, positioning it as a collective issue rather than an individual problem.

Findings

Growing awareness and feminist practices are creating space for cycle-sensitive work cultures, despite ongoing stigma.

Cyclic practices remain individualized, placing extra burden on workers with menstrual cycles.

The study advocates for rethinking workplaces to prioritize cyclic embodiment and care.

Abstract

Around half of all working bodies experience a menstrual cycle for a significant part of their (working) lives, followed by (peri-)menopause. Yet, the implications of cyclic embodiment and bodily transitions remain well-concealed, stigmatized, and insufficiently integrated into work organization. Theoretically positioned within critical menstruation research with focus on work organization, our study enhances existing research by offering a cyclic perspective which considers the whole menstrual cycle, including changing symptoms over time and the transition to (peri-)menopause. By changing the default linear perspective to a cyclic one, we frame the menstrual cycle as a collective workplace issue rather than an individual inconvenience or problem and advocate for policy reforms. This perspective foregrounds a more holistic understanding of work organization that accounts for diverse and changing body realities.

For this purpose, we carried out a longitudinal study (2021–2025) to explore and evaluate the effects of the menstrual cycle on the professional lives of women and people with menstrual cycles (WPMC) in Germany. Insights from qualitative interviews and action research workshops during this time period are supplemented by expert perspectives from Germany, Belgium, Ireland and Spain.

The results are organized alongside a differentiation between three spheres (1) individual sphere, (2) organizational sphere, (3) societal sphere. We find that growing awareness, generational shifts, and feminist practices are slowly opening spaces for cycle-sensitive and more caring work cultures, despite ongoing stigma, resistant structural barriers, and anticipated backlashes.

Our analysis shows that cyclic practices are largely individualized, which risks burdening WPMC with the additional work of finding solutions for cyclic symptoms within ongoing linear, meritocratic work structures. To counteract these dynamics, this study proposes rethinking workplaces by setting cyclic working bodies as the default. In this way, they are built to accommodate diverse and changing embodied experience by equally valuing care as well as times of regeneration.

Figures