Menstrual Leave Dissent and Stigma Labelling: A Comparative Legal Discourse

The menstrual cycle is sensitive in some countries and is still a stigma and imperious practice. Most legal systems do not grant menstruation leave, which has been taken as little credence with narrow contours. There is a conundrum to the issue; for instance, one of the significant difficulties in attempting a contextual analysis of menstruation is the stigmatized terrain of the subject; the study elaborates on it brick by brick in the different segments to pave the connection between law and women and also it will outline the prospects and challenges of menstrual leave. The article is a “Magnum opus,” emphasizing the importance of perceiving both sides of an argument as convergence and divergence. The study establishes that most countries have not enacted“Menstrual Leave”-related laws. The current work is limited to working women in organized sectors. The present discourse is based on the following research questions: whether the menstrual leave is regressive or progressive. What difficulties do women face when they are menstruating? How is menstrual leave incorporated into a few legal systems? This study employs a doctrinal method with a comparative legal analysis, and it reviews some of the literature to collect the necessary data. This paper sheds light on and compares those countries which have granted menstrual leave policies.