Biden’s Dept of Labor urges employers to help ‘menstruators thrive at work’

[tabibito]

Same for 'menstruator'.
Yet they have what you described as the "masculine" suffix.
You just refuted your own objection.

"Unspecified persons" was expected to be interpreted as "persons of unspecified gender." Where a term describes strictly feminine attributes, the feminine ending is appropriate - whether or not the term is used to refer to a particular person.

English is not nearly as tidy and consistent as you seem to think.

I know full well that English is not tidy, and that it is thoroughly inconsistent.

[Roy]

Roy, I know you always want to be true and accurate, and never descend into name calling or false accusations, so I looked at the OP again, and it appears you are disseminating false information about the OP.

Here's the actual Department of Labor link.....

That's the same document I linked to earlier. Did you notice that despite what you cited in the OP it does not use 'mentruators' to mean 'women', but is explicitly about helping women who are menstruating?

[Sparko]

That's the same document I linked to earlier. Did you notice that despite what you cited in the OP it does not use 'mentruators' to mean 'women', but is explicitly about helping women who are menstruating?

You are correct about that specific article, roy.

It is speaking of menstruating persons. I was confused by the sentence in the OP article that mentions "Menstruators, uterus-havers, cervix-owners, birthers, and other reproductive function or body part terms have been replacing the words "woman" or "mother" in documentation and rhetoric across the Biden administation to appease those who believe males and females can change their biological sex through sheer belief, medication, and surgery."

It was talking about the government replacing "women" in other publications also, not specifically in that one article you linked to.

[Cow Poke]

That's the same document I linked to earlier.

Ah, so you're just reading it wrong.

Did you notice that despite what you cited in the OP it does not use 'mentruators' to mean 'women', but is explicitly about helping women who are menstruating?

A) Perhaps you meant "menstruators" instead of "mentruators"....

But, lookie here, Roy....

menstruators screen shot.png
Help me out with that word highlighted in Yellow* () --- does it say "women", or does it say "menstruators"?


B) It's essentially liberal crap assuming that business owners are too stupid to deal with potential problems in their workplace.


*yellow makes me sad

[Cow Poke]

That's the same document I linked to earlier. Did you notice that despite what you cited in the OP it does not use 'mentruators' to mean 'women', but is explicitly about helping women who are menstruating?

And more... from their own website... U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR BLOG

(sorry for the weird formatting - I just did a copy/paste, and am not gonna spend time cleaning it up --- I will, however, bold and highlight the pertinent parts...)

5 ways employers can make workplaces more menstruation-friendly

To commemorate this Menstrual Hygiene Day, the Women’s Bureau is breaking down the stereotypes and stigmas that have made menstruation a taboo topic in the workplace. Menstruation is a natural part of half our population’s life, and yet it has been overlooked in the context of work - perhaps because it is seen as a personal issue or uncomfortable to discuss. The taboo nature of menstruation has likely contributed to the lack of understanding about its impact on workers, which can include challenges related to symptoms of premenstrual syndrome

; unexpected or heavy bleeding; and pain from cramps, headaches or migraines

while at work.

Implementing workplace policies that address menstruation can enable menstruating employees to continue to fully participate in and contribute to the workforce while mitigating adverse effects to their mental and physical health. Most employers are already ensuring easy access to bathrooms and providing proper handwashing facilities

and regular breaks during work hours

. And menstruating employees may be protected under laws and regulations against discrimination on the basis of age

, sex and disability
(or a combination of these characteristics), the federal Family and Medical Leave Act, sick leave requirements for federal contractors and state paid family and medical leave or sick leave

laws. But there is more that employers can do to support menstruators.

Here are five more ways employers can make workplaces more menstruation-friendly:

1. Provide a sufficient supply of varied period products in bathrooms and ensure menstruators can access products privately.
2. Allow flexibility in uniforms, with options in dark colors to ensure menstruators do not need to worry that an unexpected period or heavier flow will lead to noticeable stains.
3. Allow scheduling and work flexibilities such as telework, flexible work hours or shift modifications.
4. Guarantee access to paid sick leave, provide explicit guidance that menstruation is a qualifying condition for the leave – whether for symptom management or for related medical appointments – and ensure that employees and their managers are aware these are allowable reasons to use sick leave.
5. Educate and train workers and managers about the symptoms of menstruation and how they can impact employees at work and include support services for menstruation in any Employee Assistance Program offered.

Many of the same policies and protocols needed to support those managing symptoms of menstruation are already being implemented by many employers. Employers can make small adjustments to worker protections, flexibilities and accommodations to ensure that workplaces are more inclusive of menstruating employees, reduce the stigma surrounding menstruation and improve menstruators’ quality of life at work. Making workers aware that they may use a workplace flexibility for menstruation-related reasons can help create an environment in which workers and managers are more comfortable discussing these topics and requesting the help they need.

Menstruation does not have to be taboo. Employees who feel supported can continue to thrive in the workplace during their periods. By providing basic protections and accommodations, employers can signal a commitment to ensuring all workers maintain the dignity they deserve.


Eleanor Delamater and Mathilde Roux are Policy Analysts at the Women’s Bureau.

Surely, Roy, you don't think this is talking about men. (Real men, anyway)

[Sparko]

Ah, so you're just reading it wrong.



A) Perhaps you meant "menstruators" instead of "mentruators"....

But, lookie here, Roy....

menstruators screen shot.png
Help me out with that word highlighted in Yellow* () --- does it say "women", or does it say "menstruators"?


B) It's essentially liberal crap assuming that business owners are too stupid to deal with potential problems in their workplace.


*yellow makes me sad

It's as if they think women haven't had periods throughout history and had to know how to deal with that at work.

[Roy]

A) Perhaps you meant "menstruators" instead of "mentruators"....

Yes, typo.

But, lookie here, Roy....
Help me out with that word highlighted in Yellow* () --- does it say "women", or does it say "menstruators"?

It says 'menstruators'. It means 'menstruators'. It does not mean 'women', despite what the article you cited in the OP claims.

I doubt you are too dumb to understand that there is a difference between 'women' and 'menstruators', that the DOL article is correctly using the latter while the article you cited is claiming they mean the former. If I'm right, you're playing stupid games to avoid admitting you posted a crap article. If I'm wrong, you're swallowing propaganda. Either way, continuing is a waste of time.

B) It's essentially liberal crap assuming that business owners are too stupid to deal with potential problems in their workplace.

That's a completely different point you're using as a distraction.

[Roy]

And more... from their own website... U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR BLOG

Surely, Roy, you don't think this is talking about men. (Real men, anyway)

Stop playing dumb.

[Roy]

You are correct about that specific article, roy.

Thank you.

It was talking about the government replacing "women" in other publications also, not specifically in that one article you linked to.

Not 'also'.

Complaining about the government inappropriately replacing 'women' by citing an article where they are talking about a subset of women is misplaced.

If they haven't got a real example of such a replacement, perhaps it isn't happening.

[Diogenes]

Thank you.Not 'also'.

Complaining about the government inappropriately replacing 'women' by citing an article where they are talking about a subset of women is misplaced.

If they haven't got a real example of such a replacement, perhaps it isn't happening.

It's hilarious to watch to try to actively avoid the fact only women menstruate.

Stop playing dumb.

Perhaps try your own advice.

[Cow Poke]

Stop playing dumb.

It's right there, Roy - "Menstruators" ---- not women.

[Cow Poke]

It's hilarious to watch to try to actively avoid the fact only women menstruate.

It would not surprise me the least if some of the leftist nutters wanted to try to figure out how to make men menstruate.

[rogue06]

It's as if they think women haven't had periods throughout history and had to know how to deal with that at work.

After that college protest where the students went into full freak out mode over a woman needing feminine hygiene products, they may have a point regarding some being clueless about what to do.

[Sparko]

June 16th is Parental Units without a uterus Day.