Endometriosis and Medical Misogyny. Author: Daisy Tilley

Endometriosis has existed in records since 1825 B.C.E. (Lindeman, 2023: 51), yet it still cannot be cured. Worse, there is still no understanding on what exactly causes it, even though it affects one in ten people who menstruate (Hallström, 2024: 1). An incredibly under-researched and misunderstood condition, it is shocking that recent research funding has been squandered on a paper studying the impact of endometriosis on male partners (Culley et al., 2017), or a 2013 study on whether women with endometriosis are more attractive (Vercellini et al.), though the authors finally retracted this paper in 2020. Thus, the priority is not the women suffering with this debilitating condition, but rather the ways in which endometriosis affects male idealisations of women and the ways women are perceived in a patriarchal society. This misogyny transpires into the medical sphere, with endometriosis sufferers being susceptible to medical gaslighting, misdiagnoses and mistreatment by medical professionals. This desperately needs to change.

Medical gaslighting is disproportionately faced by women, making it a form of medical misogyny. It is the ‘dismissing, downplaying, or attributing patients’ reported symptoms to psychological causes without proper investigation’ (Kaur Dhillon, 2025: 845), and this constant invalidation can lead to misdiagnosis. Studies have shown that ‘women who experience medical gaslighting are more likely to suffer from anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder’ (p. 845), resulting in their increasing disengagement from the medical system altogether. Endometriosis symptoms are often so harsh that women cannot partake in even the most mundane, everyday activities, but symptoms are still broadly dismissed as ‘bad periods’ (Jones, 2016: 559). This is due to the misogynistic, male-centric medical model dubbing endometriosis a ‘menstrual disorder’ rather than a debilitating chronic illness, resulting in the normalisation of ‘severe pain as an expected part of female reproductivity’ (p. 560) and subsequent perpetuation of the reduction of women’s pain.

Therefore, women are often completely unaware that they have endometriosis, but as Lindeman (2023) notes, many are aware that they do have it, ‘but haven’t persuaded the right people to give them a diagnosis’ (p. 9). Endometriosis sufferers endure a constant battle with medical professionals, having to pitch their symptoms to an institution that has little to no regard for their circumstances. Once diagnosed, endometriosis patients are often given hormonal treatments such as birth control, or are even told to just ‘have a baby’ to alleviate the symptoms. Therefore, medical professionals see endometriosis as a ‘reproductive, rather than a pain disorder’, and care more about a woman’s fertility than her pain (Seear, 2009: 378). The ludicrousness of suggesting that a woman must birth a child to reduce her pain is insultingly dismissive, and as Seear notes, does not consider how strenuous this would be for a chronically ill woman suffering with endometriosis (p. 377). This reduction of women’s bodies as mere vessels for reproduction is a prime example of medical misogyny.

Lindeman (2023) discusses Parsons’ sick role in relation to endometriosis. Simply put, the sick role is ‘how medical professionals—and larger society—expect sick people to behave’ (p. 35), and the ‘asymmetry of power’ seen within a doctor/patient relationship (p. 36). Lindeman notes that those with endometriosis do not fit into the sick role, because the fact that their endometriosis is not taken seriously ensures that they ‘remain high functioning despite [their] pain’ (p. 37). This ignorance of women’s pain reinforces the notion of medical misogyny, and is another aggravating factor for women disengaging with the healthcare system. Seear’s 2009 study discusses the ways in which women who have experienced medical gaslighting have tried to regain control through non-compliance with the medical system. She argues that non-compliance in itself ‘can be a form of resistance to medical power and the medical gaze and a form of expertise with its own inherent logic or rationale’ (p. 381). With endometriosis ignored and its study underfunded in the patriarchal medical model, who is to say that medical expertise is the best approach to follow? Women in Seear’s study remarked that, as a result of the ‘conflicting advice’ that they were given from doctors, they were uncertain ‘that doctors were actually “experts” about endometriosis’ (p. 380). Therefore, they would tend to comply with medical advice in part, but not always, instead aiming to ‘maintain a sense of some control over the structure of their day and their lives’ (p.376).

Non-white and non-cisgender endometriosis sufferers further experience abhorrent forms of medical gaslighting or medical misogyny – this cannot be ignored. Black women with endometriosis endure even deeper inequality resulting from a combination of medical misogyny and systemic racism. There is a myth that Black people ‘inherently possess traits to withstand severe pain’ (Mandeville et al., 2025: 965), and this only further perpetuates the downplaying of endometriosis and other health problems. It typically takes Black women two and a half years longer than white women to receive an endometriosis diagnosis, (Perro et al., 2023, para. 9), and they are also more likely to ‘experience more surgery-related complications’ (Mandeville et al., 2025: 965) as a result of this pain myth. Additionally, the experiences of gender diverse people with endometriosis have been omitted from most endometriosis research (Eder and Roomaney, 2025: 1611), and so the experiences of these people and the effects that endometriosis has on their gender identity must be acknowledged.

What needs to change to ensure that medical professionals take seriously a condition that affects so many? How can these people receive the care that they need? How can we dismantle this normalised medical misogyny experienced by so many for so long? We need an overhaul of the healthcare system at an institutional level. By providing ‘comprehensive bias training for healthcare providers’ (Kaur Dhillon, 2025: 845), we can aim to reduce medical misogyny and recognise women’s struggles. Likewise, ‘institutional accountability measures’ (p. 845) would ensure that medical professionals become increasingly aware that they do owe their endometriosis patients a genuine diagnosis, or liability for a misdiagnosis. We also need to change doctor/patient culture towards ensuring a ‘commitment to listen to women, validate their concerns without premature judgment, and engage them as active partners in their healthcare journeys’ (p. 850) – in other words, seeing women as more than their fertility. Finally, there must be extra care taken to rid the conscious and unconscious biases (p. 850) within the healthcare system to ensure that Black women and gender-diverse endometriosis patients receive the care they need, and there should be healthcare available to gender diverse endometriosis patients that affirms their gender as a trans or non-binary person experiencing endometriosis (Eder and Roomaney, 2025: 1621).

References

Culley, L., Law, C., Hudson, N., Mitchell, H., Denny, E. and Raine-Fenning, N. 2017. A qualitative study of the impact of endometriosis on male partners. Human Reproduction 32(8), pp. 1667-1673. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dex221

Eder, C. and Roomaney, R. 2025. Transgender and non-binary people’s experience of endometriosis. Journal of Health Psychology 30(7), pp. 1610-1623. doi: 10.1177/13591053241266249

Hallström, I. 2024. Endo Episteme: Epistemic Injustice and the Misrecognition of Endometriosis. Feminist Philosophy Quarterly 10(4), Article 2. Available at: https://ojs.lib.uwo.ca/index.php/fpq/article/view/16491/17305

Jones, C. E. 2016. The Pain of Endo Existence: Toward a Feminist Disability Studies

Reading of Endometriosis. Hypatia 31(3), pp. 554-571. doi: 10.1111/hypa.12248

Kaur Dhillon, J. 2025. Psychological Effect of Medical Gaslighting on Female Patients: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology 10(6), pp. 845-852. doi: 10.38124/ijisrt/25jun646

Lindeman, T. 2023. Bleed: Destroying Myths and Misogyny in Endometriosis Care.

Toronto: ECW Press. Available at: https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/cardiff/reader.action?c=UERG&docID=3040072 2&ppg=1 [Accessed: 25 October 2025].

Mandeville, J., Pollack, A. Z., Kornegay, L. and Gupta, J. 2025. Stigma and discrimination experienced by Black women with endometriosis in the Washington, DC, Metropolitan area: A pilot of the ENDO-served study. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 170(2), pp. 965-967. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.70042

Perro, D., Weckesser, A., and Griffith, V. 2023. Endometriosis: black women continue to receive poorer care for the condition. Available at:

https://theconversation.com/endometriosis–black–women–continue–to–receive–poorercare–for–the–condition–200663 [Accessed: 4 November 2025].

Seear, K. 2009. ‘Nobody really knows what it is or how to treat it’: Why women with endometriosis do not comply with healthcare advice. Health, Risk & Society 11(4), pp. 367-385. doi: 10.1080/13698570903013649

Vercellini et al. 2013. RETRACTED: Attractiveness of women with rectovaginal endometriosis: a case-control study. Fertility and Sterility 99(1), pp. 212-218. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.08.039