women in islam
The Qur’an is explicit in defining a woman’s role in society as that of a wife and mother and codified a woman’s right to initiate divorce and receive inheritance. But just how progressive was Islam in the rights it afforded women?
Yes and no. Islam improved women’s rights in some areas, but also imposed serious restrictions in others. Many Muslims regard the rights to divorce and own property as remarkably progressive in the context of 7th-century Arabia. But these examples are cherry-picked and misleading, and also fail to capture that women’s rights in Islamic doctrine, as a whole, are essentially nonexistent.
Before the rise of Islam, there was no universal legal framework for women’s rights in Arabia. Status varied by tribe, religion, and region. Following the Islamic conquest, women’s roles and rights became more uniformly defined and restricted. Women were placed under male guardianship, subjected to polygyny (the practice of one man having multiple concurrent wives), and bound by laws that limited their autonomy and agency.
Qur’an 4:11 assigns male heirs a larger share of inheritance than females, while Qur’an 2:282 declares that a woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man’s. Perhaps the most disturbing and controversial example of women’s subjugation in Islam is Qur’an 4:34, which explicitly instructs men to discipline their wives through physical beating. This verse also clearly states that men are “in charge of” women and are thereby permitted to use beating as a response to disobedience. Modern scholars have attempted to reinterpret this verse, often suggesting euphemisms like “lightly beat” or “reprimand.” These qualifiers are absent from the original Arabic and do little to change the core issue: Allah explicitly grants men the authority to discipline their wives through physical violence for their disobedience.
Modern theologians likewise attempt to justify the idea that a woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man’s with a contrived argument about literacy: because women in 7th-century Arabia were less likely to be educated or literate, a second woman’s testimony was needed to “supplement” or support the first. There are two problems with this. First, most men at the time would also be considered uneducated or illiterate by today’s standards. Second, this is Allah’s timeless revelation dictated to His Prophet: why would it simply reflect the gender norms of 7th-century Arabia if Islam actually respected the intellectual potential of women?
Muslim scholars also commonly argue that unequal inheritance is justified because Islam obliges men to provide for women. Yet this perpetuates economic dependency and stands against the modern reality of women who earn and make equal financial contributions to the household.
Muslim scholars argue that Islam abolished practices harmful to women, such as female infanticide, though there is no conclusive evidence that the burial of newborn girls was widely practiced in pre-Islamic Arabia; this belief actually originates from the Qur’an itself (16:57-59, 81:8-9). On the other hand, female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) was commonly practiced in pre-Islamic Arabia, as well as parts of Asia and Africa, to suppress women’s sexual desire. It continues in many Muslim communities today and the Qur’an remains notably silent on the issue. In fact, all major schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence either permit or promote the practice, despite its well-documented harm to women and girls.
Most importantly, Muslim women are legally and socially defined by their relationships to men as wives, sisters, daughters. The rights they possess stem from those relationships, while the restrictions they face on their movement and autonomy have no male counterpart.
Not quite. While Islam is said to have granted women the right to divorce, this “right” is heavily restricted. A woman seeking divorce through khula must undergo a burdensome legal process and often forfeit her dowry, whereas a man can divorce his wife unilaterally for any reason. In practice, one is a privilege, the other a right.
The Qur’an describes women as “a tilth for [men],” available to their husbands at will (2:223). There is no reciprocal right for women to refuse sex. Muslim men are permitted to marry Christian and Jewish women, but Muslim women may only marry Muslim men.
Qur’an 4:3 permits polygyny, allowing men to marry up to four wives, provided they believe they can treat all the wives fairly. Some modern scholars argue that men must obtain permission from their current wives, but the Qur’anic text includes no such requirement. This interpretation appears to be a modern attempt to soften the impact of polygyny by suggesting that a husband's right to marry again depends on his wives' approval. It appears to be a modern-day effort to offer women some sense of control in a system where they otherwise have little say.
No. The idea that hijab is inherently feminist is, in fact, a modern reinvention that emerged in the late-20th-century revival of political Islam. The “hijab” or head covering was recast as both an act of devotion and love for Allah and as a symbol of feminist empowerment and resistance. Yet the Qur’anic verses that deal with women’s dress are clear in their purpose: Islamic modesty is meant to shield men from sexual temptation, not to affirm female agency.
Verse 33:59 instructs the Prophet to tell believing women to draw their jilbāb “so they may be recognized and not harassed”. Verse 24:31 orders women to extend their khimār over the chest and urges men simply to “lower their gaze.” This verse and 33:55 also specify that a woman may not uncover in the presence of men outside her immediate family and household. Women are squarely responsible for regulating male desire: men’s self-control is assumed unreliable, so women must preemptively cover to prevent inciting their lust.
Still, because the Qur’an fails to offer clear details on or prescribed punishments around modesty, hijab enforcement varies widely by region and culture. This ambiguity gives religious authorities broad discretion, making the system vulnerable to abuse and overreach.
If Islam were truly feminist, it would instead focus on men’s responsibility to manage their own impulses and treat women as moral equals, rather than controlling women’s dress to prevent hypothetical male misbehavior. Rebranding that burden as empowerment does not erase its inherent misogyny.
Menstruation is a natural biological process essential to fertility and reproduction. Yet Qur’an 2:222 and related hadiths treat it as a state of impurity or even illness. The Qur’an describes menstruation as “harm” and instructs men to avoid sexual contact with their wives during this time. Women who are menstruating are prohibited from praying, fasting, touching the Qur’an, or performing religious duties such as Hajj. These restrictions are based entirely on the notion of impurity.
In recent years, some Muslim feminists have reinterpreted these rules as acts of mercy, arguing that menstruating women are “exempt” from religious obligations out of divine compassion. But this is a modern reimagining. The original texts do not frame these prohibitions as merciful allowances; they clearly define menstruation as a state of ritual uncleanliness that disqualifies women from full participation in Islamic life. Rather than dignifying a natural biological process, these rules reinforce the idea that menstruating women are spiritually deficient.