A Variable Normal
Leah Libresco Sargeant reviews "The Period Brain"
Editor’s note: With the new year, we’re updating our publishing schedule and moving more content over to Substack. Now, new original pieces will be published on Tuesdays, both on our website and here on Substack, so you’ll get the full text in your email. You’ll get our weekly round-up in your inbox on Fridays, with links to the week’s top sex-realist feminist content from around the web.
A Variable Normal
Leah Libresco Sargeant
Dr. Sarah Hill is not afraid of controversy. In her first book, This is Your Brain on Birth Control, she dismantled the idea that birth control makes a woman sterile without changing anything else about her. Hill doesn’t oppose birth control tout court. She rejects the assumption that the standards of informed consent are being met when women aren’t given a full picture of how our hormones (and the Pill’s alternate pattern of hormones) affects our thinking and way of being.
Her newest book, The Period Brain, may be less politically controversial, but Hill is well aware of the dangers of speaking frankly about asymmetries between the sexes. She acknowledges her readers may be uncomfortable talking about the hormonal cycle outside the context of periods and pregnancy. She writes:
As a woman, I understand fearing that if we speak too loudly about the depth of impact our hormones can have on how we think, feel, and act, this could be used to argue that women are inferior to men and therefore undeserving of equal rights.
A world that premises women’s equality with men on our interchangeability with men will necessarily see open talk about biological sex differentiation as threatening women’s political equality. After all, much less stark sex differences in men and women’s conversation styles and conflict resolution strategies have been cited as a reason women cannot be trusted to practice law. Hormonal fluctuations are a much stronger differentiator between men and women, and many women have heard them cited as a put down. However, trying to quash discussion of differences between the sexes is very likely to systematically disadvantage women. When we build public policy or social expectations around either a male norm or a “gender neutral” one, women get shortchanged.
As Hill notes, women’s menstrual cycles have persistently been cited as a reason to exclude naturally cycling women from scientific trials. Including naturally cycling women means scientists have to scale up their sample sizes and track information about cycle phases, so they can normalize their data to account for drug-hormone interactions. It’s simpler to exclude women—or to include only women on the Pill, or only women who are currently in the first, lower-hormone phase of their cycle. Simpler for the scientists, anyway. For women, this results in taking drugs that haven’t been tested to see how they might interact with a normal hormonal cycle, which may cause the drug to be metabolized differently in different phases. For this reason, and many others, Hill thinks the risks of hiding sex differences outweigh the risks of acknowledging them.
Without clear explanations of how our bodies actually work, women struggle to understand or advocate for ourselves. Many women come to see the ordinary variation in the female body and cycle as pathological. I know this first-hand. It wasn’t until I read Taking Charge of Your Fertility in preparation for marriage that I learned one experience in my cycle that worried me was completely normal and a sign of a well-functioning body.
Hill draws a helpful distinction between bodily variations as symptoms or experiences. “Symptoms” are the result of something going wrong within our body; they help us when they draw our attention to a pathology in time to correct it. “Experiences” are noticeable changes in the body that draw our attention, but don’t point to an underlying problem. Becoming sleepy at night is not a symptom in this typology, even though it prompts us to respond. It is simply an experience, a natural part of being a human person, who requires rest at regular intervals.
An entity who was suddenly thrust into a human body and had never had sleepiness explained might treat this experience as a symptom, trying to correct what seemed like a wrongness in their body by drinking more caffeine or turning on more lights, when, in fact, they desperately needed sleep. Some college students do indeed try this approach, despite more than eighteen years of embodiment under their belt. But when we use our bodies against the grain of their functioning, we suffer twice over: first, because we are subverting the natural needs and functioning of our bodies, and second, because we interpret the ordinary functioning of a human body as a personal failure.
Because women’s bodies and hormonal cycles are understudied and underdiscussed, Hill thinks women are poorly prepared to distinguish between symptom and experience. As she puts it:
Many of the things that go on in the luteal phase are experiences masquerading as symptoms. And because we’re not taught what they are, what they mean, and what our bodies need in light of our changing hormonal states, they feel pathological. Like a sign of something wrong.
A middle school health education that only differentiates a woman’s cycle into “bleeding” and “not bleeding” phases leaves girls in ignorance of the natural, hormonal variation they can expect to experience. Because of the surge of progesterone in the luteal phase, for example, it’s normal for women to be more tired and physically weaker during this time. Women who aren’t aware of the way their hormones shape their experience may make plans their body can’t sustain, and then blame themselves for their failure. The absence of clear instruction about hormonal variation makes it harder for women to distinguish non-worrying experiences from the symptoms of PMS or other hormonal pathologies.
Hill’s book gives women a map to understand the ways their physical strength, emotional resilience, and appetites may change in tandem with their hormonal peaks and lows. In many ways, her work represents the best of the MAHA orientation to health. She is focused on the range of individual experience, rather than taking narrow averages as normative for all. She is interested in how women can best respond to the seasons of their cycle, rather than having static, mismatched expectations. She encourages women to chart and experiment, and to get curious about how lifestyle changes and supplements might help them better respond to their personal ups and down.
Hill excels much of the MAHA movement in clearly differentiating which of her recommendations are backed up by gold-standard studies, and where she’s offering more speculative advice, and the evidence base is weak. I’m pretty skeptical of the idea women should “seed cycle” by eating different seeds for different micronutrients in distinct phases of their cycles, for example. Hill is curious about it, but transparent with the reader that this trend has almost nothing supporting it. Still, she’s happy to see a world in which women are actively experimenting with what supports them throughout their cycles. Just keep collecting data and be prepared to reevaluate, she urges.
She closes her book with two injunctions in bold: “Biological sex matters and the existence of sex differences should be assumed until proven otherwise” and “Sex hormones and cycle phase matter and need to be studied rather than statistically controlled for.” Her guidance for scientists is also a much-needed rebuke to the idea that “woman” is primarily a state of mind, not a question of embodiment.
To be just to women, we need to tell the full truth about women’s bodies. Women’s “normal” is more variable than men’s “normal.” Accommodating men and women fully and equally means rejecting a narrow, unsexed norm for either.
Leah Libresco Sargeant is a writer who advocates for a culture that sees the dignity in mutual dependence, instead of aspiring to an impossible autonomy. She runs the Other Feminisms substack, which focuses on the way the world treats women as defective men. Her most recent book, The Dignity of Dependence: A Feminist Manifesto, was published in fall 2025 by Notre Dame University Press.





Leah!!! So refreshing!!!
I believe I was reading your Manifesto a few weeks ago, but I didn't finish it. It talked about the variation problem with car seats and air bags and other "made for typical man" approaches that fit the financial in a "nice profit" but fail to provide adequate protection for smaller humans. And, personally, I've always worried about pregnant women driving cars with airbags and seat belts.
I appreciate how you provide both sides of the discussion about (or not talk about) the female cycle and its effect on brain function in this article. I firmly believe that the research should include the female cycle, even though this may not align with the views of others. I've had a hard lesson on what it's like not to know, and believe me, I'd rather stand up for women because we see the reality and can work with it, rather than hiding the information so it cannot be potentially weaponized.
Living through my wife going through peri- and now menopause taught me how blind we all are about women's NATURAL health journey. And what frustrated me the most is that I, being one of the very few husbands apparently to care, dove into self-teaching about menopause (and with it, a lot of rabbit holes) only to find a lot of angry women and very little knowledge in the medical community about menopause (which is just not a real good word for it). Interestingly, my wife was uninterested in my research, as her response was, "It just tells me everything that's wrong with me and what I'm doing wrong or not doing enough of." The shame cuts so deep in her that it's paralyzing her. And the isolation from knowledge (the education she would have received when she was younger, if it existed) only creates more turmoil today.
In short, it literally broke my heart to watch my wife suffer for years. We're not talking about just GSM issues, but issues of her brain and other parts of her body that baffled her and me, and still do today!
It really upsets me to realize that the research is "too hard and complicated" to include women's cycles as factors. Our society faces numerous seemingly insurmountable challenges, yet we have consistently overcome them. And to think that the data will potentially be weaponized against women frosts me. Based on these surmised conditions, it seems that no matter what we do, someone is going to get hurt (emotionally, hopefully not physically).
It's a damned if we do and damned if we don't scenario. So far, the current "don't" method is not really working out too well. It sucks hiding from the data because the confusion created from not knowing is probably more painful across more women than those potentially targeted to put down. It's a real shame that society has fostered such distrust, because many more people are emotionally suffering due to a lack of knowledge and inadequate education.
Good review. I’m not going out to buy the book bc of the MAHA undercurrents. I also went through a similar “detox” after being on the pill for most of my 20s and then switching the Natural Cycles app for BC after the big study about estrogen pills and breast cancer came out. yeah, I did seed cycling and dietary cycling and for a bit and…no dice. The dietary stuff is mostly BS, but reducing overall inflammation with a better diet isn’t. 6 of one, 1/2 dozen of the other. Also read the same Fertility book. I really did not understand my body beforehand and it was mind blowing. The pill, though, helped me pursue the career I wanted and gave me the financial and relationship stability to have a family later on, and to me, that was worth some elevated risks.
I think an important counterpoint biologically, though that bc western females are reaching puberty earlier due to nutrient availability and are awash in these hormones for longer than in traditional societies plus have more inflammatory issues from diet, we’re having more issues and high hormone correlated cancers, hormonal issues from crash diets, PCOS, depression, painful cysts, etc. Frankly, we’re in uncharted territory here, and the Pill is neither a silver bullet nor is it the an awful, insidious thing. So, I think there is a strong case for limited hormonal birth control for younger women for behavioral, economic, and hormonal reasons, but it’s a tool that can’t be used forever and doesn’t work for everyone. Perimenopausal women need better and diverse options bc of their irregular cycles too and more data is needed. A woman’s life history and needs will vary so much by age and stage.