Fighting for menstrual equity through period product pantries
Edward J Glayzer,Claire T Jennings,Judith M Schlaeger,Brynn Watkins,Annabelle Rieseler,Melissa Ray,Adrienne Lee,Jennifer E Glayzer
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/17455057241281459
Abstract:Background: Menstruators facing period poverty often struggle with menstrual hygiene and waste management, which can result in harmful short- and long-term health outcomes such as urinary tract infections, yeast infections, and vulvar contact dermatitis. Research indicates that 42% of menstruators in the United States have difficulty affording period products. Traditional methods of distributing period products through social services may unintentionally undermine menstruators' agency, leading to disempowerment and inefficient resource allocation. Period product pantries are a novel approach aimed at addressing period poverty, inequity, and inadequate menstrual health education in the United States. Objectives: This paper aims to examine the development, organization, and implementation of two distinct period product pantry networks in Ohio and New York. It seeks to compare the advantages and challenges of grassroots versus nonprofit-led models and to provide practical insights for future pantry operators. Design: The study examines two models of period product pantries: a grassroots effort led by three local residents in Ohio and an initiative spearheaded by a nonprofit organization in New York. The design includes a comparative analysis of both models' organization, funding methods, and operational structures. Methods: The authors gathered data on the construction, operation, and usage of two pantry networks, focusing on factors such as accessibility, community engagement, and sustainability. The study employed a combination of qualitative methods, including interviews with organizers, and a review of organizational documents to analyze the effectiveness and scalability of each model. Results: Both pantry networks increased accessibility to period products in low socioeconomic neighborhoods, which are disproportionately affected by period poverty. The grassroots model, while resource-limited, fostered strong community ties and local engagement. The nonprofit-led model benefited from dedicated staff and a more stable funding structure but faced bureaucratic challenges. Despite their differences, both models demonstrated the potential to empower menstruators by preserving their dignity and autonomy. Conclusions: Period product pantries represent an innovative and equitable approach to addressing period poverty and inequity. The analysis of the two models offers valuable insights for organizations and individuals interested in establishing similar initiatives. While each model has its unique benefits and challenges, both are effective in empowering menstruators and providing accessible menstrual hygiene products to those in need. Registration: Not applicable.