Frankly, I think there's a lot of nonsense being spread about the "differences" between sexes.
It's a fact that women must go through a monthly "cycle" (and I still think that certain sanitary products should be zero VAT since they aren't "luxuries") and that, apart from hormone treatment, they go through a major change, known as menopause, in later years.
Every time the news announces yet another celebrity wedding between an "old geezer" and a younger woman, we are expected to admire him. This is a sign of virility. No. This is a sign of his celebrity or wealth. Big deal! He's got enough "lead in the pencil" to be able to have sex and create a child. It doesn't make him any younger!
This "male monthly cycle" story is probably a UL, put about by a group who feel that since the seventies and eighties, the male has lost ground in the "sex war". Women have always had a hard time and now they are reaching equal status. So pro-male groups may be wanting to pull the "you think you've got a problem" card to even the score. Pathetic. Prove it medically and I might be interested (such as a male menopause - theoretically possible but anecdotally lame) but from a liberated, fair-minded male perspective, I don't think I go on a "monthly cycle". Now sod off! I've got chocolate to eat, Brief Livesto watch and I want a damn good cry!