Period poverty, Menstruation policy and Denmark, A critical look at what the 'problem' with 'menstruation' is represented to be in the Danish parliamentary resolution on free access to menstrual products, and why the Danish welfare state does not fight period poverty.: A critical look at what the ‘problem’ with ‘menstruation’ is represented to be in the Danish parliamentary resolution on free access to menstrual products, and why the Danish welfare state does not fight period poverty.
Translated title
Period poverty, Menstruation policy and Denmark, A critical look at what the 'problem' with 'menstruation' is represented to be in the Danish parliamentary resolution on free access to menstrual products, and why the Danish welfare state does not fight period poverty.
Author
Thies, Lea
Term
4. term
Publication year
2023
Pages
64
Abstract
Period poverty refers to lacking access to menstrual products, information, and suitable washing and waste facilities. In 2021, a Danish MP proposed a parliamentary resolution to provide free menstrual products to ease the financial burden on people who menstruate. The proposal was rejected. This thesis asks how the “problem” of menstruation is represented in the Danish proposal and debate, and why the Danish welfare state did not adopt this policy to address period poverty. The study traces how menstruation has been included in international and EU conventions, conferences, and directives, and examines attitudes toward menstruation in Denmark. The theoretical background draws on gender and welfare state regime research and the Multiple Streams framework, which explains when problems, policy ideas, and politics align to enable change. The analysis combines this framework with the “What’s the Problem Represented to be?” approach, which looks at how policy proposals define the problem they aim to solve. Findings show that the proposal frames menstruation mainly as an economic challenge, with a solution modeled on Scotland’s Period Products (Free Provision) Act 2019. In the parliamentary debate, however, the problem is often framed as one of stigma and taboos. This framing overlooks other aspects of period poverty, such as access to information and facilities. Some politicians also argue that period poverty does not exist in Denmark and that menstruation is a private issue the state should not intervene in. The thesis concludes that the economic framing and the Scottish-inspired design did not fit the Danish welfare context, helping to explain why the proposal was rejected.
Menstruationsfattigdom er, når mennesker mangler adgang til bind, tamponer og andre hygiejneprodukter, viden om menstruation, ordentlige vaske- og bortskaffelsesmuligheder m.m. I 2021 fremsatte et folketingsmedlem et forslag om gratis adgang til menstruationsprodukter for at lette de økonomiske udgifter for dem, der menstruerer. Forslaget blev dog afvist. Dette speciale undersøger, hvordan “problemet” ved menstruation bliver fremstillet i forslaget og den politiske debat, og hvorfor den danske velfærdsstat ikke valgte at bekæmpe menstruationsfattigdom gennem denne politik. Jeg kortlægger, hvordan menstruation er blevet omtalt i internationale og EU-sammenhænge, og ser på holdninger til menstruation i Danmark. Teoretisk bygger specialet på forskning i køns- og velfærdsstatsregimer samt på Multiple Streams-rammen, der forklarer, hvornår problemer, løsninger og politiske forhold mødes, så politik kan ændres. I analysen kombineres denne ramme med “What’s the Problem Represented to be?”-tilgangen, som undersøger, hvordan politiske forslag definerer selve problemet. Analysen viser, at forslaget primært fremstiller menstruation som en økonomisk udfordring, med en løsning inspireret af Skotlands Period Products (Free Provision) Act 2019. I folketingsdebatten bliver problemet derimod ofte beskrevet som et spørgsmål om stigmatisering og tabuer. Denne fremstilling overser andre sider af menstruationsfattigdom, såsom adgang til information og faciliteter. Nogle politikere afviser også, at menstruationsfattigdom findes i Danmark, og ser menstruation som et individuelt anliggende, som staten ikke bør blande sig i. Specialet konkluderer, at den økonomiske problemforståelse og modelleringen efter den skotske ordning ikke passer godt til den danske velfærdsmodel, hvilket er med til at forklare, hvorfor forslaget blev afvist.
[This apstract has been rewritten with the help of AI based on the project's original abstract]
Keywords