Content uploaded by Jane Ussher
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Jane Ussher on May 11, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
This article was downloaded by: [Ms Jane M. Ussher]
On: 01 June 2014, At: 18:26
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Women's Reproductive Health
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uwrh20
Representations of PMS and
Premenstrual Women in Men's Accounts:
An Analysis of Online Posts from
PMSBuddy.com
Marlee Kinga, Jane M. Usshera & Janette Perza
a University of Western Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Published online: 28 May 2014.
To cite this article: Marlee King, Jane M. Ussher & Janette Perz (2014) Representations of PMS and
Premenstrual Women in Men's Accounts: An Analysis of Online Posts from PMSBuddy.com, Women's
Reproductive Health, 1:1, 3-20, DOI: 10.1080/23293691.2014.901796
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23293691.2014.901796
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
WOMEN’S REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH, 1(1), 3–20, 2014
Copyright C
Society for Menstrual Cycle Research
ISSN: 2329-3691 print / 2329-3713 online
DOI: 10.1080/23293691.2014.901796
ARTICLES
Representations of PMS and Premenstrual Women
in Men’s Accounts: An Analysis of Online
Posts from PMSBuddy.com
Marlee King, Jane M. Ussher, and Janette Perz
University of Western Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Representations of premenstrual syndrome (PMS) in Western scientific and popular discourse con-
struct premenstrual change as a disorder and portray premenstrual women as out-of-control, emotion-
ally unstable, and dangerous. Previous research has suggested that the adoption of such constructions
of PMS by male partners can have a deleterious influence on women’s experiences of premenstrual
distress. However, few studies to date have examined constructions of PMS and the function of such
constructions within men’s talk. Representations of PMS and premenstrual women in men’s accounts
in the online discussion forum PMSBuddy.com, which appeared between September 2008 and Febru-
ary 2009, were analyzed through a thematic discourse analysis. The majority of accounts positioned
negative premenstrual change as a hormonal disorder, an excuse, or a nuisance. Some men described
themselves as victimized by their premenstrual partners, and positioned their experiences as unfair
and undeserved. A small portion of men talked positively about premenstrual women and emphasized
the importance of providing support. These findings suggest that it is important to recognize that PMS
is constructed and experienced in a relational context. Cultural and relational constructions of PMS
can influence both men and women’s experiences of premenstrual change.
Keywords PMS, premenstrual change, cultural representation, men, online
In the research literature, negative premenstrual change has been recognized as a common,
disruptive, and often debilitating factor in many women’s lives, which warrants increased efforts
to understand and ameliorate women’s premenstrual distress (Marvan & Cortes-Iniestra, 2001;
Steiner et al., 2006). From a feminist, social-constructionist perspective, premenstrual change
is conceptualized as a normal experience for women (e.g., Chrisler & Caplan, 2002; Figert,
2005; Swann & Ussher, 1995; Ussher, 2003a). However, Western cultural representations within
Correspondence should be sent to Marlee King, PhD, Centre for Health Research, University of Western Sydney,
Locked Bag 1797, Penrith South DC, NSW 2751, Australia. E-mail: marleeking@gmail.com
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
4KING ET AL.
scientific and popular discourse construct premenstrual change as a disorder, more specifically a
premenstrual syndrome (PMS), and portray premenstrual women as prisoners of their reproductive
bodies, out of control, emotionally unstable, and dangerous once a month (Chrisler, 2002; Figert,
2005; Ussher, 2006).
Women’s negative positioning of their premenstrual changes in emotion and behavior reflects
such cultural representations (Chrisler, 2002; Ussher, 2006). This is evident in the large number
of women who position their premenstrual changes as “symptoms” of a disorder, themselves as
“PMS sufferers,” and their bodies as the site of blame and suffering (Sveinsdottir, Lundman, &
Norberg, 1999; Swann & Ussher, 1995; Ussher, 2008; Ussher & Perz, 2006). By contrast, in
countries such as Hong Kong, China, and India, wherein negative representations of PMS are not
prominent, women do not position premenstrual change as an illness or themselves as disordered
(Chang, Holroyd, & Chau, 1995; Chaturvedi & Chandra, 1991; Chrisler & Caplan, 2002). In a
Western cultural context, interviews with self-identified “PMS sufferers” demonstrated that re-
sisting negative cultural discourses associated with PMS can help to reduce premenstrual distress
(Ussher & Perz, 2006; Ussher & Perz, 2013a). Women who actively resisted constructions of
themselves as mad, or as passive PMS sufferers, were able to normalize premenstrual change and
engage in effective coping, which helped them to avoid or reduce premenstrual distress. This find-
ing highlights the influence of cultural representation on women’s construction of premenstrual
change.
In accordance with the research literature above, it is critical to examine the ways in which
cultural representations of PMS position premenstrual change and premenstrual women as cultural
representation regulates subjectivity or ways of being (Ussher, 2003a). In PMS research, there
is a large focus on women, the PMS sufferers, which negates men’s constructions and responses
to premenstrual change. There is strong evidence that PMS is a relational issue, as premenstrual
change is negotiated within a relational context (Ussher & Perz, 2013b). Intimate partners can
affect the way in which women experience and understand premenstrual change, with partners’
responses contributing to the amelioration or exacerbation of women’s premenstrual distress
(Jones, Theodos, Canar, Sher, & Young, 2000; Mooney-Somers, Perz, & Ussher, 2008; Rundle,
2005; Ussher & Perz, 2008, 2013b). Premenstrual changes also can have an impact on men,
through changes in relationship dynamics (Rundle, 2005; Ryser & Feinauer, 1992). Given the
role that male partners can have in women’s premenstrual experiences, it is important to consider
men’s constructions of PMS and the positions they take in relation to premenstrual women.
Within the small body of research on men’s accounts of PMS, the predominant finding
is that men depict premenstrual change as a negative, debilitating, and distressing experience
(Brooks-Gunn & Ruble, 1986; Laws, 1992; Parlee, 1987). This finding is supported by men’s
reports that focus on the negative aspects of women’s premenstrual experiences, such as mood
swings, impulsivity, lack of self-control, fatigue, anxiety, and anger (Brooks-Gunn & Ruble,
1986; Christensen & Oei, 1990). Also, evident within some men’s accounts are constructions of
PMS as a myth or an excuse. In Koch’s (2006) study, for example, one male participant claimed
that PMS was something on which women blamed their “crabby” moods (p. 62). In a more
recent study, Thornton (2013) investigated the ways in which menstruation was constructed on
the social network Twitter. The tweets that made reference to the menstrual cycle or menstruation
were collected and analyzed. Of the 2,211 tweets that were collected, a small number specifically
mentioned PMS. Cultural representations of the mad, bad, and dangerous woman (Ussher, 2006)
were apparent, as illustrated by the following tweet: “Passed a place called ‘PMS Firearms’ ladies,
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
REPRESENTATIONS OF PREMENSTRUAL WOMEN IN MEN’S ACCOUNTS 5
if it’s that time of the month, they’ll fix you up! Haha! #wow” (p. 49). Thornton also noted that a
number of male tweeters portrayed themselves as victims in relation to menstruating women and
argued that women should adjust their behavior around men.
Research on the relational experience of PMS, conducted with heterosexual women, is con-
sistent with the above findings (Mooney-Somers et al., 2008; Sveinsdottir, Lundman, & Norberg,
2002; Ussher & Perz, 2013b; Ussher, Perz, & Mooney-Somers, 2007). For example, in Sveins-
dottir and colleagues’ (2002) study, women described men as deploying the term PMS in a
belittling, mocking, demeaning way and “blowing it off” as a legitimate experience for women.
Similarly, in Ussher and Perz’s (2013b) study, heterosexual women recounted instances in which
their partners positioned them as mad or bad premenstrually. This is illustrated by a woman who
stated that her partner would ask her, “Who am I talking to today?” This would make her feel
like “a schizophrenic or something” (p. 71). Such reports indicate men’s portrayal of premen-
strual change as an illness, an illegitimate experience for women, and as engaging in culturally
unacceptable behavior (Chrisler, 2002; Ussher, 2011). These findings also evidence the negative
impact that men’s negative constructions can have on a woman’s negotiation of her premenstrual
experiences (Ussher & Perz, 2013b).
There are various sociocultural routes through which PMS discourses and cultural repre-
sentations are established and maintained. Feminist scholars (e.g., Bertelsen, 2001; Chrisler
& Levy, 1990; Figert, 2005; Rittenhouse, 1991) have examined products and media (e.g.,
advertisements, magazine articles, books, television) to highlight many of the dominant
cultural discourses regarding women’s premenstrual changes. Such discourses have been found
to present premenstrual women as ruled by their hormones and to position them as crazy,
bitchy, and irresponsible (Figert, 2005). However, few researchers to date have examined PMS
representations and the function of such representations in men’s talk. An analysis of cultural
representations in men’s everyday discourse could provide insight into the complex role culture
plays in shaping men’s understanding and experiences of premenstrual change. Also, such an
analysis may provide further insight with regard to why some men respond to premenstrual
women with understanding and support and other men do not (Frank, 1995; Mooney-Somers
et al., 2008; Rundle, 2005; Ussher & Perz, 2013b).
Online forums are a relevant observational platform by which to examine men’s talk about
PMS, because they are social media tools based on conversation; individuals can read and respond
to comments made by others. The website PMSBuddy.com is one of few websites entirely devoted
to PMS and the only website to offer a free online PMS reminder in addition to an online forum,
an iPhone application, and a PMS tips page. Within a year of its launch in 2008, the site claimed to
have 150,000 registered users. More recently, the website claimed to have 44,500 registered users.
Another website with a similar concept, TrackYourBitch.com, was created after PMSbuddy.com,
but did not have the same longevity; the website no longer exists. Of the features mentioned above,
the free reminder service is the central focus of PMSBuddy.com. The purpose of this reminder
is to notify men when the women in their lives are going to enter the premenstrual phase of the
menstrual cycle. For the reminder to work, a “PMS calculator,” provided by PMSBuddy.com,
estimates the date on which the woman will be entering the premenstrual phase. A notification is
then sent to the person tracking her to inform that person that she will be premenstrual in the next
few days. Although PMSBuddy.com also offers itself as a service for women, suggesting that
women can use it to “give a heads-up” to others about their PMS, the website appears to be largely
directed toward men. This is illustrated by the website’s attempts to recruit men, suggesting to
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
6KING ET AL.
them that the reminder service is their “buddy” when it comes to PMS. In addition, the “PMS
Tips” page talks solely to men: “First and foremost, don’t ask ‘Do you have PMS? It sure seems
like it.”’ The men’s buddy notion is reinforced by the advertisements on the website that promote
products and services intended to help men cope with women’s cycles, including access to a
dating service with the slogan, “It never hurts to look.”
The online forum at this website, “PMS Stories,” is another key feature, and it encourages men
(and women) to share their experiences, opinions, and observations related to PMS. Men’s online
posts from PMSBuddy.com provide unique insight into how constructions of premenstrual change
are developed, shared, and maintained in an online context. Compared to face-to-face interactions,
online interactions are often anonymous, there is a lack of visual and verbal cues, communication
is asynchronous, and the presence of authority is minimized. This affects how information is
shared and received, because individuals are less inhibited and, therefore, may be more likely
to respond aggressively to other people’s posts and to provide more open and honest responses
(Conrad, 2002; Suler, 2004; Walther, 1996). The research questions addressed in this study are: (a)
How is premenstrual change constructed by men within the online context of PMSBuddy.com?
(b) How do men negotiate the multiple and contradictory discursive representations of PMS in
order to construct their experiences with premenstrual women?
METHOD
Research Design and Sample
Men’s accounts were collected from the online forum on the PMSBuddy.com website between
September 2008 and February 2009. This totaled 126 posts, the length of which ranged from 7
to 370 words. The 126 posts had 106 different usernames. Some posts were edited to increase
coherency, however, the meanings were not altered. Cues within the text were utilized to identify
the gender of the online personas, including gender-specific names such as Jessica or Mark and
statements such as “I am a man who . . . ” or “when I get PMS . . . .” The posts that seemed to
have been written by women, or did not clearly indicate gender, were excluded from the analysis.
Informed consent, privacy, and confidentiality are basic ethical tenets of scientific research on
people (Frankel & Siang, 1999). However, gaining consent in this instance presented a challenge.
In accordance with the guidelines discussed by Eysenbach and Till (2001), it was determined
that, for the present analysis, informed consent was not necessary because the PMSBuddy.com
forum is accessible to anyone who visits the website (including those who do not sign up to
PMSBuddy.com), there are no restrictions with regard to who can post online, and individuals
have the choice to remain anonymous.
Data Analysis
The thematic discourse analysis (DA; Braun & Clarke, 2006) used in the present study focused
on men’s construction of PMS and their experience in relation to women’s premenstrual changes.
It also allowed data from the posts to be separated into coherent themes while maintaining a
focus on the construction of PMS through discourse (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Stenner, 1993). This
particular type of thematic DA was informed by a critical realist epistemology, which recognizes
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
REPRESENTATIONS OF PREMENSTRUAL WOMEN IN MEN’S ACCOUNTS 7
the ways in which individuals make meaning of their experiences and how social context impacts
such meaning and acknowledges the material aspects of “reality” (Willig, 1999).
The term discourse is used in different ways and can have different meanings depending
on the methodology adopted (Willig, 1999); it is, therefore, important to explain what it means.
Discourses are culturally specific sets of meanings or statements that people draw on to make sense
of, or construct, the world (Parker, 1992). Discourses are powerful because they bring different
aspects of experience into focus and position us in different ways, which has implications for how
we act in the world (Burr, 2003; Foucault, 1979). Therefore, although individuals can draw on
different discourses to construct different versions of reality, discourses contain a range of subject
positions that can make available, or restrict, our experiences and practices (Willig, 1999). In this
way, we can position ourselves within, or be positioned by, discourse (Harr´
e & Lagenhove, 1999),
which has important implications for our subjectivity (Davies & Harr´
e, 2007; Foucault, 1979).
Following the guidelines set out by Braun and Clarke (2006), once the men’s posts were
gathered, each was read and reread to enable in-depth familiarization. During this process, initial
notes were written to highlight patterns between men’s accounts. This allowed codes to be created
and a thematic framework to be developed, which served as a way of organizing the codes into
potential themes. Posts with the same username were coded multiple times, and posts that had
multiple codes belonging to different themes were coded multiple times. Twenty-seven posts were
not put into themes, because they did not explicitly relate to PMS or were not a construction or
a position that men took. This is exemplified by Raul P who posted, “Ya’ll crazy!!! Great advice
though :).” The organization of codes and themes was achieved by examining the relationship
between codes and between themes, and by determining which themes were subthemes and
which were primary themes. Once themes were determined, relevant data extracts were coded
under these themes. The next stage of analysis involved the further revision of themes, wherein
some themes were merged and others were discarded. Once this thematic framework was deemed
suitable for the present analysis, the names of the themes were further defined and refined, and the
way in which each theme contributed to the overall “story” was determined. Key extracts were
selected and organized in a way that provided a framework for a story to be developed. During
this process, the discursive resources used in men’s accounts, the subject positions they contained,
as well as the implications on their practices were identified and described (Willig, 2003). The
three authors were involved in all stages of analysis to ensure the consistency of patterns and the
plausibility of the analysis.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Two broad themes were consistently identified throughout men’s posts. With regard to the first
theme, men’s construction of PMS and premenstrual women, 43% of the 126 posts were coded
under the subthemes: hormones as excuses for bad behavior (15%), PMS as not a legitimate
excuse for women’s changes in mood and behavior (16%), PMS as a choice (12%),and pre-
menstrual women as mad, bad, and dangerous (31%). With regard to the second theme, men’s
self-positioning in relation to premenstrual women, 34% of the 126 posts were coded under the
subthemes: men as victims of premenstrual women (22%), men as the innocent bystander (10%),
men as the “good” husband (8%), and men as the supportive partner (7%). These themes are
explored below.
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
8KING ET AL.
Men’s Construction of PMS and Premenstrual Women
For this theme, men described and defined PMS, explaining its causes and how it affects women.
Most men constructed PMS as a hormonal issue, an illegitimate excuse for women’s behavior, or
a choice.
Hormones as Excuses for Bad Behavior
Of the men who provided explanations for women’s premenstrual changes in emotions and
behavior (30%), the most recurrent explanation was that PMS is a hormonal issue (15%). This
is evident in comments by David who posted, “I think the reason why men need it [PMS] to be
explained to us is that we don’t have the same hormonal processes” and by Jack, who claimed,
“It’s [PMS] like being really high or drunk. Hormones are super powerful drugs.” In describing
premenstrual change as resulting from hormonal processes, some men (6%) indicated that PMS
could, and should, be “fixed” through medical intervention.
Bill: When I got a divorce, one criterion for re-entering the dating world was . . . she had to have a
hysterectomy and preferably be on a daily estrogen supplement (or else on a daily antidepressant). I
am fortunate to have married a woman on estrogen post hysterectomy. So I don’t have to deal with
the EXTREMELY SCARY mood swings of PMS. Just the plain ole bad ones associated with two X
chromosomes trying to coexist in the same body.
In this account, Bill presented his primary criterion for entering a new relationship – his partner
must either have no uterus, or should be taking an estrogen supplement, which he justified by
explaining that these methods prevent women from experiencing the “EXTREMELY SCARY”
mood swings associated with PMS. Bill implicitly attributed his divorce to PMS, which evidences
the adoption of a masculinist perspective, whereby marital discord and family troubles are blamed
on women’s “periodic lapses in female placidity” (Zita, 1988, p. 80). In this way, Bill drew
upon a hegemonic discourse of idealized femininity, which condemns women’s divergence from
being calm, stable, and appeasing (Cosgrove & Riddle, 2003; Swann & Ussher, 1995). Bill’s
criterion that his partner should be taking daily antidepressants can be seen as constructing mood
change as a form of madness that necessitates treatment, which effectively pathologizes women’s
premenstrual mood changes (Ussher, 2003a; Ussher, 2010).
Men’s positioning of PMS as a biomedical illness or a hormonal dysfunction is in line with
broader cultural assumptions about PMS (Chrisler & Caplan, 2002; Zita, 1988). Although there
is compelling evidence in the PMS literature that premenstrual distress is not solely the result
of hormonal fluctuations (Bancroft, 1993; Ussher, 1996), it is assumed by lay audiences that the
underlying cause is something essentially female, such as female hormones (Taylor, 2006). By
constructing PMS as a hormonal issue, people assign sole blame to the woman’s “malfunctioning”
body, rather than to distress resulting from external stressors such as work, family, or intimate
relationships (Kuczmiercyk, Labrum, & Johnson, 1992; Seigel, 1986; Ussher et al., 2007). This
demonstrates how cultural constructions of PMS as a hormonal problem may facilitate men’s
focus on women’s deficiencies, as well as the negation of the role the men themselves may play
in women’s experiences of premenstrual distress.
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
REPRESENTATIONS OF PREMENSTRUAL WOMEN IN MEN’S ACCOUNTS 9
PMS as Not a Legitimate Excuse
Some men (16%) dismissed the legitimacy of women’s premenstrual distress. Instead, men
positioned women’s expressed discomfort as an irritation, or a nuisance, as evident in the following
statements: “Stop whining and mow the lawn” (Rick) and “How do I stop the bitching” (All I have
is my hand). Such expressions of frustration, irritation, or intolerance, as well as demands for
women in general to “quit ch’er bitchin” (Jack), imply a construction of premenstrual complaints
as excessive, illegitimate, or disproportionate to the degree of emotional or physical distress
experienced.
A small portion of men (2%) specifically mentioned women’s premenstrual crying in their
posts, positioning such behavior as trivial. This is illustrated by Me who posted, “It’s always
been my answer to PMS . . . just head out to the course and leave her to cry over shit like Tide
commercials into a bucket of ice cream.” In a similar vein, Will D explained:
I love my wife, but she makes me go nutso when she has PMS. Last week I bought [my wife] a
necklace just to be nice, but she started to cry because it has rubies and she said she hates rubies and
that I never listen. WHO CRIES WHEN THEY GET A NECKLACE WITH RUBIES?!?!
Will D positioned himself as the good husband, who thoughtfully gave his wife jewelry. However,
he expressed exasperation in relation to her reaction by suggesting that it was unexpected or un-
explainable. Although he mentioned his wife’s explanation for her reaction, he never listens—he
rejected this explanation and suggested that her reaction was unreasonable. This stance repro-
duces broader cultural constructions of women’s premenstrual emotional expression as baseless,
unjustified, and not the male partner’s fault.
In rejecting the legitimacy of premenstrual distress, some men (10%) criticized women for
using their PMS as an “excuse” for their changes in emotion and behavior. For example, Mak
demanded: “Ok, ENOUGH ! Fine, you get PMS. We geddit, stop using it for an excuse for
every god-damned thing under the sun. It’s part of life, not a cause celebre . . . deal with it or
SHUTTUP!” Conveyed in this post is intolerance for the way women purportedly take advantage
of the concept of PMS. This not only implies a construction of PMS as an illegitimate reason
for women’s change in behavior, but positions women as calculating and opportunistic. The
accusation that women use PMS as an excuse, or as a tool to exploit certain situations, is
consistent with previous research (Koch, 2006; Sveinsdottir et al., 2002). Such practices are also
argued to be enshrined in a masculine culture of menstruation (Laws & Campling, 1990), in
which it is acceptable for men to criticize women for “using” their menstrual cycle as a way of
explaining their changes in emotion and behavior (Figert, 2005; Sveinsdottir et al., 2002).
PMS as a Choice
In a similar vein, some men (12%) positioned PMS as a choice by suggesting that women
can choose to remain rational or calm, but instead choose to have emotional outbursts during the
premenstrual phase. This is exemplified by Rob, who posed a question to women:
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
10 KING ET AL.
Can you manage your emotions enough not to bite the head off the cop who just pulled you over?
The barista? Your boss? If you can, then you can do it with your SO [significant other], who deserves
the best you have, just as you deserve his/her best.
Within his question, Rob suggested that if a woman can control her premenstrual outbursts in
social and work settings, she should also exercise such control with her partner. Previous research
has identified a number of social and relational factors that underlie women’s engagement in
emotional control premenstrually, such as restrictions in the work setting (Ussher, 2002; Ussher
& Perz, 2013b). However, men’s positioning of PMS as a choice suggests that some men may
rely on broader constructions of women as calculating and PMS as not a legitimate experience.
Some men attempted to understand why women would “choose” to express negative affect
premenstrually, and others immediately condemned women’s choices to behave “badly” once
a month. For example, Andy declared that women could, and should, refrain from displaying
premenstrual distress.
Andy: Fuck them [women], whatever they go through (or don’t but I’d rather believe PMS is real than
think all women are liars) doesn’t give them the right to be shitheads to me. . . . It’s your choice how
you act regardless of your hormones if you are a normal person. If you can’t, guess what, you’ve got
some sort of actual mental condition and you need to seek help! [ . . . ] I ditched the relationships
with women that decided it was OK to be a bitch, and have had great relationships with women that
don’t act like skitzoids no matter how bad their PMS is.
Andy’s construction of PMS as a choice is evident in his use of the word “decide,” (“women
that decided it was OK to be a bitch,”) and the way in which he highlighted his own ability
to control himself during times of stress, pain, or hormonal changes: “I have stressful times, I
have regular times were part of my body is absolutely aching in pain, I don’t let myself treat
other people like scum.” This makes explicit an ideology that it is a woman’s responsibility
to control her emotions, regardless of her embodied changes or experiences (Chrisler, 2008).
To adhere to this hegemonic image of idealized femininity (Kaplan, 1992), “good” women are
expected to remain calm and in control, regardless of the circumstance (Chrisler, 2008; Douglas,
1995; Ussher, 2003b). This suggests that hegemonic constructions of femininity may be linked
with men’s negative constructions of PMS, serving to legitimate men’s lack of empathy and
vilify women who express premenstrual emotionality or distress. In line with this construction,
most men drew from the monstrous feminine discourse (Ussher, 2006) to describe women’s
premenstrual behavior, which is described below.
Premenstrual Women as Mad, Bad, and Dangerous
In describing premenstrual women as “crazy,” “nuts,” “irrational,” “a demon,” and “a bitch”
in their online posts, a large portion of men (31%) adopted the monstrous feminine discourse.
This discourse relates to representations of the feminine as powerful, impure, and corrupt and the
reproductive body as a site of fascination and fear (Ussher, 2006). Men’s online posts employed
the monstrous feminine discourse to construct premenstrual women as mad, bad, unpredictable,
dangerous, and out of control and PMS as an intense negative force that significantly interferes
with, or disrupts, her normal functioning.
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
REPRESENTATIONS OF PREMENSTRUAL WOMEN IN MEN’S ACCOUNTS 11
Notable within men’s posts was the emphasis on the impact of PMS on women’s rationality, or
sense of reality, as Lickety explained: “When my wife hits PMS she goes into search and destroy
mode. She’ll hunt me down and scream at me for something I did or did not do. I always know
it’s PMS because it’s so illogical that I almost laugh—but dare I DO NOT!” Consistent with the
monstrous feminine discourse is the emphasis on women’s dangerous and powerful behavior and
the fear it induces in men, which is exemplified by Lickety’s exclamation, “but dare I DO NOT!”
In conjunction with men’s adoption of the monstrous feminine discourse, a small number
of men (7%) described premenstrual women as having two separate personas—their “normal”
nonpremenstrual persona and their PMS persona: the “demon,” “Attila the Hun clone,” “creature,”
or “she devil.” Such personality splitting is made apparent through descriptors including “turn
into” and “morphs,” as exemplified by Steve: “Sweeties, I know it’s not your fault you turn into
creatures occasionally.” This perpetuates a notion of PMS as a supernatural force that suddenly
changes “good” women into “bad” women.
In describing women’s premenstrual irrationality, some men (17%) emphasized the difficulties
in adapting to unpredictable shifts in moods, but also the difficulties in determining what actions
(or lack of action) will bring out a negative reaction in their partners.
Kev: I was on the phone the other day to a female employee while at home. We all have fun at work
so we were continuing making fun of a colleague, which was the worst thing imaginable. To sound
as though you’re having fun with a female, even though my GF knows her, is one step away from
having full intercourse, once the GF has entered “Irrational Week.”
Kev emphasizes the ridiculousness of his partner’s reaction to him “having fun” with a female
employee. In the last statement, Kev’s use of hyperbole functions to justify his description
of the premenstrual phase as “Irrational Week.” Such an account implies a construction of the
premenstrual woman as powerful and capable of suddenly changing the “rules” of the relationship
rather than a construct that legitimizes her annoyance at his banter with a female colleague.
Men’s Self-positioning in Relation to Premenstrual Women
Consistent with broader cultural representations of men in the context of PMS, a large number of
men (22%) positioned themselves as innocent bystanders and victims of premenstrual women,
which was evident in their descriptions of personal negative impact and their talk of injustice.
Men as Victims
All men who took up the victim position conveyed expressions of anger, resentment, or
frustration toward their premenstrual partners and described their negative experiences with their
partners’ PMS. Some men described their negative experiences in a lighthearted and joking
manner: “Bash night is the name ‘WE’ have given to every 4th Thursday night; where no matter
what is done or said I get bashed . . . not physically of course, just mentally” (Game). Other
men described their experiences metaphorically: “I guess I had forgotten about PMS and have
not learned to duck fast enough to avoid getting my head snapped off repeatedly over the years”
(Growing a new head).
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
12 KING ET AL.
A small portion of men (5%) constructed their negative experiences as so severe that they
considered ending the relationship.
Help!: Sorry, I am a man. I love my wife, but I don’t know if I can take her PMS anymore. I’ve
considered homosexuality to escape PMS . . . that’s how desperate I am. I just want to know. At what
point do you ladies decide to take your pain and confusion out on us men? If you love us then why
would you want to push us away like that? I’ve come close to ending the relationship on several
occasions . . . always when she is on the rag.
Help! positioned his wife’s PMS as a significant problem that affects his relationship with her.
It is noteworthy that Help! made no other reference to factors that affect their relationship, apart
from his wife’s decision to push him away when she is premenstrual or menstruating.
Men’s negation of explanations beyond PMS to explain relational discord is further supported
by the following extract: “Ok this is really serious. I’m getting to the point that I can’t stand my
wife. Just bitching and moaning all the time. Just stop bitching and all will be great” (I can’t
fucking take it anymore). Recurrent themes of negative relational impact attributed to premenstrual
symptomatology are congruent with previous research (Gardner, 2008; Ryser & Feinauer, 1992;
Ussher & Perz, 2013b; Ussher et al., 2007). Men’s positioning of PMS as the cause of the
deterioration of their relationships echoes the romantic discourse used by women in Swann and
Ussher’s (1995) study. This discourse enabled women to construct their premenstrual experiences
in a way that suggested “everything would be fine if PMS did not exist.” In much the same way,
men’s description of PMS implies that their intimate relationships would be fine if the women’s
PMS did not exist. This is suggestive of a construction of PMS that enables men to negate their
personal contribution to relational discord. In this way, the explanation “PMS” maintains the
victim position for men because of cultural constructions of PMS and premenstrual women as
a problem (Chrisler & Caplan, 2002; Chrisler & Johnston-Robledo, 2002; Figert, 2005; Ussher,
2006).
Men as the Innocent Bystanders
A small group of men (12%) emphasized their innocence prior to and during premenstrual
conflicts with their partner. In addition, men suggested that women’s premenstrual outbursts
were not precipitated by the men’s wrongdoing, but by “seemingly ordinary” behaviors, such
as choosing the wrong food, playing the television too loud, declining sex, or in Game’s case
“[leaving] a light on in a room not being occupied, leaving one microscopic crumb on the kitchen
bench or better still, forgetting to remind her to not forget to do something.” Similarly, TB
explained:
I was in the kitchen happily doing a job for our daughter (covering a schoolbook with contact plastic)
when the ‘she devil’ emerged in from the garden screaming that the TV was too loud (the ads were
on) & that our neighbors didn’t want to listen to our TV blaring. [I] was taken back by the suddenness
and ferocity of the tone & volume of her voice.
TB juxtaposes his caring and positive practices with his wife, the “she devil’s” reactions. This
contrast encourages us to question the legitimacy of his partner’s negative reaction to the volume
of the television. In a similar vein, Stefan detailed a typical conflict between him and his wife:
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
REPRESENTATIONS OF PREMENSTRUAL WOMEN IN MEN’S ACCOUNTS 13
She makes general statements like ‘you don’t listen’, which don’t really mean much to me. I ask for
a concrete example . . . a reason and she goes off her nut saying there it is . . . or how many times do I
have to tell you incredulously??? Should I just nod and pretend to understand? Which doesn’t really
seem like communication to me?
Implicit in these men’s posts is a victim discourse that suggests, “What you say or do during
PMS is wrong. Also know that she can’t be held responsible for anything she says or does during
this time” (Dr Spiff ). Such a discourse functions to make men more likely to give up trying to
resolve relational discord, which may lead them to engage in repetitive negative interactions with
their partners with little hope for change, or avoidance of the issue or of their partners (Doherty,
1981; Fincham & Beach, 1999). Such findings provide insight into the implications of the victim
discourse for men’s engagement in effective conflict-resolution strategies.
Men as the “Good” Husbands
A small portion of men (8%) emphasized the injustice of their suffering, but also positioned
themselves as “good” husbands and drew from a romantic discourse that suggested that “good”
husbands should receive “good” treatment from their wives. Being a “good husband”‘ was
positioned by these men as remaining faithful or being a good father or, in I’m a good husband’s
case, being a financial provider: “Ok here’s the deal. I make 50K per year all kinds of perk’s have
good home. Will she stop BITCHING any [time] soon.”
A similar account was provided by Growing a new head, who expressed confusion in relation
to his partner’s negative response to him, despite the fact that he is a good father, husband, and
provider:
I was still recovering from yesterday from when I left the house and tried to say goodbye. I didn’t
think I had done anything to upset her either that morning or the night before but when I said goodbye
she snapped “good riddance!” and then said I was overly emotional because I was a bit stunned
by her words. I am married 20+years, never cheated, have provided adequately, she has never had
to work since our firstborn, stayed in shape, committed to our kids, etc.
In this account, Growing a new head described the negative and unexpected response from his
partner; by listing his positive qualities and practices within the relationship, Growing a new
head is making clear that his mistreatment within the relationship is not justified. In posting this
account on the PMSBuddy.com forum, he is implicitly suggesting that his partner’s behavior is
attributable to PMS.
Men’s accounts of being a good husband, father, and, in particular, a good provider, reflect a
traditional patriarchal discourse of the man as the sole provider and the woman as the caretaker
of others and of the household (Riley, 2003). Patriarchal discourse assigns an instrumental role
to the husband: He is responsible for providing material resources, establishing the family’s
social status, and handling the financial transactions. The wife is assigned an expressive role:
She engages in activities that are confined to the home and assumes responsibility for the quality
of the dyadic relationship (Pollock, Die, & Marriott, 1990; Riley, 2003). Men’s talk reflects a
heteropatriarchal discourse, which reinforces a woman’s and a man’s role within the family; thus,
the woman must fulfill the caring role despite her premenstrual distress.
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
14 KING ET AL.
Further, most of these men (5%) expressed a sense of entitlement as a result of their hard work:
their need for better treatment from their partners in the form of sex, recognition, or gratitude.
Men’s expression of entitlement and power indicates their adherence to traditional patriarchal
constructions, which assign high importance to the sole provider for the household. Edley and
Wetherell (1995) explained that power within families is a complex matter, and, whereas women
can be powerful in certain aspects through their mothering activities, power within the family
and in society more generally depends on financial resources and the ability to engage in paid
work, which is primarily a privilege bestowed on men. Although the men in the present study
associated being a “good provider” with the expectation of their partner’s relational satisfaction,
research on intimate relationships suggests that relational satisfaction is more strongly related to
open communication, complex negotiation, and “emotion work” from both parties rather than
simply on financial support (Duncombe & Marsden, 1998; Gottman, 1994; Markman, Rhoades,
Stanley, Ragan, & Whitton, 2010). However, unlike in egalitarian relationships, the responsibility
of men in traditional relationships to engage in social interaction and emotional sharing within
the family, and expressive concern is limited (Pollock et al., 1990). This provides further insight
into the critical role of traditional masculinity in shaping men’s negative constructions of PMS
and their negative practices in relation to premenstrual change.
Although negative accounts of PMS predominated in the forum, there were some posts that
acknowledged the possible issues that underlie women’s distress or encouraged men to become
more empathetic to premenstrual women. Such posts are presented below.
Men as the Supportive Partners
A small portion of men (7%) took the position of the supportive partner. These men did not
focus on the negative impact of PMS on themselves in their posts and did not use derogatory
language to describe premenstrual women. The men’s posts largely centered on the actions
necessary to ameliorate premenstrual distress, which included being caring or understanding,
providing emotional support, or in Stu’s case, being sympathetic.
Stu: Now I have a partner, 4 yrs now, I have a better understanding of PMS [ . . . ] We often laugh
because I get some of the pains as well. [ . . . ] It might sound nuts but I’m a believer of sympathetic
PMS. BECAUSE IM A SUFFERER. It is what it is can’t be helped as a bloke I just do what I can to
ease the pain (and minimize the damage lol).
Implicit in Stu’s account is a construction of premenstrual change as real and as a relational
experience. He conveyed this through his exclamation that he is also a sufferer of PMS and also
through his suggestion that he can help to ease his partner’s pain. Notable is the absence of blame
and his statement that PMS “can’t be helped,” which is unlike the accounts presented earlier in
this analysis. The present findings, in combination with previous research (Frank, 1995; Frank,
Dixon, & Grosz, 1993; Ussher & Perz, 2013a), contest discourses in popular culture that position
all men as insensitive to women’s premenstrual needs and experiences. Rather, such findings
suggest that at least some men are capable of engaging in practices intended to help women to
cope with negative premenstrual changes. Notable is the pride some of these men expressed in
relation to providing support: “Sometimes I will just sit and hug her for hours; crying and sobbing
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
REPRESENTATIONS OF PREMENSTRUAL WOMEN IN MEN’S ACCOUNTS 15
along with her [ . . . ] I think empathy is the best policy for helping her through the tough times
and am proud to help her” (Mike).
Not all of the men who positioned themselves as supportive partners refrained from adopting
negative cultural constructions to explain women’s premenstrual behavior and emotion. Bob,
for example, used biomedical discourses to encourage men to be more accepting of women
premenstrually, as he explained:
Women don’t “choose” to be insane because they have PMS, the irrationality comes from a sudden
shift in hormones. It is NOT a choice. For those men who denigrate this-I can only say you lack
a basic education in biology . . . Some women ∗can∗manage it without being irrational, some have
hormone changes so dramatic it’s unrealistic to expect them to keep it together. Every woman is
different.
Although Bob primarily described PMS as a hormonal issue, he did not mention medication or
medical intervention. Bob’s adoption of biomedical discourse functioned to contest other men’s
claims that PMS is a choice. Bob also described premenstrual women as “insane” and “irrational,”
but he did not vilify women. Instead, he emphasized that the premenstrual phase is a difficult
time for women, which serves to foreground Bob’s suggestion that men should respond to their
partners with increased understanding and support during this time: “How hard would it be to
give her what she needs, if you’ve already discussed it? Give her reassurance during those times
she needs it, sex when she’s crazy w/lust, be her confident leader when she’s feeling especially
insecure and confused.”
Men like Mike and Bob are resisting the dominant, or hegemonic constructions of masculinity
to take up a subordinate construction of romantic masculinity (Allen, 2007; Gilmartin, 2007).
Connell’s (1987) concept of hegemonic masculinity described the fact that there are culturally
dominant forms of being a “man,” which is constructed in relation to various subordinate mas-
culinities and femininity. One of the factors that make romantic masculinity subordinate is its
association with “feminine” attributes such as emotional attachment, care, and sensitivity (Hol-
land, Ramazanoglu, Sharpe, & Thomson, 1994). This suggests that men’s adoption of alternative
masculinities is critical to their engagement in supportive premenstrual practices. However, it is
often the case that men who demonstrate “sensitive” qualities also value traditionally masculine
qualities (Talbot & Quayle, 2010), which suggests that men need not reject traditional masculin-
ity to adopt subordinate masculinities. This strengthens the notion that dominant constructions
of masculinity play a critical role in men’s negative practices and constructions in relation to
premenstrual change.
Positive posts about premenstrual change were often met with criticism and insult in the forum,
which suggests that they were a challenge to dominant constructions of PMS, premenstrual
women, and men as victims. For example, Bob defended premenstrual women in this post:
Men- are you a big baby when you get sick? Flu, Fever, Tired, Body Aches? No . . . Not at all? Are
you sure? Then you have every right to expect the women in your life to woMAN up! If however,
you are a big baby when you get sick and feel like crap and just want to be pampered, then you owe
the women in your life the same treatment.
The first comment in response to Bob’s post was: “This is crap. Do you think men will actually
believe this? Bob, you’re just kidding, right? Men don’t whine and complain on a regular basis
like women do” (AV ). Although the possibility of being criticized did not deter some men from
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
16 KING ET AL.
posting positive comments, this tension emphasizes the negative culture of PMS that exists online,
where it is the norm to insult and criticize premenstrual women and provide negative accounts of
PMS.
CONCLUSION
Men’s accounts of premenstrual change in this study reflect the dominant representations that
exist in the media and popular culture, which portray the typical premenstrual woman as irrational,
mad, uncontrollable, and dangerous, with her body positioned as the source of distress (Chrisler
& Caplan, 2002; Figert, 2005; Parlee, 1987). Biomedical discourses also featured in men’s
accounts, because most men positioned premenstrual change as a hormonal issue and a disorder,
thus reflecting dominant cultural constructions that pathologize premenstrual changes. Consistent
with Koch’s (2006) findings, many men were skeptical about the existence of PMS or about the
legitimacy of women’s premenstrual complaints, and they questioned the “actual” impact of PMS
on women’s ability to function or perform everyday tasks. This implies that some men are still
reliant on the cultural representation of PMS as “existing in a woman’s head” (Taylor, 2006). The
men who positioned premenstrual change as real largely constructed PMS as having a detrimental
impact on themselves and their intimate relationships. These men expressed feeling victimized
and positioned their negative experiences as unfair and undeserved, which suggests that men tend
to construct premenstrual change as the woman’s “fault” rather than as a relational issue.
Although the majority of men constructed premenstrual change negatively, there was a small
portion of men who talked positively about premenstrual women and reinforced the importance of
providing support during this time. These men appeared to be aware that premenstrual distress is
not simply an excuse, but may reflect relational issues that male partners could influence (Ussher
& Perz, 2013b). Further, the men who demonstrated recognition of the issues underlying their
partners’ distress, or who were more empathetic to women, appeared to be less likely to take
up the victim position. Men’s positive accounts of premenstrual changes thus contest cultural
assumptions of premenstrual changes as an illness and men as constantly suffering at the hands
of (pre)menstrual women (Chrisler & Levy, 1990; Figert, 2005; Thornton, 2013). Also, men’s
accounts of providing support to their partners premenstrually contest notions of traditional
masculinity wherein men are positioned as incapable of being sensitive (Allen, 2007).
The present findings, in conjunction with previous research, suggest that awareness and under-
standing of women’s premenstrual changes may help some men to be more empathetic to women,
and may as well facilitate a positive construction of women’s premenstrual changes (Frank et al.,
1993; Koch, 2006; Mansfield, Koch, & Gierach, 2003; Ussher & Perz, 2013b). However, most
men in the present study appeared to struggle to make sense of women’s premenstrual experiences.
There is evidence that providing men with information about women’s menstrual cycle-related
experiences and encouraging men to engage in open discussion can challenge misconceptions and
facilitate men’s acceptance of women’s (pre)menstrual experiences (Alpern, 1983). Accordingly,
promoting positive aspects of premenstrual changes in public domains, including the media, the
internet, and popular culture may also help men to resist negative representations of PMS. Accu-
rate information on premenstrual changes and menstruation in public discourse may encourage
men to have open discussions about such issues and invert the cultural norms that permit public
criticism in relation to menstruating and premenstrual women (Laws, 1992; Sveinsdottir et al.,
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
REPRESENTATIONS OF PREMENSTRUAL WOMEN IN MEN’S ACCOUNTS 17
2002). Positive discourses may also help men to resist engaging in unsupportive practices in
relation to their partner.
The online posts from PMSBuddy.com presented a unique avenue in which to explore men’s
constructions of and experiences with premenstrual changes. However, there are some limitations
to the present study. Due to the lack of demographic information on the men who posted on
PMSBuddy.com, it is unclear whether the analysis was performed on a narrow sample of men, or
on a sample of men with different relationship statuses, ages, and cultural backgrounds. It is also
unclear whether the accounts of men in long-term relationships with women who experienced
premenstrual change were actually analyzed, or whether some were the accounts of men who
had no actual experiences with a premenstrual female partner and simply implied that they did.
Therefore, it could not be determined what “kinds” of men tended to use the reminder service
or the forum provided by PMSBuddy.com. This restricted the possibility of considering whether,
and in what ways, men’s posts were a function of their social location. However, as suggested
earlier, the website is intended to appeal to men who find PMS troublesome. Therefore, it is likely
that there is a higher participant pool of such men, which skews the nature of online submissions.
Also, many of these accounts were brief, and there was no opportunity to query the men about
their comments. In light of these limitations, caution must be taken when making conclusions
about men in the context of premenstrual change. Rather, the present findings broaden our
understanding of the various ways men make sense of premenstrual change and their experiences
with premenstrual women.
To extend the current body of research on men and menstruation, future researchers could
gather men’s accounts of premenstrual changes through focus groups. Similar to online forums,
focus groups are based on conversation and enable the researcher to analyze consensus and docu-
ment the operation of humor and dissent in order to identify shared constructs and understandings
of a particular experience (Kitzinger, 1995), such as PMS. Interviews would allow men’s con-
structions and responses to premenstrual changes to be examined in-depth. An examination of
men’s talk within the context of interviews and focus groups might also address some of the
limitations in the present study, as participants from a range of ages and relationship contexts
could be recruited.
In conclusion, the present findings demonstrate how various online mechanisms and conven-
tions, such as those available on PMSBuddy.com, can help to make shared meanings visible and
can strengthen negative constructions of premenstrual changes. In light of the current findings,
it is clear that researchers and clinicians need to recognize that PMS is not simply “a woman’s
problem” and to understand the impact that cultural and relational constructions of PMS can have
on both men’s and women’s experiences with premenstrual changes.
FUNDING
This study was funded by a Discovery Grant from the Australian Research Council (DP0984913).
REFERENCES
Allen, L. (2007). “Sensitive and real macho all at the same time”: Young heterosexual men and romance. Men and
Masculinities,10(2), 137–152.
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
18 KING ET AL.
Alpern, N. (1983). Men and menstruation: A phenomenological investigation of men’s experience of menstruation
(Doctoral dissertation). The Union Institute & University, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
Bancroft, J. (1993). The premenstrual syndrome: A reappraisal of the concept and the evidence. Melbourne, Australia:
Cambridge University Press.
Bertelsen, L. (2001). Socially defined “PMS” (Doctoral dissertation). University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, USA.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology,3(2), 77–101.
Brooks-Gunn, J., & Ruble, D. (1986). Men’s and women’s attitudes and beliefs about the menstrual cycle. Sex Roles,
14(5), 287–299.
Burr, V. (2003). Social constructionism. London, UK: Psychology Press.
Chang, A., Holroyd, E., & Chau, J. (1995). Premenstrual syndrome in employed Chinese women in Hong Kong. Health
Care for Women International,16(6), 551–561.
Chaturvedi, S., & Chandra, P. (1991). Sociocultural aspects of menstrual attitudes and premenstrual experiences in India.
Social Science and Medicine,32(3), 349–351.
Chrisler, J. C. (2002). Hormone hostages: The cultural legacy of PMS as a legal defense. In L. H. Collins, M. R. Dunlap,
& J. C. Chrisler (Eds.), Charting a new course for feminist psychology (pp. 238–252). Westport, CT, USA: Praeger.
Chrisler, J. C. (2008). Fear of losing control: Power, perfectionism, and the psychology of women. Psychology of Women
Quarterly,32(1), 1–12.
Chrisler, J. C., & Caplan, P. (2002). The strange case of Dr. Jekyll and Ms. Hyde: HowPMS became a cultural phenomenon
and a psychiatric disorder. Annual Review of Sex Research,13(1), 274–306.
Chrisler, J. C., & Johnston-Robledo, I. (2002). Raging hormones? Feminist perspectives on premenstrual syndrome
and postpartum depression. In M. Ballou & L. S. Brown (Eds.), Rethinking mental health and disorder: Feminist
perspectives (pp. 174–197). New York, NY, USA: Guilford.
Chrisler, J. C., & Levy, K. (1990). The media construct a menstrual monster: A content analysis of PMS articles in the
popular press. Women & Health,16(2), 89–104.
Christensen, A., & Oei, T. (1990). Men’s perception of premenstrual changes on the premenstrual assessment form.
Psychological Reports,66(2), 615–619.
Connell, R. W. (1987). Gender and power: Society, the person, and sexual politics. Stanford, CA, USA: Stanford
University Press.
Conrad, D. (2002). Deep in the hearts of learners: Insights into the nature of online community. Journal of Distance
Education,17(1), 1–19.
Cosgrove, L., & Riddle, B. (2003). Constructions of femininity and experiences of menstrual distress. Women & Health,
38(3), 37–58.
Davies, B., & Harr´
e, R. (2007). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for the Theory of Social
Behaviour,20(1), 43–63.
Doherty, W. J. (1981). Cognitive processes in intimate conflict: II. Efficacy and learned helplessness. American Journal
of Family Therapy,9(2), 35–44.
Douglas, S. J. (1995). Where the girls are: Growing up female with the mass media. New York, NY, USA: Three Rivers
Press.
Duncombe, J., & Marsden, D. (1998). Stepford wives and hollow men? Doing emotion work, doing gender, and authen-
ticity in heterosexual relationships. In G. Bendelow & S. Williams (Eds.), Emotions in social life: Critical themes
and contemporary issues (pp. 209–224). London, UK: Routledge.
Edley, N., & Wetherell, M. (1995). Men in perspective. London, UK: Pearson Education.
Eysenbach, G., & Till, J. E. (2001). Ethical issues in qualitative research on internet communities. British Medical Journal,
323(7321), 1103–1105.
Figert, A. E. (2005). Premenstrual syndrome as scientific and cultural artifact. Integrative Physiological & Behavioral
Science,40(2), 102–113.
Fincham, F. D., & Beach, S. R. H. (1999). Conflict in marriage: Implications for working with couples. Annual Review
of Psychology,50(1), 47–77.
Foucault, M. (1979). Michel Foucault: power, truth, strategy. (Vol. 2). London, UK: Feral Publications.
Frank, C. E. (1995). Conjoint treatment: Impact on married couples with and without PMS (Doctoral dissertation). Ball
State University, Muncie, IN, USA.
Frank, B., Dixon, D. N., & Grosz, H. J. (1993). Conjoint monitoring of symptoms of premenstrual syndrome: Impact on
marital satisfaction. Journal of Counseling Psychology,40(1), 109–114.
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
REPRESENTATIONS OF PREMENSTRUAL WOMEN IN MEN’S ACCOUNTS 19
Frankel, M. S., & Siang, S. (1999). Ethical and legal aspects of human subjects research on the Internet. Published by
AAAS online. https://nationalethicscenter.org/resources/187/download/ethical legal.pdf.
Gardner, M. (2008). Understanding men’s attitudes about the menstrual cycle (Doctoral disseration). Saybrook Graduate
School and Research Center, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Gilmartin, S. K. (2007). Crafting heterosexual masculine identities on campus college men talk about romantic love. Men
and Masculinities,9(4), 530–539.
Gottman, J. M. (1994). What predicts divorce?: The relationship between marital processes and marital outcomes.
Hillsdale, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Harr´
e, R., & Langenhove, L. V. (2007). Varieties of positioning. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour,21(4),
393–407.
Holland, J., Ramazanoglu, C., Sharpe, S., & Thomson, R. (1994). Power and desire: The embodiment of female sexuality.
Feminist Review,46(1), 21–38.
Jones, A., Theodos, V., Canar, W. J., Sher, T. G., & Young, M. (2000). Couples and premenstrual syndrome: Partners
as moderators of symptoms? In K. B. Schmaling (Ed.), The psychology of couples and illness: Theory, research &
practice (pp. 217–239). Washington, DC, USA: American Psychological Association.
Kaplan, A. E. (1992). Motherhood and representation: The mother in popular culture and melodrama. London, UK:
Routledge.
Kitzinger, J. (1995). Qualitative research: Introducing focus groups. British Medical Journal,311(7000), 299–302.
Koch, P. (2006). Women’s bodies as a “puzzle” for college men. American Journal of Sexuality Education,1(3), 51–72.
Kuczmiercyk, A. R., Labrum, A. H., & Johnson, C. C. (1992). Perception of family and work environments in women
with the premenstrual syndrome. Journal of Psychosomatic Research,36(8), 787–795.
Laws, S. (1992). “It’s just the monthlies, she’ll get over it”: Menstrual problems and men’s attitudes. Journal of Repro-
ductive and Infant Psychology,10(2), 117–128.
Laws, S., & Campling, J. (1990). Issues of blood: The politics of menstruation. New York, NY, USA: Macmillan.
Mansfield, P. K., Koch, P. B., & Gierach, G. (2003). Husbands’ support of their perimenopausal wives. Women & Health,
38(3), 97–112.
Markman, H. J., Rhoades, G. K., Stanley, S. M., Ragan, E. P., & Whitton, S. W. (2010). The premarital communication
roots of marital distress and divorce: The first five years of marriage. Journal of Family Psychology,24(3), 289.
Marvan, M. L., & Cortes–Iniestra, S. (2001). Women’s beliefs about the prevalence of premenstrual syndrome and biases
in recall of premenstrual changes. Health Psychology,20(4), 276–280.
Mooney-Somers, J., Perz, J., & Ussher, J. M. (2008). A complex negotiation: Women’s experiences of naming and not
naming premenstrual distress in couple relationships. Women & Health,47(3), 57–77.
Parker, I. (1992). Discourse dynamics: Critical analysis for social and individual psychology. Florence, KY, USA: Taylor
& Frances/Routledge.
Parlee, M. B. (1987). Media treatment of premenstrual syndrome. In B. E. Ginsburg & B. F. Carter (Eds.), Premenstrual
syndrome (pp. 189–205). New York, NY, USA: Plenum Press.
Pollock, A., Die, A., & Marriott, R. (1990). Relationship of communication style to egalitarian marital role expectations.
Journal of Social Psychology,130(5), 619–624.
Riley, S. C. E. (2003). The management of the traditional male role: A discourse analysis of the constructions and
functions of provision. Journal of Gender Studies,12(2), 99–113.
Rittenhouse, A. (1991). The emergence of premenstrual syndrome as a social problem. Social Problems,38(3), 412–425.
Rundle, R. (2005). A qualitative exploration of couples’ relational experiences when one partner suffers from symptoms
of PMS: A systems approach (Doctoral dissertation). Alliant International University, Alhambra, CA, USA.
Ryser, R., & Feinauer, L. L. (1992). Premenstrual syndrome and the marital relationship. American Journal of Family
Therapy,20(2), 179–190.
Seigel, J. P. (1986). Marital dynamics of women with premenstrual tension syndrome. Family Systems Medicine,4(4),
358–366.
Steiner, M., Pearlstein, T., Cohen, L. S., Endicott, J., Kornstein, S. G., Roberts, C., . . . , and Yonkers, K. (2006). Expert
guidelines for the treatment of severe PMS, PMDD, and comorbidities: The role of SSRIs. Journal of Women’s Health,
15(1), 57–69.
Stenner, P. (1993). Discoursing jealousy. In E. Burman & I. Parker (Eds.), Discourse analytic research: Repertoires and
readings of texts in action (pp. 94–132). London, UK: Routledge.
Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect. Cyberpsychology & Behavior,7(3), 321–326.
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
20 KING ET AL.
Sveinsdottir, H., Lundman, B., & Norberg, A. (1999). Women’s perceptions of phenomena they label premenstrual
tension: Normal experiences reflecting ordinary behaviour. Journal of Advanced Nursing,30(4), 916–925.
Sveinsdottir, H., Lundman, B., & Norberg, A. (2002). Whose voice? Whose experiences? Women’s qualitative accounts of
general and private discussion of premenstrual syndrome. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences,16(4), 414–423.
Swann, C. J., & Ussher, J. M. (1995). A discourse analytic approach to women’s experience of premenstrual syndrome.
Journal of Mental Health,4(4), 359–368.
Talbot, K., & Quayle, M. (2010). The perils of being a nice guy: Contextual variation in five young women’s constructions
of acceptable hegemonic and alternative masculinities. Men and Masculinities,13(2), 255–278.
Taylor, D. (2006). From “it’s all in your head” to “taking back the month”: Premenstrual syndrome (PMS) research and
the contributions of the Society for Menstrual Cycle Research. Sex Roles,54(5/6), 377–391.
Thornton, L.-J. (2013). “Time of the month” on twitter: Taboo, stereotype, and bonding in a no-holds-barred public arena.
Sex Roles,68(1–2), 41–54.
Ussher, J. M. (1996). Premenstrual syndrome. Reconciling disciplinary divides through the adoption of a material-
discursive epistemological standpoint. Annual Review of Sex Research 7, 218–251.
Ussher, J. M. (2002). Processes of appraisal and coping in the development and maintenance of premenstrual dysphoric
disorder. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology,12, 309–322.
Ussher, J. M. (2003a). The role of premenstrual dysphoric disorder in the subjectification of women. Journal of Medical
Humanities,24(1/2), 131–146.
Ussher, J. M. (2003b). The ongoing silencing of women in families: An analysis and rethinking of premenstrual syndrome
and therapy. Journal of Family Therapy,25(4), 387–404.
Ussher, J. M. (2006). Managing the monstrous feminine: Regulating the reproductive body. New York, NY, USA:
Routledge.
Ussher, J. M. (2008). Challenging the positioning of premenstrual change as PMS: The impact of a psychological
intervention on women’s self–policing. Qualitative Research in Psychology,5(1), 33–44.
Ussher, J. M. (2010). Are we medicalizing women’s misery? A critical review of women’s higher rates of reported
depression. Feminism & Psychology,20(1), 9–35.
Ussher, J. M. (2011). The Madness of women: Meth and experience. London, UK: Routledge.
Ussher, J. M., & Perz, J. (2006). Evaluating the relative efficacy of a self-help and minimal psycho-educational intervention
for moderate premenstrual distress conducted from a critical realist standpoint. Journal of Reproductive and Infant
Psychology,24(4), 347–362.
Ussher, J. M., & Perz, J. (2008). Empathy, egalitarianism, and emotion work in the relational negotiation of PMS: The
experience of women in lesbian relationships. Feminism & Psychology,18(1), 87–111.
Ussher, J. M., & Perz, J. (2013a). PMS as a process of negotiation: Women’s experience and management of premenstrual
distress. Psychology & Health,68(1–2), 132–150.
Ussher, J. M., & Perz, J. (2013b). PMS as a gendered illness linked to the construction and relational experience of
hetero-femininity. Sex Roles,68(1–2), 1–19.
Ussher, J. M., Perz, J., & Mooney-Somers, J. (2007). The experience and positioning of affect in the context of intersub-
jectivity: The case of premenstrual syndrome. International Journal of Critical Psychology,21, 144–165.
Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction.
Communication Research,23(1), 3–43.
Willig, C. (1999). Beyond appearances: A critical realist approach to social contructionism. In D. J. Nightingale & J.
Cromby (Eds.). Social constructionist psychology: A critical analysis of theory and practice (pp. 37–51). Buckingham,
UK: Open University Press.
Zita, J. (1988). The premenstrual syndrome: “Dis–easing” the female cycle. Hypatia,3(1), 77–99.
Downloaded by [Ms Jane M. Ussher] at 18:26 01 June 2014
