Mohammed was the first Muslim refugee

[meauneau]

Based on what? The fact that Khadija was a wealthy and respected business woman?

Based on the fact that Islam denied woman any rights other than to receive her mehri when married, half the share of inheritance a man takes and the right to live. She can't even deny her husband sex. Women became here objects after Islam. They wrapped them up in sheets and kept them hidden away and segregated all the time. They could no longer do business with other men as was the case prior to Islam.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Based on the fact that Islam denied woman any rights other than to receive her mehri when married, half the share of inheritance a man takes and the right to live. She can't even deny her husband sex. Women became here objects after Islam. They wrapped them up in sheets and kept them hidden away and segregated all the time. They could no longer do business with other men as was the case prior to Islam.

You're basing this on speculation as pre-Islamic Arabia is not very well known to us. Its not true that women became objects. As you yourself point out they had rights to inheritance and dowry, which meant they had basic property rights. They also had to consent to marriage, though admittedly in the case of virgins silence was considered consent.

Its also not true that they couldn't do business with men. There's plenty of research in the last few decades that have combed the Ottoman court records and have found that women were active economic agents. They inherited, sold, and bought property(both commercial and residential) as well as founded and managed trust funds known as waqfs. The idea that because some Muslim women were segregated this meant they were completely disenfranchised is an Orientalist myth from early modern travel literature and its not even one that went uncontested in that period. Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, a British woman who traveled to Istanbul in the 18th century, famously said that Turkish women have far more freedom than their English counterparts because of their rights of inheritance and property rights and she would know far better than the men because as a woman she actually had access to the harem.

There are many legit criticisms of Islam, you don't have to pull out make believe or outdated ones out of your ass.

 

[meauneau]

You're basing this on speculation as pre-Islamic Arabia is not very well known to us. Its not true that women became objects. As you yourself point out they had rights to inheritance and dowry, which meant they had basic property rights. They also had to consent to marriage, though admittedly in the case of virgins silence was considered consent.

Its also not true that they couldn't do business with men. There's plenty of research in the last few decades that have combed the Ottoman court records and have found that women were active economic agents. They inherited, sold, and bought property(both commercial and residential) as well as founded and managed trust funds known as waqfs. The idea that because some Muslim women were segregated this meant they were completely disenfranchised is an Orientalist myth from early modern travel literature and its not even one that went uncontested in that period. Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, a British woman who traveled to Istanbul in the 18th century, famously said that Turkish women have far more freedom than their English counterparts because of their rights of inheritance and property rights and she would know far better than the men because as a woman she actually had access to the harem.

There are many legit criticisms of Islam, you don't have to pull out make believe or outdated ones out of your ass.

I stand corrected, it is not true that Muslim women have only 2 rights given to them by Mohammed (aka Allah), they actually have 3 rights: dowry, inheritance and marriage consent.

Women did become objects or at least continued to be objects. I am making the comparison from a modern perspective. Men could and still can, in priciple and in practice, buy and sell women in the slave market or through marriage as in zawaj al nikah, whether you admit it or not. In both cases, marriage or slavery, one can buy women for sex. Women cannot buy sex in this way, but they can sell themselves. How is this not the objectification of women?

Different epochs different ways. Islam formbids women to deal directly with men who aren't blood relatives. They cannot work with men (in offices and such) nor can they serve them or interact with them. Even in the video of the cafe in France we see the Muslim man telling the woman that she should leave becuase as he said "ici il ya que des hommes" there is but men here. Women aren't supposed to be around other men, and these were North African Muslims who are considered more liberal relative to other Islamic nations.

You cited the Ottoman empires as an example for how much freedom they gave women. Why not cite earlier or later Islamic empires as examples of how oppressed they were/are? They don't fit you biases thats why.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I stand corrected, it is not true that Muslim women have only 2 rights given to them by Mohammed (aka Allah), they actually have 3 rights: dowry, inheritance and marriage consent.

They also have property rights which is a big deal. Property rights are one of the most important and basic rights.

Women did become objects or at least continued to be objects. I am making the comparison from a modern perspective. Men could and still can, in priciple and in practice, buy and sell women in the slave market or through marriage as in zawaj al nikah, whether you admit it or not. In both cases, marriage or slavery, one can buy women for sex. Women cannot buy sex in this way, but they can sell themselves. How is this not the objectification of women?

They weren't legally objects, they have legal personhood which in many ways Western women lacked for over a thousands years after Islam came into being. The marriage laws are definitely skewed in favor of men but its also the case that women have some perks. Women are entitled to financial support from men and can sue for divorce if denied this under some of the schools of law as well as being entitled to 3 months alimony and child support for the duration of nursing in virtually all Sunni schools.

Women just as men could be bought in slave markets, that wasn't unique to women. Though you are right, I doubt a woman could purchase a slave for the purpose of sex. Female sexuality was constrained because of concerns about patrilineality.

Different epochs different ways. Islam formbids women to deal directly with men who aren't blood relatives. They cannot work with men (in offices and such) nor can they serve them or interact with them. Even in the video of the cafe in France we see the Muslim man telling the woman that she should leave becuase as he said "ici il ya que des hommes" there is but men here. Women aren't supposed to be around other men, and these were North African Muslims who are considered more liberal relative to other Islamic nations.

This is also not true, not to the extent you're presenting it. Its true that the system of gender segregation limited the movement of women, particularly upper class women, but women interacted with men in an official capacity. The Ottoman court records reveal that many women represented themselves in court and when they didn't it was usually the case of an upper class women acting through an agent. They frequently used the court system to guarantee their rights and the courts would uphold their rights.

You cited the Ottoman empires as an example for how much freedom they gave women. Why not cite earlier or later Islamic empires as examples of how oppressed they were/are? They don't fit you biases thats why.

I'm not a hack like you, the reason is I've just read more about the Ottoman Empire than any other Muslim empire. I'd also bet there is a lot more material in the form of court records that survive from the Ottoman period than from the older Islamic empires like the Abbasid or even Mamluk periods. And so as a result we have a better understanding about the everyday lives of Ottoman women in a way we probably don't for Abbasid women.

 

[Bald1]

Well, you did call him Kafir "kunt".

Just because this thread got linked in a different discussion.

Kafir has called me a cheeky cunt before. I was mortified and devastated. Still hurts just thinking about it.