Since Vice President Harris announced her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, Republicans have scrambled to find anything to tarnish Walz’s reputation. What did they find? A bill Walz signed into law last year requiring Minnesota’s public schools to provide free menstrual products to all 4th through 12th-grade students.
With the longstanding cultural stigma against menstruation, which is largely founded in patriarchal religious traditions, are we really supposed to believe this admirable law is bad? This law promoting menstrual equity marks Minnesota as one of 28 states with such provisions mandating access to menstrual products in public schools.
The chief religious right complaint stems from the law’s acknowledgment that not all women menstruate and not all those who menstruate are women. As the Republican Party takes on more and more radical anti-transgender beliefs, arch-conservatives are trying to use an innocuous and overdue law to attack Walz. Minnesota Republicans led an attempt to restrict the mandate of free menstrual products to female and gender-neutral school bathrooms, which was ultimately unsuccessful. The author of the failed amendment even ended up voting for the bill’s final version, citing the issue’s importance as his reasoning. The law addresses period poverty, in which nearly one in four U.S. students has struggled to afford menstrual products, and one out of every 10 students who menstruates missed school last year due to a lack of access to tampons or pads. Globally, 500 million women, girls and people who menstruate do not have access to needed menstrual products or water, sanitation and hygiene facilities.
It’s a reflection on reactionaries to see how quickly the “Tampon Tim” nickname gained traction on conservative social media. The infamous Stephen Miller, senior advisor to former President Donald Trump, posted on X, “She actually chose Tampon Tim.” Chaya Raichik, the person behind the hateful X account Libs of TikTok, outrageously posted a picture of Walz photoshopped onto a box of tampons.
Those who demean menstrual equity and those like Walz who champion it are heirs to a religious tradition, as nearly all religions have shamed girls and women for menstruating. Historically, most religious texts and practices have excluded women from religious rituals, temples and the public sphere during their menstrual cycle. Many religions have demanded girls and women use dangerous and humiliating menstrual huts or similar isolation sites due to their misogynistic beliefs that menstruating women are “impure” or even “dirty.” Several women die tragically in Nepal every year due to the sexist practice of isolating women in menstrual huts despite the practice being outlawed for years.
Patriarchal religions generally have considered menstrual blood to be ritually unclean. Judaism and Christianity cite Leviticus, which decrees that menstruating women are unclean, periods are unclean, sex during menstruation is unclean and that menstruating women must be “put apart” for seven days. Anyone who touches the places a menstruating woman has touched, or the woman herself, will also become “unclean.” The bible absurdly decrees a woman must even offer a sin atonement — a burnt offering — to the priest for this normal, monthly bodily function tied to life-giving fertility. (Leviticus 15:19–23) In the Middle Ages, menstruating women were considered physical and spiritual dangers to men under Judaism and Christianity, and menstrual taboos, beliefs that periods are unclean, shameful or even dangerous, have unfortunately carried over into contemporary times.
Menstrual taboos were a major reason for barring women from positions of authority in Christianity, and some Orthodox Christian authorities dictated that women were not allowed to take communion during their menstrual cycle. Russian Orthodox Christians, too, used menstrual huts, and women were not allowed to attend church, have contact with men or touch raw or fresh food. The air around menstrual women was believed to be polluting to hunters, and it was thought their gaze could even affect the weather negatively.
Christianity’s condemnation of menstruation, of course, comes partly from Eve’s “curse” from eating the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge. In Genesis 3:16, God told Eve, “I shall give you intense pain in childbearing, you will give birth to your children in pain.” Menstruation’s role in reproduction is why even today many people still refer to a period as “having the curse.”
In Islam, some believe that women are not allowed to enter any shrine or mosque or to touch the Quran while on their period. Women are also exempt from daily prayers and fasting while menstruating, including during Ramadan. Some Hindu and Buddhist views portray menstrual blood as “impure” or “polluted.” In various places worldwide, there are still strong taboos against menstruating women appearing in the public sphere, and menstrual huts continue to be a significant problem for some Hindu women. This stems from an ancient Hindu text depicting the story of menstruation manifesting from the guilt women were forced to take on following the killing of a Vedic demon.
Girls, women and people who menstruate have long been stigmatized by religion and culture. Somehow, those seeking to shame Walz for ensuring all students have access to needed period products fail to understand how damaging their rhetoric is to those students. Thankfully, those of us who understand menstruation as a normal and natural occurrence can embrace the nickname “Tampon Tim” because it shows just how much Walz cares about girls, women and their health. “Tampon Tim” is a failed slight against Walz that only paints him in a good light.
FFRF Action Fund commends Walz for joining the 27 other states that mandate access to free menstrual products in public schools. Period equity is included in FFRF Action Fund’s issue areas and Resources for Legislators page because this issue is closely tied to our mission to keep religion out of public policy. We hope more states follow Walz’s lead.
FFRF Action Fund is a 501(c)(4) organization that develops and advocates for legislation, regulations and government programs to preserve the constitutional principle of separation between state and church. It also advocates for the rights and views of nonbelievers, endorses candidates for political office, and publicizes the views of elected officials concerning religious liberty issues.