Invisible Until It’s an Emergency: Why Menstrual Needs Are Still Excluded from Public Planning

Menstrual needs are rarely acknowledged in public planning until something goes wrong. A delayed flight. A missed school day. A long commute without access to a sanitary pad. Only in moments of crisis does the absence of menstrual infrastructure become visible.

This pattern reveals a deeper truth. Menstruation is not forgotten in public systems by accident. It is excluded by design.

Public infrastructure has historically been designed around bodies that do not menstruate. From urban transport systems to institutional buildings, the default user is assumed to be male.

This results in:

When bodies that menstruate are not considered in planning, exclusion becomes structural rather than incidental.

Menstruation is often categorised as a personal issue rather than a public responsibility. This framing allows institutions to distance themselves from accountability.

The consequences are predictable:

Public planning fails when it treats a predictable biological process as an unpredictable personal problem.

Menstrual neglect becomes visible only when circumstances intensify:

These moments are not anomalies. They are routine realities for menstruating individuals. The emergency is not the period; it is the absence of preparation.

Airports, railway stations, courts, schools, government offices, and workplaces present themselves as neutral civic spaces. In practice, they often privilege one set of bodily needs over others.

A public space that cannot support menstruation:

Neutrality that ignores difference is not fairness. It is exclusion.

The lack of access to menstrual products and disposal facilities increases the risk of:

Public health planning that overlooks menstrual hygiene contradicts the goal of preventive care. Health systems cannot claim comprehensiveness while ignoring a recurring biological need.

India has acknowledged menstrual health through schemes, guidelines, and awareness initiatives. However, recognition has not translated into enforceable public planning standards.

Key gaps include:

Without mandates, menstrual access remains optional and therefore unreliable.

Increased discussion around menstruation has improved awareness, but awareness alone does not build infrastructure.

Visibility without planning results in:

Public planning requires budgets, standards, and monitoring—not just narratives.

The argument that menstrual infrastructure is expensive or secondary does not hold.

The cost of:

is minimal compared to:

Planning for menstruation is not an added burden. It is an efficiency measure.

Menstrual-inclusive planning should be embedded into:

Core elements include:

Planning works best when it anticipates needs rather than reacting to crises.

A just system does not wait for emergencies to act. It prepares for routine realities.

When menstrual needs are built into public planning:

Preparedness is the quiet measure of progress.

Menstrual needs should never become visible only in moments of distress. Their exclusion from public planning reflects outdated assumptions about whose bodies public spaces are meant to serve.

If menstruation is predictable, planning must be proactive. If public spaces are meant for everyone, they must account for everyone. Inclusion does not begin during an emergency. It begins in the planning room.