In yet another baffling move, the Trump administration has pulled federal funding from a menstruation study after conservative activists falsely claimed it was focused on “menstrual cycles in transgender men.” In reality, the research was intended to develop safer, sustainable menstrual products from natural fibers—an initiative that could have significantly improved both menstrual health and agricultural sustainability. But apparently, a single mention of transgender men in the grant’s description was enough to send the administration into a frenzy, leading to the project’s abrupt termination.
The Grant and Its Purpose
The $600,000 grant was awarded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) National Institute of Food and Agriculture to Southern University Agricultural and Mechanical College. The project, titled “Farm to Feminine Hygiene: Enhancing the Textiles Lab for Research, Extension and Scientific Instrumentation for Teaching at Southern University,” was slated to run through 2027. It sought to develop organic menstrual products using regenerative cotton, wool, and industrial hemp while simultaneously educating women and girls about menstrual health. Additionally, the research would have helped Louisiana farmers by providing a fiber processing plant to support the production of natural materials for sustainable hygiene products.
A Politically Motivated Cancellation
The controversy erupted when the far-right think tank American Principles Project “flagged” the study for the Department of Agriculture, claiming the grant “denies biological reality” because it acknowledged that transgender men and non-binary individuals also menstruate. USDA Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins, embracing the misinformation, celebrated the cancellation on Twitter, writing, “Keep sending us tips. THANK YOU, @approject! The insanity is ending and the restoration of America is underway.” The administration’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency team (DOGE) then amplified the claim, reposting the message both on X and on its official website.
The USDA later doubled down on the mischaracterization, stating that the grant “prioritized women identifying as men who might menstruate,” which, they claimed, did not align with the administration’s policies, which insist on a strict male-female binary. Of course, this was a blatant misrepresentation of the project’s goals. The study’s primary focus was on developing safe menstrual products, not examining menstrual cycles in transgender men. A single sentence in the grant proposal mentioning transgender people was all it took for conservatives to launch a targeted attack that ultimately resulted in defunding an initiative meant to improve menstrual health and sustainability.
Impact on Researchers and Beneficiaries
Dr. Samii Kennedy Benson, who oversaw the project, was blindsided by the decision, only learning about it when reporters reached out for comment. “Our local fiber processing facility would have benefited farmers who often grow fibers on a smaller scale, while also providing much-needed menstrual education,” Benson told the media. “This was about sustainability and health. The fact that it’s being framed as something else is deeply frustrating.”
Southern University, a historically Black land-grant university in Louisiana, issued a statement attempting to downplay the controversy, distancing itself from any language supportive of transgender individuals. “The term ‘transgender men’ was only used once to state that this project, through the development of safer and healthier feminine hygiene products, would benefit all biological women,” the university stated.
The cancellation of this grant is just the latest example of the Trump administration’s sweeping effort to erase references to transgender people from government policies, funding, and initiatives. Agencies have been ordered to remove any mentions of gender identity from federal documents, and phrases associated with diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) have become targets for elimination. The administration’s executive orders now officially recognize only two sexes, male and female, completely disregarding the existence of intersex and transgender individuals.
The Bottom Line
DOGE, the administration’s self-proclaimed government efficiency watchdog, has been promoting its so-called cost-cutting measures by targeting federal contracts and grants that include language about gender identity or diversity. However, the organization has already been caught inflating its savings claims, misrepresenting figures, and listing contracts multiple times to exaggerate its impact. A glaring example was an alleged $8 billion in savings that turned out to be just $8 million—a slight overstatement, to say the least.
Meanwhile, the real casualties of this political stunt are the people who would have actually benefited from the research. Women, girls, and menstruating individuals—many of whom face health risks from synthetic hygiene products—are now left without this critical study to explore safer alternatives. Louisiana farmers, too, are missing out on what could have been an economic boost from the fiber processing facility.
The Trump administration’s decision to pull funding from a project designed to make menstrual health products safer, just because it dared to acknowledge that transgender men also menstruate, is nothing short of ridiculous. It highlights the broader issue of how far conservatives will go to erase trans people from public discourse—even at the cost of scientific research and public health.
At the end of the day, this was never about science or fiscal responsibility. It was about politics. And unfortunately, when politics override facts, the people who suffer most are those who were meant to benefit from initiatives like this one.
