Adapted from her book Blood,
Bread and Roses: How Menstruation Created the World.
First published by Beacon Press, Boston, 1993.
Download
Article (PDF format)
The theory of origins I am espousing is epistemological, in
that it asks the question "How do we know what we know,
and has that made us human beings, and different from other
animals?" In postulating "the particularities of menstruation"
as the source of our human uniqueness, the first quality we
can notice is that ancestral humans have understood, quite reasonably,
that the jelling up of menses within the womb produces a new
being. Peoples have thought this regardless of how they have
imagined semen as a part of the reproductive process. It is
only recently that reproduction is understood as the joining
of DNA from a single sperm with the DNA of a single egg which
then embeds itself in the menstrual material lining the womb
until the placenta develops. So it is quite reasonable for ancestral
peoples to have equated menses with creative capacity in reproduction.
The number of other capacities assigned to menstruation
in world wide rites, practices and mythologies is quite another
matter, and it is these that have attracted my attention in
addressing the question of how we acquired our cultural accomplishments
and the behaviors particular to us as human beings.
Creation mythologies frequently open with everything being darkness,
stillness, all one undifferentiated element that then separates
into the forms we know as light, water, earth, sky, and so on.
Consciousness, in other words, evolved, and in this process,
needed forms to contain the emerging knowledge. I call those
forms metaforms, related to menstruation and its rituals.
At one time, our ancestral primates could not see the landscape
of the earth, could not recognize the sun and moon as entities,
and had no name for water. The ancient stories recall a time
when our hominid ancestors could not perceive shape, color,
light, depth, distance as we do, and had no names for them or
fixed sense of their qualities. The state of being, which we
call "nature," rules from inside the animal body:
emotions, physiological states, estrus, and mating simply happen;
they are not up for question, examination, or rearrangement.
Seasons change and fur turns white or brown; the animal is moved
from within to interaction with life around it, without externalizing
much imagery beyond what (considerable amount) the body conveys
through gesture, smell, or sound. Although the inner animal
life has its known order, its own integration with the whole,
its own rationalism, we rely so much on our culture that the
preconscious state before our ancestors learned to think outside
themselves was a state we now call Chaos—and greatly fear.
Other primates have gestural and sound languages, learned culture,
and may even use tools; humans differ in that humans have metaformic
consciousness. While animals have mind, emotion, rich social
lives, and their own forms of consciousness, we human beings
have metaformic minds, metaformic consciousness, which is externalized
as cultural forms, within which we live.
Separating Dark from Light
Menstrual
seclusion rites in many parts of the world, as recorded over
the last few centuries, typically include (among others) three
basic prohibitions: the menstruating woman must not see light,
she must not touch water, and she must not touch the earth.
Since these same elements are differentiated in Genesis and
other creation stories, I began to see how menstrual rites might
have "created the world" for ancient peoples and to
wonder whether the sleepers who awoke and saw landscape, who
named the elements, who separated the above from the below,
and darkness from light, water from earth, were informed by
rites of seclusion that specified these very elements, singled
them out for attention through regulations or taboos—from
the Polynesian word tapua, sacred law of "the woman's
friend," which is menstruation.
Human perception began, many creation stories say, when we could
distinguish between light and dark. That distant ancestral eyes
didn't have the perception of this distinction is easier to
comprehend (how could they not see light?) if we remember that
until very recently a person could walk for weeks in dense forest
without seeing the sky as more than fragments of glitter through
a maze of moving leaves. Not only the equatorial girdle, but
much of the Northern Hemisphere was covered with dense forest
in the age immediately preceding our own. Even the stark sand
of the Sahara is believed to have once been forested.
In many parts of a dense forest, light never reaches the ground;
it "lives" scattered in the trees, and in constant
motion. A band of primates, held to a small forested area by
predators and the need for leafy food, lived in a small world,
one that didn't need to know the original sources of water or
light, merely the keen inner senses to locate water and see
with light. For it isn't that the remote ancestors didn't see
light but that they saw with light, as natural as breathing.
They did not see light as outside of themselves, as having a
distinct source, a single place (or entity) from whence it emanated.
They had no origin story of light. Once externalized light was
recognized by someone, was perceived as a separate entity, how
could she retain and remember it, given that prehumans by definition
had no language, no marking system, nothing that we call physical
culture? How could they establish noninstinctual knowledge outside
of their own bodies? How did we acquire orderly minds of external
measurement?
Anthropologists currently believe that the oldest continuous
religion on earth is among Australian aborigines, some of whom
have a deity named Rainbow Snake. According to legend, two sisters,
the Wawilak Sisters, were the first to be swallowed by the Snake.
This happened on the occasion when the older sister was giving
birth. The younger sister began to dance while they waited for
the afterbirth, and suddenly she began her first blood flow.
At this instant, the Snake came out of the waterhole and wrapped
itself around both of them and their newborn child. Anthropologist
Chris Knight has hypothesized that the idea of the Rainbow Snake,
coming from the "womb" of the waterhole, and said
to "swallow" a woman when she menstruates, is an example
of menstrual synchrony, evidently so central to these people—at
least at one time—that "menstrual blood of three
women" is a topic of women's cats-cradle games, and most
rituals include "menstrual" flows.[1]
Acquiring an externally based mind required early humans to
connect something outside of themselves as a frame of reference,
to connect physically; and this was accomplished when the females
evolved a menstrual cycle capable of synchronous rhythm, or
entrainment. Entrainment is the quality of two similarly timed
beats to link up and become synchronized in each other's presence.
Nondigital clocks behave this way, and so do drums.[2]
This quality of interactive rhythm, not being mechanical, applies
as well to the periodicity of menstruation. As has been demonstrated
by women volunteers and observers, menstrual periods are highly
affected by the environment. Periods are easily disrupted by
changes of light, travel through time zones, and severe exercise
or dietary deprivation. Menstruation is a malleable cycle, and
menstrual periodicity is also able to entrain: women living
together and in similar circumstances will often spontaneously
synchronize their periods with each other and evidently with
any light source that imitates the moon's dark and light cycles.
Menstruation has been disrupted by the urban environment, with
its irregular lighting.[3] The flexibility of menstrual cycles,
their ability to entrain to another regular rhythm, gave ancestral
females the inner tool to entrain with other females enough
to notice the commonality of blood flow, and to entrain with
the moon closely enough to notice it as a source of light and
to differentiate its effect from darkness.
This unique cycle in correspondence with the cycles of an outside
body, the waxing and waning of the moon, a body far beyond (as
we learned later) the surface of the earth, taught humans to
see from outside of their animal bodies and to display that
knowledge externally, in physical culture. The menstrual mind
became externalized because females were forced to teach its
perspective to members of the family who did not menstruate.
Males, in learning the pattern, greatly extended it, rearranged
it, demonstrated their comprehension one further step, and mirrored
back to the females: an ongoing dance of mind between the genders.
The consequences of the menstrual-lunar correspondence is what
has divided us, for good and ill, from the other animals. Unlike
our simian relatives, unlike any other creature, humans use
external measurement, the gift of menstruation. We have a lunar/menstrual
lever that enables us to move our sense back and forth between
the subjective and the objective and to embody our ideas in
external form.
When during the hundreds of thousands of times the ancestral
females secluded themselves during what was at least some of
the time a collective menstruation at the dark of the moon,
they noticed that the light was also hiding. They may also have
come to notice that the light at times (dawn) was the same color
as their blood. While they were menstruating, they noticed darkness
was different from light. Darkness thus had a source: menstruation.
At the end of each menstruating, they "created" light
when they emerged from darkness, from hiding. And to continue
its remembrance and to reinforce the principle, they began emerging
from seclusion exactly at dawn, emerging "into the light."
They synchronized with darkness and light. And because of the
back-and forth road that is cause and effect, since menstruation
"created" light as it "created" dark, so
it could also destroy them. The menstruant, especially at menarche,
was not allowed to look at light—lest in her condition
she destroy it, allowing her society to fall back into Chaos.
Menstrual separation was the first step to differentiating light
from darkness and to displaying and remembering the knowledge.
Perhaps this is a part of the memory kept alive by seclusion
rites recorded in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, which
almost universally include/d a prohibition against seeing light:
Among the Indians of California a girl at her first menstruation
was thought to be possessed of a particular degree of supernatural
power, and this was not always regarded as entirely defiling
or malevolentÉ.Not only was she secluded from her family and
the community, but an attempt was made to seclude the world
from her. One of the injunctions most strongly laid upon her
was not to look about her. She kept her head bowed and was forbidden
to see the world and the sun. Some tribes covered her with a
blanket.[4]
Among many tribes, the menstruant
could not see the moon or the sun and had to be covered even
when she left the hut at night. In particular, her head had
to be shielded from the great lights in the sky.
How terrifying the first ventures into separation must have
been, for at the very beginning of the changes from primate
to human, archaeologically dated, currently, at between four
and seven million years ago, there were no words to describe
the vision. Wordlessly, a more conscious female pulled her sisters
into seclusion with her. Wordlessly, concerned mothers pushed
their daughters into seclusion at the first sign of their blood.
Wordlessly, the bleeding females sat in the moonless night and
"saw" darkness as a different state from light. They
named it with the act of separation. They "saw" that
when anyone menstruating was absent from the group, so was the
night light. In this seeing, they perceived light and dark as
different states. They saw that light, like the menstruant,
separates and then emerges.
With the act of sitting together bleeding in the dark, the early
women entered a new world of consciousness. Their minds became
"human" through an externalized vision that had as
yet and perhaps for countless millennia to come no other expression
than menstrual separation, the creation of consciousness by
distinguishing menstruation from other activities. This separation
endowed both menstruation and light with power, the power of
memory and first cause, the power of rite to create human mind
and culture.
The fundamental connection between separation and creation comes
through in languages that developed much later, in the word
"sacred," with means "set apart" (it also
means "curse"), and in the word "Sabbath,"
or sabbat, which can be translated as "the divider."
The ancient European religion of the goddess Diana celebrated
four separations, or Sabbats, as divisions of the year. "Wherever
the ancient cult of Diana was extant, its votaries met four
times a year to celebrate the mysteries of their faith, and
these gatherings, which were known as Sabbats or Sabbaths, were
the very heart of their existence as a corporate society."[5]
The original meaning of Sabbath can be understood as "menstrual
separation," particularly as related to the new moon. As
the seventh day, it is also "the day of rest" of the
Genesis creation story, which took place in seven days—so
each week is a re-creation of the Beginning. The number of days
of menstrual seclusion is specified for Hebrew women in Leviticus
15:19, and it is seven. Menstrual seclusion is implied as well
in the Babylonian creation myth, the oldest one known, which
lists in its sixth line, after descriptions of Tiamat and Apsu,
a special kind of sacred reed hut, the giparu.[6]
When the ancestress of four or five or seven million years ago
separated in the earliest Sabbats, she stepped out of Chaos
and across a terrifying abyss of mind. What makes the Abyss
so ominous is that to enter human mind we step out of the security
of instinct, the net of animal mind, and enter the frail social
construct of a rite, which is only held in place externally
and accessed through cultural memory and repetition. The farther
we get from inner knowledge, the more dependent on the external
mind we become. The Abyss yawned before those who did not keep
the separation, for in their newfound understanding they established
a principle correspondence: without menstrual seclusion, there
was no light. Menstrual seclusion rites continually created
light and separated it from dark. Without menstrual separation
and the emphasis taboo placed on the seeing of light, the idea
of light having a source would have flickered and gone out.
And probably, many times, it did.
By using ancient versions of tapua, women were able to
hold the thought still, to capture the perception of the source
of light, emphasize its importance, and teach it. Every time
a girl began her period for the first time, she separated and
was not allowed to see light. Then at the end of her bleeding,
she emerged into the light. "After a girl emerges from
seclusion, theÉwomen take her around and show her the earth,
bodies of water, flowers, trees—as though she is seeing
them for the first time."[7]
In this way, seclusion reenacts the original awakening of human
consciousness.
In a typical seclusion, on the occasion of her first menstruation,
which is called "entrance into the shade," or Chol
Mlop, a Khmer girl in Cambodia was secluded in a darkened, curtained-off
section of the house. She was forbidden to look upon men and
allowed to go outdoors only in the dark night. The "shade"
lasted several months, sometimes as long as a year, and during
this time she learned skills of weaving and basketmaking. The
end of her cloistering, called "coming out of the shade,"
featured a feast with relatives and friends, who made offerings
to ancestors and spirits, as well as a number of rites similar
to those for weddings.[8]
Separate huts were often built so that the initiates could not
see light: "Among the Yaracares, an Indian tribe of Bolivia,
as the eastern foot of the Andes, when a girl perceives the
signs of puberty, her father constructs a little hut of palm
leaves near the house."[9]
In India, continuing into the present, maidens at menarche are
secluded in many families do not look at the sun, and cover
their heads so the sun does not shine on their heads.
Menstrual seclusion rites reenacted their own discoveries, returning
women back along a path of unraveling time, to the chaotic mind
before light was seen. Menstrual seclusion accomplished this
by a simple taboo: the menstruant was not allowed to see light.
On the North American continent, she had to cover her head with
a deerskin before going outdoors and was secluded in a dark
place for days, even weeks, at a time. In Southeast Asia, she
might have been wrapped in a hammock or enclosed in a little
hut or square of mats, or she had to lie down in a dark part
of a house for days and nights on end. Silence often accompanied
the cloistering: she could not speak, or she could not speak
above a whisper, or her name could not be spoken during the
sacred time—as though she were returning deliberately
to a preconscious state.
Reasons given for this and other menstrual taboos concern her
openness and vulnerability to earth and stellar energies at
the times of menses: her family feared that harm would come
to her, that she would sicken or die, that her bones would break,
that she would become infertile, that wayward spirits would
harm or even rape her, that the sun, being hungry, would devour
her. The reverse of her vulnerability is also held—that
she has extraordinary power at this time and can aid, heal,
re-form, or harm others. Some peoples held taboos in which the
menstruant's positive and negative destructive powers affected
all life and even the features of the landscape and sky. If
a woman kept taboo, all life flourished; she had irresistible
allure and life-energy.
If
a woman broke taboo, not only would she herself be harmed, but
harm would come to others, to her family, her village. Her eyes
had special power, sometimes too much power, so she could not
look at others or they would sicken. In one example, she could
not drop blood on the path, for someone might step on it and
later die or be infertile. In others, she had to avoid talking
to her husband or touching his weapons lest harm befall him
in the hunt; she was forbidden to cross the path of a hunting
party. In some practices, she was sexually dangerous, harm would
come to her partner's genitals, and person, so she could not
have sex. In tantra, however, sex with her was magic and a method
of acquiring positive power.
Her
responsibilities were enormous, for if the menstruant failed
to keep her taboos, her community would no longer thrive. Thus,
she could not look at the sky or the planets. Nor could she
gaze at bodies of water, for fear of causing a flood. If she
were to look at trees and plants, they would wither. She had
to protect the sources of water; she could not look at the pond
or it would dry up. Her glance would cause the village cows
to sicken and die, or their milk to dry up; it caused crops
to wither in the fields. In other practices she ran through
the fields to ensure their fertility. She was, considered overall,
a vessel for cosmic power—vulnerable to it and carrying
it forward, through her body, her gaze and touch, her blood,
and also, her allure. She had, in her blood rites taken as a
whole, complete positive and negative powers over all that humans
depend on for their lives, all we had deciphered about the universe—for,
as I have argued, it was menstrual consciousness that first
created all these elements. And so many of the rites involved
silence, as though they were laid down during the long eras
before speech, when action alone did the creating.
Hers was the power of raveling and unraveling, since what consciousness
(spirit, mystery) gives us, it can also take back. And the power
of creation and destruction, as at one time evidently all humanity
believed, was in the woman's blood.
Metaphor and Metaform
As
a poet, I work with the power of metaphor and with its mechanics,
and I have long been aware that metaphor isn't just a method
of description. Some metaphors are so powerful they become translated
into physical form. If a poem emphatically states (with believable
graphic details) that a woman is a rattlesnake, some of the
power of the "snake" to strike in its own behalf is
transferred to the cultural idea "woman." A metaphor
is a figure of speech using measurement and comparison, for
the purpose of transferring power. In this example, the power
of a real rattlesnake may be assumed by a real woman. If repeated
use of this snake poem leads a woman to take a self-defense
class, for example, she then converts the poetic metaphor into
a form. In the class she may even learn to strike two fingers
in her attacker's eyes "like a snake's fangs." In
a different context, a chanted poem using the metaphor of a
woman as snake might accompany a dance in which a young woman
learns to twine her arms, legs and trunk in sinewy "snake"
movements; perhaps she wears the tail of a rattler as a bracelet
and makes a rhythmic sound as she dances. In both cases, the
women are altering their own bodies in ways that originate with
real beings, rattlesnakes.
Historically
human culture, as we shall see, has used such creatures for
all sorts of purposes. In examining the power of verbal metaphor,
I began to see that we surround ourselves with living, interacting,
physically embodied metaphors. And in tracing the use of such
physical forms as comparisons, as measurement, I found that
remarkable numbers of everyday objects, artifacts, creatures,
and human cultural habits can be traced back, through mythology
and anthropology, to a single element of measurement: menstruation.
My search for women's contribution to science and culture has
thus intersected with my poetic explorations of how metaphor
translates into genuine cultural power.
Our
menstrual-minded ancestress stepped out of her excellent net
of animal intelligence into the potentially chaotic external
mind, the mind unique to human beings. The human mind uses metaphoric
imagery, what I call "external measurement." Our originators
could not have stepped across the Abyss without simultaneously
finding a way to hold the first few ideas in place, since they
disappear in the absence of culture. Neither instinct nor the
central nervous system store such imagery. It has to be externalized,
and it is fragile. It has to be taught and to be taught, it
has to be remembered. This required techniques resembling metaphor
but much more extreme. The metaphor somehow had to be actualized,
acted out in the physical.
Our
ancestresses taught via menstrual instruction, through rituals
that embodied ideas based on menstrual information. I call this
metaform, specifically, an act or form of instruction
that makes a connection between menstruation and a mental principle.
Spirit is included in this definition as well, "mental-spiritual
principle," as peoples all over the world have revered
their metaformic creations to the point of deifying them. At
first I thought to call the forms that menstruation creates
menstruaforms, but that seemed too narrow a word for
what I mean. I chose metaform instead, meaning a physical embodiment
of metaphor in which menstruation is one part of the equation.
Meta means among, with, after, and also change, and I
like its implication of transformative measurement: measured
form, metaform. I also like the sense of a super- or panvision,
as in metaphysics, though I don't mean "beyond the physical."
A metaform is an idea that translates into physical form, and
conversely, it is also the physical form that embodies or "holds"
an idea, with menstruation as its source. My broadest premise
is that all metaphor, all measurement, and all cultural forms,
could they be traced back far enough, would lead us to menstruation
and menstrual rite.
If—as
we are told in a multitude of creation stories—the act
that enabled the human mind to emerge "from Chaos,"
that is to say, from an unconscious state, was an act of separation,
then menstrual seclusion rites are repeated separations consisting
of metaforms that contain creation stories and that gradually
became basic elements of culture.
Chaos
then is forgetting learned metaphoric patterns, forgetting metaformic
instruction. And since our original millions-of-years-ago ancestress
presumably was completely of the animal world, she could take
only one step out of that fully developed order, only one step
at a time away from the network of animal interactions that
maintained the pattern of her life and of her family's life.
She had as yet no language, no poetry, no drawing, no masks
or maps or music with which to convey her first external insight:
the relation between her womb cycle and another, outside cycle,
the relation between herself, and darkness and light. She had
only the intelligence of her own body and its actions; she had
only her blood, and its peculiar entrainment with the moon.
And when she secluded herself in imitation of the moon, she
externalized the metaphoric (and the real) connection; she merged
identification with the lunar cycle.
We
now think in metaphors, and we think with metaphors, as molds
into which we pour the stuff of everyday experience. But we
get these metaphoric molds, these metaforms, not from blind
imagination, but from our very specific and historic interactions
with the external and internal physical world, remembered through
rites and ceremonies handed down to us—by now through
dozens and hundreds of channels. The original metaforms were
set in place millions of years before humans had speech, and
they were based in the synchrony inherent in the menstrual cycles,
as well as in the ability of the primate mind to think in terms
of mimicry and metaphor.
Metaphor
itself is a form of synchrony, measuring the inner with the
outer. Metaphor says that one thing is another; it says they
are entrained through repetition of pattern. Metaphor measures
through comparison. The recognition of similarity and dissimilarity
of category between elements is how we think, and the external
expression of this recognition is what makes us human. The transformation
of such an idea into a metaform, an external expression of the
synchronization of two patterns, is what enables human communication.
Metaform transforms or merges one thing into another, endowing
two unlike things with equality of power, in our minds.
As
biological science tells us, though the animals continue to
evolve, the interactions, skills, and intelligence of nonhuman
beings appears to have achieved ecological balance—a sustainable
economy. The nonhuman minds appear to be perfect for what they
set out to do. What disrupts this ecological balance are the
extreme actions of humankind; consequently, we appear in our
ways of being to be unfinished—still struggling mightily,
especially with ourselves. We differ from the animal minds,
from what Western biology has called "instinct," in
that animal minds are almost entirely inner. Though we still
have instincts (suckling, or fearing fire, for example), cultural
teachings and misteachings can completely disrupt them. We have
become dependent on our external minds.
We
have constructed our minds externally, not abstractly, but through
using physical metaphors—metaforms—that embody a
comparison to a menstrually based idea. Two good examples of
metaforms are the chair and the hut. These forms are so culturally
ingrained that virtually any adult stranded at length in the
wilderness could construct, from memory, a rude hut and some
version of a chair. As we shall see, both "chair"
and "hut" are rooted in menstrual rite.
Metaforms
are physical, mental, and also spiritual. By spirit I mean that
metaforms at times "speak" to us in some fashion,
and people understand this communication as a dialogue with
nonhuman intelligent spirit, or deity, as messages from the
mind of the cosmos. Nonmaterialist peoples have had terms that
combine all three spheres, for example the Maori word aria,
meaning a spirit that enters—say, a snake—and conveys
a message to humans.[10]
The Bible and other mythology refer to speaking huts, walls,
and thrones, as well as the wind; rocks, plants, and animals
speak to tribal and psychic folk; and psychiatrists work with
divinatory nature of dreams, whose images speak to us of our
deepest comprehensions of life. In work I have done later, following
Blood, Bread, and Roses, which outlines the initial principles
of this relational theory, I have asked the question, are the
roots of human comprehensions of deity itself metaformic?
So
my contention begins with the idea that the central unit of
measurement, the ultimate metaphor, to which all metaforms refer,
is blood, from menstrual rites and related rites. To help sort
through the varieties of metaform, I have divided them into
four categories, corresponding to the ways human society has
remembered, taught, and acted out menstrual principles. Logically,
the first of these seems to have been wilderness metaform:
the use of, or more accurately, being in relation with, creatures,
formations, and elements of nature to describe menstrual ideas.
The
second category is cosmetic metaform, for which the Greek
word cosmetikos seems appropriate, with its dual meanings
of "a sense of harmony and order" and "one skilled
in adorning," from cosmos, meaning both "ornament"
and "the universe as a well-ordered whole." Expanding
on this, I use cosmetic metaform to mean the ordering
of the world through descriptive use of human body action, artful
movement, shape, ornament and decoration, and even ingestion
of meaningful foods.
Third
is narrative metaform, based in language, sound, number,
and story, which came about as people imagined themselves and
their originators to be characters in a life cycle and came
to use what archaeologist Alexander Marshack—studying
lunar marks on bone—calls "time-factored thought".
Fourth is material metaform, characteristic of our current,
mainstream capitalist civilization: the separation of spirit
from matter, and the exploitation of the earth's being to craft
marketed products into forms expressive of current external
ideas.