Feminism and the Body

While scrolling on X, I’ve seen the online community scrutinize female biology, labeling it as unmanageable and incapacitating compared to the male body. Some users say, “3:00 p.m. hormone drop as a woman is diabolical,” or “My wife couldn’t even function before this hormone-balancing detox.” In reality, there is no 3:00 p.m. hormone drop that only affects women. Men and women have the same capacity to be emotional or level-headed, no matter their hormones. Despite the obsession with women’s bodies, healthcare industries and society have failed to conduct sufficient women’s health research, especially when men’s bodies aren’t spoken about in the same way. Having autonomy over how our bodies are treated and perceived first requires addressing sexism and its roots in bioessentialism. 

Biological essentialism—the idea that sex-specific biological differences govern behavior and ability—has controlled society’s perception of women for centuries. This view has led to stereotypes that portray women as emotionally unstable and less capable compared to men. The narrative has shaped the roles women have been taught to fulfill, such as homemakers, caregivers, and supporters of their male counterparts. For example, presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Hillary Clinton have faced waves of backlash, with critics questioning their emotional stability, rationality, and decision-making capabilities. They also have been seen as “aggressive” compared to male candidates. Such bias is visible in all fields, resulting in fewer women holding positions of power and influence. 

This systemic bias is reflected in how society interprets the biological differences between men and women. While women experience estrogen fluctuations that result in mood swings, men have testosterone fluctuations—although their cycle length is much shorter.  However, men typically aren’t spoken about in a demeaning manner. At the Super Bowl LVIII in February, football player Travis Kelce was filmed having an outburst after accidentally bumping into his coach, Andy Reid. Many comments backed Kelce’s reaction, and a Sports Illustrated article was even written about how he “got caught up in the heat of the game.” Historically, male spells of emotion are labeled as “passion” and “drive” rather than “hysterics”—a term rooted in toxic masculinity and sexism. In the nineteenth century, hysteria was a real “disease.” The diagnosis stemmed from having a uterus, a seemingly perfect explanation for every unmanageable quality in a woman. It wasn’t until 1980 that “hysteria” was deleted from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 

Historically, society has placed misinformed assumptions on women’s bodies, consequently allowing misogyny to persist. Correct information, such as severe menstrual cramps being anomalous, has only recently become widespread. Still, women are consistently underrepresented in clinical trials, with less than two percent of medical research funds going towards pregnancy, childbirth, and female reproductive health. When trying to advocate for their health, especially on social media platforms, women are seen as abrasive or dramatic. Furthermore, the lack of research on women’s bodies has inherent health risks. Women are 20-30% more likely to receive a misdiagnosis, as their complaints about symptoms are reduced to melodrama, possible pregnancy, or hormones. By allowing gender bias in research and health education to continue, we are not only failing to provide women with access to healthcare but also allowing stereotypes to dictate the way they are treated and respected. 

Furthermore, bioessentialism-based misogyny is harmful to people of all genders. Considering women as emotional fuels toxic masculinity, holding men to impossible standards of stoicism and rejection of vulnerability. However, stereotypically feminine emotions such as vulnerability and compassion are actually essential to relationships and empathy. Therefore, imposing stoicism on men can create problems in relationships and have a destructive impact on mental health. The result is also seen in women who adopt “masculine” behaviors to gain respect and empowerment. This often leads to them neglecting their mental health and imitating passivity to fit toxic standards. 

Likewise, bioessentialism marginalizes transgender people, excluding them from conversations about health, feminism, and identity. During the 2024 Olympics, Algerian boxer Imane Khelif, a cisgender woman, was at the center of a heated debate regarding gender eligibility in sports. Speculation about Khelif’s performance in the Olympics began when her opponent Angela Carini withdrew after a hard punch. There is no proof of Khelif having XY chromosomes or differences of sexual development. However, she faced transphobic harassment and abuse from the online community, celebrities, and political figures. The baseless, cruel comments directed at Khelif’s masculine physicality demonstrate how society often condemns women who are not stereotypically feminine. Men such as Michael Phelps, who have natural physical advantages in sports, rarely face the same scrutiny and harassment as women and transgender athletes. From sexualization to loss of autonomy, women have been confined by societal perceptions of their bodies. 

Scrutiny of women’s bodies, dismissing their health concerns, and trivializing their emotions as “unmanageable” parts of their biology reflect the roots of bioessentialism in our society. To combat this, both high schools and medical schools need to implement more gender-inclusive health curriculums. By understanding and reducing the stigma around these topics, we can begin to raise awareness of and validate women’s health concerns. As a high school student, none of my classes have gone beyond basic sexual education. LGBTQ+ and female health education, such as spotting and menstruation, have never been thoroughly explained. As a hypochondriac, I fall into anxious spirals and accusations, and doctors take my concerns less seriously each time I visit. 

Online, teenagers are constantly exposed to misinformation, and health classes are needed to properly educate them. In medical school, an inclusive curriculum is needed to reduce bias and ensure widespread access to quality healthcare. In addition, more women are needed in the medical field and political world to advocate against the cycle of female oppression. Change starts with an education that empowers all students, regardless of gender or background. Policies for equitable research funding, anti-discrimination laws in healthcare, and workplace directives for gender equality can all help change systemic misogyny. Autonomy over how our bodies are perceived and treated is an intersectional issue requiring all to advocate for inclusivity in healthcare and education.