Historically, there has been a greater focus on male pleasure in many societies worldwide. However, modern views of sexuality emphasize the importance of female pleasure. This shift represents a move away from the male gaze, where women were seen as mere objects for heterosexual men's pleasure, toward the female gaze, where women have agency and the right to experience real pleasure without feeling the need to fake it to satisfy men.

Thanks Maria for commenting! How would you describe this female pleasure? It is erotic in nature or emotional? Men are motivated to initiate and drive sexual activity due to their acute arousal with a lover. Women are not so motivated because they are not erotically aroused with a lover. This is because women always assume the receiver role with a man. Being the receiver involves giving pleasure to the penetrating male. Political movements by women who don't understand these biological facts are a waste of time. A women offers regular intercourse to a man who supports her goals of affectionate companionship and support for family. There is no such thing as a right to enjoy sexual pleasure. Women enjoy emotional pleasure with a loving man who offers a committed relationship.

Your response seems to come from a very heteronormative, male-centered perspective on sexuality. First, it’s important to recognize that sex is not synonymous with penetration. Women are not merely "receivers" of pleasure; they have their own sexual autonomy and the right to experience sexual pleasure, which has historically been denied to them. We see harmful practices like Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), which is still prevalent in parts of the world, that directly aim to suppress female pleasure. Another harmful practice that has been normalized in Western societies is sexual coertion, particularly within relationships. Women are often made to feel that they have an "obligation" to engage in sexual activity with their partners, even when they don’t want to, due to societal expectations or perceived marital duties. This notion that women must prioritize their partner’s sexual needs over their own undermines their autonomy and diminishes the importance of consent. Even though it may not be as overtly visible as practices like FGM, it perpetuates a culture where women’s sexual agency is not respected.

Women, just like men, can and do experience sexual pleasure, and this right is central to sexual equality. The generalization that women are not erotically motivated is a dangerous oversimplification and reinforces harmful stereotypes. My research focuses on violence against women and girls, and perpetuating this type of restrictive view of female sexuality can contribute to broader societal violence, control, and suppression of women’s autonomy. Female pleasure can be both emotional and erotic, and women, like men, deserve a sexual experience that is fulfilling on all levels. Denying this is not only inaccurate, but also harmful. Please, let’s be mindful of not spreading harmful gender stereotypes.

There would be no point in having two sexes if we were the same. Male sexual function involves impregnating females, which depends on sexual responsiveness to trigger ejaculation of spermatozoa. Female sexual function depends on conceiving and bearing children. Saying that women have the right to orgasm with a lover (or at any time) is just as ridiculous as saying that men have the right to bear children. We only evolve functionality that is critical to our survival or to reproduction. Evolution does not provide sexual function purely for our pleasure.

The prime purpose of sex is reproduction. Sexual pleasure is merely a by-product that motivates men to engage in mating behaviour. If women could orgasm from intercourse, or any other activity with a lover, the focus on male orgasm would be reduced and reproduction would suffer. Women are not intended to be aroused with a lover because their orgasm has nothing to do with increasing human reproductive success. Women’s sexual function is to assist with male arousal and male orgasm, which triggers the ejaculation of spermatozoa into the vagina. Women are only capable of orgasm because they have a phallus, an evolutionary anomaly. This explains why female orgasm was a mystery for so long and why female masturbation is rare.

I suggest that you focus on your field of research and leave me to focus on mine. You are preaching political rights and sexual ignorance not science. Women can be equal with men without needing to be the same as men.

Jane Elizabeth Thomas Your argument seems deeply rooted in outdated and reductionist views of biology and human sexuality, so let me clarify a few points for you.

First, the idea that "the prime purpose of sex is reproduction" might make sense if we were living in a time where the only priority was to propagate the species. But we're not. Sexual pleasure is not just a "by-product" of evolution. Numerous species, including humans, engage in sex for reasons beyond reproduction—social bonding, emotional connection, and, yes, pleasure. Your claim that female orgasm would somehow detract from reproduction is not only biologically unfounded but also ignores the actual diversity of human sexual behavior.

Second, saying that "women are not intended to be aroused with a lover" is, quite frankly, absurd. Female sexual pleasure plays an important role in overall sexual health and relationships. Suggesting that women’s bodies exist solely for the arousal of men reflects an archaic and misogynistic understanding of human sexuality. If your goal is to reduce women’s experiences to a function that revolves solely around male pleasure, you might want to reconsider what century your argument belongs to.

Your assertion that the female orgasm exists only because of a "phallus" and is an "evolutionary anomaly" is another glaring error. The clitoris, an organ specifically evolved for female pleasure, is not an anomaly but a fascinating and integral part of human sexual anatomy. Since you consider yourself a scientist, perhaps it would be beneficial for you to study the anatomy of the clitoris—clearly that information is missing from your statements.

Lastly, the claim that female masturbation is rare shows a clear disconnect from the research on sexual behavior. The studies on this topic contradict your statement and demonstrate that self-pleasure is common among women. Your insistence otherwise appears to come from assumptions, not evidence.

I suggest you engage more with current research in evolutionary biology, sexual health, and psychology before dismissing arguments as "political" or based in "ignorance." Science has moved on from rigid and simplistic views about gender and sexuality. Perhaps it’s time for you to catch up.

Maria, I asked whether you are talking about erotic or emotional pleasure. You didn't answer. If you claim that women achieve orgasm with a lover, you need to explain the erotic turn-ons that cause their arousal. Emotional rewards from a relationship do not cause orgasm - as any man will tell you.

Female genital mutilation is carried out by women. It is just one of the many behaviours that women worldwide use to enhance their attractiveness to men so that they can obtain the rewards that men offer - e.g. marriage. No man would condone behaviour that prevented a woman having an orgasm with him. The clitoris does not respond with a lover, as you would know if you had ever masturbated to orgasm. This is due to lack of turn-ons.

What research findings have you read? If you have done research, you should publish a paper. Rosemary Basson was the last person to give her conclusions. No one can accept her conclusions, just as they have ignored Kinsey and Hite. Erotic fiction makes sex education an impossible task:

… women’s sexual response more commonly stems from intimacy needs rather than a need for physical sexual arousal … (Basson, 2000)

compared to men whose responses are influenced more by testosterone, women have a lower biological urge to be sexual for release of sexual tension (Basson, 2000)

women’s motivation (or willingness) to have a sexual experience stems from a number of ‘rewards’ or ‘gains’ that are not strictly sexual, these rewards being additional to, and often of far more relevance than, the women’s biological neediness or urge. (Basson, 2000)

major components of women’s sexual satisfaction: trust, intimacy, the ability to be vulnerable, respect, communication, affection, and pleasure from sensual touching (Basson, 2000)

The rewards of emotional closeness—the increased commitment, bonding, and tolerance of imperfections in the relationship—together with an appreciation of the subsequent well-being of the partner all serve as the motivational factors that will activate the cycle next time. (Basson, 2000)

Orgasmic release is extremely variable and is not essential for sexual satisfaction for women. (Basson, 2000)

Your statement about female genital mutilation (FGM) is not only grossly uninformed but recklessly dangerous, reducing a horrifying form of gendered violence to a twisted notion of “female choice.” Claiming that FGM is a “behavior” women adopt to “enhance their attractiveness to men” isn’t just wrong; it’s an outrageous distortion of reality. FGM is a brutal, coercive act imposed on women and girls under patriarchal regimes specifically to control and suppress female sexuality. Suggesting that women willingly undergo such traumatic and violent procedures to gain male approval shifts blame onto the very victims of this atrocity, exonerating the oppressive systems that enforce it. This is a grotesque misrepresentation that ignores the real, lifelong scars and traumas inflicted by FGM, deflecting the systemic abuse by reducing it to a perverse, victim-blaming narrative.

Beyond this, your entire response drips with condescension, embodying Pierre Bourdieu’s symbolic dominance, where white heterosexual male-centered views are assumed to hold all the truth and authority. The claim “as any man will tell you” reeks of arrogance, suggesting that men alone understand female sexuality, while women’s own insights are secondary and trivial. This attitude, steeped in what scholar Laura Mulvey calls the male gaze, reduces women’s sexual agency to male-defined “rewards” and “turn-ons,” stripping women of authentic pleasure and autonomy. By doing so, you’re upholding the dangerous logic of rape culture, where women’s pleasure is only valid if it serves men’s needs, erasing women’s individuality and right to experience sexuality on their own terms.

Your selective use of Rosemary Basson’s research further reflects a deeply biased attempt to fit credible science into a distorted view, implying that women’s sexuality is biologically passive and secondary to male validation. This cherry-picking of academic sources, coupled with questioning my knowledge, is a textbook example of gatekeeping designed to silence women, reducing their voices in matters of their own bodies to mere footnotes to male perspectives.

Instead of using your voice to amplify understanding or empathy, your words perpetuate the very structures that keep women’s bodies and voices under male control. This response doesn’t just mislead—it actively does harm, validating regressive ideas that belong in the past, not in any respectful, informed discussion about women’s lives and bodies. No, women will not be silenced.

With viewpoints like yours, it's painfully obvious that women's rights are still a concept that's clearly lost on some, which is precisely why we need a feminist perspective in science.

Sexuality is about how the sexes have evolved. It has nothing to do with anyone's political rights. Rosemary Basson is one of the few women willing to publish conclusions about female sexuality. Why don't you publish some papers on sexual response? Why don't you specify the turn-ons, the anatomy and the stimulation technique involved in achieving female orgasm? If you are just going to rant and not engage in constructive discussion, please go elsewhere. Who performs FMG then? Please provide evidence that it is carried out by men.

I use my voice to amplify women's perspectives, and you don’t have the authority to silence me. If you find that uncomfortable, perhaps it’s best for you to mind your own business. As a scholar, I draw connections between the erasure of women's sexual pleasure and the violence against women and girls worldwide. My work focuses on prevention—addressing the root causes of violence before it leads to the tragic loss of lives. It’s evident you don’t grasp this connection, but your views are dangerous and perpetuate that very violence.

If you genuinely want to engage in this conversation, I encourage you to move beyond mere rhetoric. Discuss the turn-ons, anatomy, and techniques involved in achieving female orgasm rather than just ranting. This isn’t just an academic exercise; it’s a pressing issue. And please refrain from framing FGM in any positive light; that practice is deeply harmful and should never be justified.

This forum is a scientific not a political one. You have provided no facts and just repeat what you have already said. If you cannot explain how a woman achieves orgasm then you clearly have never had one. You should not talk about sexual response if you have never experienced it.

C’mon, Jane, I bet you can do better than that—women rooting for women, right? Insisting that personal experience is the gateway to scientific discussion? That’s impressive logic; by that standard, only Olympic athletes should discuss fitness, and only Nobel laureates should talk about science. You’re not here for facts or insight—you’re here to toss around cheap insults and call it intellectual debate. If this is your idea of "scientific discourse," then it's pretty clear who actually has no idea what they're talking about.

Thanks Luca! The fact is that men are motivated by their acute arousal. Conversely, women are not motivated to obtain or supply stimulation with a lover due to their lack of arousal. Women have emotional needs that must be supplied by a lover if he wants to obtain the satisfaction of his sexual needs. A woman cooperates with intercourse to please a lover who pleases her. Hence the need for romance, which most men forget as the relationship matures. This is why sex often dies in long-term relationships.

Luca Bianchi

Jane, framing relationships in terms of one partner 'supplying' while the other 'pleases' dismisses women's autonomy and reinforces outdated dynamics that keep true intimacy from flourishing. This mindset is precisely what holds relationships back; healthy connections rely on both partners' mutual respect, genuine consent, and shared responsibility—not a transactional view of romance or desire. It's time we recognize that intimacy thrives when we move beyond traditional stereotypes and value both partners' active roles equally.

"In the name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful."

"Allah is not shy of the truth." Sura 33: AL-AHZAB (THE CLANS)

Dear Jane Elizabeth Thomas and dear Prof. María Herrera , Islam places great importance on this issue and urges men to be moderate with their wives in all matters related to this important matter, so that there is order, moderation, and shared responsibility in building a successful family. Here are some examples from the Prophet's Sunnah:

Imam Abu Abdullah Ibn al-Qayyim, in his book "Zad al-Ma'ad fi Hadyi Khair al-'Ibad" (Provisioning for the Afterlife in the Guidance of the Best of Servants), mentioned the sayings of the Messenger of Allah, Muhammad (peace be upon him), regarding intercourse, and he found no religious objection, moral flaw, or social deficiency in mentioning it, as some people in our time might understand. Among his expressions:

"As for intercourse and marriage, the saying of the Messenger of Allah , Muhammad (peace be upon him), was the most complete saying, as intercourse preserves health, completes pleasure and joy of the soul, and achieves the purposes for which it was ordained.

Intercourse was originally ordained for three purposes, which are its primary objectives:

Firstly: preserving lineage and the continuation of the species until the number that Allah has decreed to bring forth into this world is complete.

Secondly: expelling the fluid that harms the entire body when it is retained and congested.

Thirdly: satisfying desire, attaining pleasure, and enjoying the blessing. This alone is the benefit that exists in Paradise.

He said: Among its benefits are lowering the gaze, restraining the soul, the ability to abstain from the forbidden, and achieving that for the woman. Thus, it benefits oneself in this world and the hereafter, and benefits the woman. That is why the Messenger of Allah Muhammad (peace be upon him) used to attend to it and love it, and he said: 'From your world, women and perfume were made beloved to me...'

In Imam Ahmad's book "Al-Zuhd" (Asceticism), there is a subtle addition to this hadith, which is: 'I am more patient with food and drink, but I am not patient with them,' meaning intercourse.

He urged his nation (peace be upon him) to marry, saying: 'Marry, for I will outnumber the nations with you...' And he said: 'O youth, whoever among you can afford marriage, let him marry, for it is more lowering of the gaze and more protective of the private parts...'

Then Imam Ibn al-Qayyim said:

'Among the things that should precede intercourse are playing with the woman, kissing her, and sucking her tongue. The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) used to play with his wives and kiss them. Abu Dawood narrated:

'That he (peace be upon him) used to kiss Aisha and suck her tongue,' and it is mentioned about Jabir bin Abdullah that he said: 'The Messenger of Allah Muhammad (peace be upon him) forbade intercourse before foreplay.'

All of this indicates that the jurists of Islam were not 'reactionary' or 'rigid' in addressing these issues, but rather, in our modern terms, 'progressive' and realistic.

In conclusion: Islam took care to regulate the sexual aspect between spouses and did not neglect it, to the extent that the Holy Quran mentioned it in more than one place."

Thanks Mahmmoud for commenting. Sexuality has nothing to do with religion. Alfred Kinsey found that those people who adhere to religious codes are often less sexually responsive than others, which makes it easier for them to be 'virtuous'. Both religions and governments promote intercourse as a marital duty in order to encourage population growth, which leads to economic growth and prosperity. Our children represent our future.

Mahmmoud Hussein A. Al Rahman Thank you for your contribution and for sharing perspectives rooted in Islamic teachings. It’s important that discussions around intimacy and relationships include diverse cultural and religious frameworks.

However, I would like to return to the original point raised, which is not about whether sexuality is acknowledged or addressed within religious traditions, but about how responsibility and agency are distributed in intimate relationships. The concern Jane and I both raised centers on moving beyond models where one gender is framed as the “provider” of satisfaction and the other as the “recipient” or manager of that experience. This dynamic has historically reinforced inequality and hindered true mutuality.

While it’s valuable to know that aspects such as foreplay and mutual enjoyment are recognized in Islamic texts, what we're critiquing is the broader social structure — across many cultures and belief systems — that too often places the emotional and physical labor of intimacy unevenly on one partner, typically women. True equity in relationships emerges not only from guidance or doctrine, but from how people engage with one another daily — with autonomy, communication, and mutual respect at the center. That is what allows intimacy to flourish, regardless of religious or secular background.

Best regards,

Dr. María Herrera

Dear Prof. Dr. María Herrera , thank you very much for your kind words and your even more beautiful way of conversing. You are right in saying this: "(Rather, it relates to how responsibility and agency are distributed in intimate relationships. The concern that Jane and I raised together focuses on moving beyond models where one gender is seen as the 'provider' of satisfaction and the other as the 'receiver' or manager of that experience. Historically, this dynamic has reinforced inequality and hindered genuine exchange.)" Yes, your analysis is very insightful and existed before Islam, but Islam established equality between husband and wife in everything. Therefore, the Holy Quran specifically pointed out this issue and addressed it with a beautiful description in verse 228 of Surah Al-Baqarah, where Allah Almighty says: ((And due to the wives is similar to what is due from them, according to what is acceptable.)) This means: women have rights and obligations upon their husbands similar to the rights and necessary duties they owe to their husbands. The husband should know that part of treating his wife kindly (including intercourse) is fulfilling her desire, and the Prophet, peace be upon him, commanded husbands to be truthful with their wives and not rush them until they have satisfied their needs. Anas, may Allah be pleased with him, narrated that the Prophet, peace be upon him, said: "When a man goes to his wife, let him be truthful with her. If he fulfills his need and she has not fulfilled hers, he should not rush her," narrated by Abdur Razzaq.

Mahmmoud Hussein A. Al Rahman Thank you for your thoughtful response and for emphasizing mutual care. Still, I must point out a crucial omission: women’s agency. Framing men as responsible for fulfilling women’s desires — however well-intended — keeps women in a passive role. As Executive Director, now in senior advisory capacity, of the Arab Institute for Women and scholar Dr. Lina AbiRafeh argues: "bodily autonomy and the right to decide for oneself are essential not only to empowerment, but to preventing violence against women". When women are not seen as full agents in their intimate lives, it reinforces the broader structures that enable control, coercion, and harm. Hence, equity in intimacy requires more than good intentions — it demands shared power, mutual authorship, and full agency.

Best regards,

Dr. María Herrera

Yes, dear Prof. Dr. María Herrera , I have reviewed almost all of Dr. Lina Abirafeh's programs as Executive Director, and I have also looked at other similar studies and programs. They are all beneficial and valuable. However, for Muslims, our constitution is the Holy Quran. The Holy Quran has given women their full rights without any deficiency.

If you want to address the issue of brutal transgression against women in a study, you should define the boundaries of the study to a specific society. That is, do not say: women in the world, but specify the type of society, for example: European, American, African, Arab, or Islamic society. Then the study will be clearer. The respected Dr. Lina has many valuable, beneficial, and wonderful studies in the field of gender equality, which represent her personal opinion. Not only her studies, but the studies of the entire world are defined by the saying of Allah Almighty: 'And due to the wives is similar to what is due from them, according to what is just' [Al-Baqarah: 228]. Indeed, the entire Holy Quran speaks about women's freedom and rights. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: 'When one of you has intercourse with his wife, let him be truthful with her. Then, when he has fulfilled his desire before she has fulfilled hers, let him not rush her until she fulfills her desire.' Narrated by Anas bin Malik, authenticated by Al-Albani, Source: Irwa' al-Ghalil, Page or Number: 7/72.

Very important note (Conclusion): In Islam, there is absolutely no violence against women, no coercion or harm to women whatsoever. Yes, there is a sharing of power between them, joint authorship, and full agency. All of this the Muslim woman possesses. The description of a woman in Islam is: daughter of a prophet, sister of a prophet, mother of a prophet, and wife of a prophet. However, she was not, is not, and will never be a prophet or messenger; this wisdom has been determined by Allah alone, and no one can transgress upon it.

You're always welcome, dear Jane Elizabeth Thomas . No, this opinion of Alfred Kinsey is not accurate and is far removed from the legislation and teachings of Islam. On the contrary, the Islamic religion encourages sexual relations and the enjoyment of intimacy with women within the framework of lawful Islamic marriage. That is why the legislation permitted men to marry up to four women, as Allah says in Surah An-Nisa, verse 3: ((Then marry those that please you of [other] women, two or three or four;)). Polygamy for men is not based on what was mentioned about nullifying social standing, suppressing their rights, or belittling their position in life. Rather, it is based on aspects of benefits, the prohibition of fornication, and the preservation of Islamic societies from fragmentation and loss.

Sorry Mahmmoud but religion does not equal science. Scientific understanding involves investigating the reality of the world around us and providing evidence for our assertions. I think you have misunderstood what Kinsey said. He is referring to the sexual proactiveness of the male and the corresponding passivity of the female. Both are required for reproductive purposes. Women allow men to take their pleasure and thereby impregnate women. But this has nothing to do with how women themselves achieve orgasm. Both sexes need to stimulate the phallus - penis or clitoris - to achieve orgasm. This is much more obvious to the male than to the female.

Sorry Jane Elizabeth Thomas , I didn't misunderstand anyone; rather, I responded according to your statement: "(Alfred Kinsey found that those people who adhere to religious codes are often less sexually responsive than others, which makes it easier for them to be 'virtuous')." With sincere regards and respect.

Dear Mahmmoud Hussein A. Al Rahman , thank you again for your response. However, I must express my deep concern regarding your insistence that “in Islam, there is absolutely no violence against women, no coercion or harm whatsoever.” Such an absolute statement not only erases the lived experiences of countless Muslim women, but also reflects a dangerous confusion between the ideal of a doctrine and the reality of how it is lived, interpreted, and enforced.

Your reference to scripture is noted, but as Dr. Lina AbiRafeh herself has supported, rights on paper—or in sacred texts—do not guarantee rights in practice. The very need for gender equality programs, research, and advocacy within Muslim societies suggests that women’s autonomy is not universally upheld, regardless of what the Quran proclaims in principle.

You also attempt to relativise gender-based violence by insisting that any study must be limited to a specific society. This is not only methodologically reductive, it also refuses to acknowledge the global structures of patriarchal control that transcend religious, cultural, and national boundaries. Feminist inquiry does not fragment women’s struggles by geography; it exposes the commonalities that allow systems of domination to replicate across contexts.

And while you affirm that women in Islam have “full agency,” you conclude by defining them only in relation to men — as wives, daughters, sisters, and mothers of prophets. That, respectfully, is the very structure of symbolic subordination. Agency does not mean reverence through association. It means the right to exist, speak, and act fully and independently, with no need to be legitimised through a male lineage.

If your faith gives you a framework for respect and care, that is admirable. But when faith is used to deny harm, silence critique, and universalise a singular interpretation as a totalising truth, it becomes part of the very structure that prevents women from being fully free.

I raise this not to debate theology, but to insist — once again — that gender equity demands more than doctrine. It requires critical awareness, accountability, and an honest reckoning with lived realities.

Dr. María Herrera

Yes, dear Prof. Dr. María Herrera , I thank you again from the bottom of my heart. You are a very refined, objective, ideal, and respectful person. All your words are logical, sophisticated, and beautiful, just like you. I never insist on what is wrong (Allah forbid), and I do not like to belittle anyone. My insistence is on the Holy Quran, which is the constitution of all Muslims and an eternal law for the entire world. All people should study it and carefully examine its meanings. The Holy Quran has legislated everything for humanity without limitation, and among these laws is the equality between men and women in everything, down to the most minute details. Allah Almighty created Adam (peace be upon him) first, and then created Eve from the part closest to his heart, second. Look, dear Prof. Dr. María Herrera : He created her (Eve) from the part closest to the heart, to be closest to his feelings and emotions. She was not created from his head to be above him, or from his feet to be crushed, rebuked, and dominated by him. Rather, Allah Almighty created her from the closest place to Adam's heart. This is the belief of Islam and Muslims: pure and sincere love for women. Yes, dear Professor, there are (some who call themselves Muslims) who live by oppressing women, and they are far from Islam; these are exceptions. The law of Islam is clear and explicit, and whoever deviates from this Islamic law is called disobedient, and if he continues in disobedience, he goes out of Islam. Your statement, dear Prof Dr. María Herrera : ((But when faith is used to deny harm, silence critique, and universalise a singular interpretation as a totalising truth, it becomes part of the very structure that prevents women from being fully free.)) I never deny harm (Allah forbid). Yes, there are some Muslim men who oppress women, but there is the law of Islamic Sharia sufficient to deter them, and these are a very small minority. As for the essence of Islam, it is with the complete freedom of women without any deficiency, according to established legitimate conditions that the Muslim woman cannot transgress or abandon. Also, dear Professor, Islam never silences criticism or rejects it at all. (Omar bin Al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, used to say: 'May Allah have mercy on a man who points out my faults to me'), Source: Imam Al-Ghazali, Ihya Ulum al-Din (The Revival of the Religious Sciences) by Al-Ghazali, Vol. 3, p. 64. (This is a simple example). So, there is never any hatred or silencing of criticism in Islam. Rather, Islam is built on criticism and the evaluation of oneself to support and perpetuate the truth, and the evidence in the Holy Quran is very abundant. Yes, dear Professor, you are right that gender equality requires critical awareness, accountability, and an honest reckoning with lived realities. Yes, you are right in all of this, and this is the crux of the discussion that the Holy Quran has defined, and we follow its teachings, Allah willing. Whoever deviates from this path is truly misguided and an exception, and Islam has despised and rejected him far away. The last will and testament of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, was: ((Treat women well, for they are captives in your hands. You have taken them as a trust from Allah , and you have made their private parts lawful by the word of Allah)). Narrated by Jabir bin Abdullah, narrated by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, Source: Tafsir al-Tabari, Page or Number: 3/2/392. The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, was the best of people with his wives and family, and he enjoined Muslims to treat their wives well. In this Hadith, there is a great exhortation to that, in which the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, says: 'Fear Allah concerning women,' meaning: fear Allah and fulfill the rights of women, the wives, by being just to them and observing their rights; 'for you have taken them by the trust of Allah,' meaning by His covenant, 'and you have made their private parts lawful by the word of Allah ,' meaning by the word of the marriage contract itself that arose from the words of offer and acceptance between the guardian and the husband. When he enjoined (good treatment of) them, he mentioned what is due from them, saying: 'And you have rights over them that they should not allow anyone you dislike to tread on your beds,' meaning you dislike their entering your houses; 'if they do that' without your consent, 'then strike them, but not severely,' meaning not with severity or difficulty; 'and they have upon you their provision and clothing,' meaning the maintenance of food, drink, housing, and clothing, 'with kindness,' meaning according to their sufficiency, without extravagance or stinginess, or considering your state of poverty and wealth. In the Hadith: a clarification of the family rights of the spouses, and that the matter is based on piety and dealing according to what the Sharia dictates to both parties. And in it: that the wife must seek her husband's permission to allow people to enter his house, especially those he does not want to enter. And in it: that the husband has the right to discipline his wife in a way that does not harm her; by striking and other means."

Dear Mahmmoud Hussein A. Al Rahman, thank you for your detailed response. I recognize the sincerity of your faith and your intention to defend it with dignity. However, I must be equally sincere in stating that no belief system—religious or secular—can claim to support gender equality while simultaneously legitimizing control, obedience, or physical correction of women, however “mild.”

When sacred texts are used to frame the subjugation of women as protection or love, the result is not moral order, but patriarchal discipline draped in reverence.

The language of rights over a woman’s body, the framing of her as a dependent, and the endorsement of her “discipline” are not acts of care—they are codified asymmetries of power.

I am not debating scripture. I am defending the ethical principle that no person should be governed, corrected, or owned by another—especially not under the banner of love.

Respectfully,

Dr. María Herrera

Thank you, noble human being, Prof. Dr. María Herrera ! Did you know that your sacred name shares the name of the most beautiful woman in the world (the Virgin Mary, peace be upon her)? She holds a great holy status among Muslims; a whole chapter (Surah) in the Holy Quran is dedicated to her, bearing her name (Maryam) – its sequence is 19, and it contains 98 verses, starting from page 305 to page 312 in the Holy Quran. Also, your family name carries great religious and cultural traditions, a descriptive title for your ancestors' profession, and it holds beautiful and significant historical and cultural meanings, especially among the Spanish people. I am certain that your deep roots are (Islamic), and even if not, your family is faithful and leans towards the blessed heavenly religions. That is why you have entered my heart completely, and I found it carrying a great faith in Allah alone. In the Holy Quran, in Surah Fatir, Allah Almighty says in verse 28: ((إِOnly those who have knowledge among His servants fear Allah.)) which means: 'It is only those who have knowledge among His servants that fear Allah.' Meaning, those who know that Allah is capable of all things are the ones who have reached divine truths through knowledge. So you, O noble and distinguished scholar Prof. Dr. María Herrera , you carry the name of the greatest woman in the world (the Virgin Mary), and your family name also carries great historical meanings ('Herrera' meaning 'blacksmith'), which was the profession of the Prophet David (peace be upon him). See Surah Saba, verse 10: ((And We certainly gave David from Us bounty. [We said], "O mountains, repeat [Our] praises with him, and the birds [as well]." And We made pliable for him iron.)) ['And We had certainly given David from Us bounty. [We said], 'O mountains, sing praises with him, and [O] birds,' and We made pliable for him iron']. Since you, dear honorable lady, hold a high degree and a distinguished position, you undoubtedly incline towards beautiful discussions like this one we are having. This inclination is not a coincidence or mere common talk, but rather a form of deep faith in Allah alone, because the natural, believing human soul is drawn to beautiful and beneficial things by the guidance of Allah alone, and away from other futile things that neither benefit nor harm. Dear Prof. Dr. María Herrera , you say that I cite sacred religious texts, and yes, this is absolutely correct, because they are fixed divine rules and laws that no human being can transgress, and we are obligated to implement them with utmost precision. You're right in this, my dear noble Doctor María Herrera . I will now move on to purely human texts containing the opinions of the greatest scholars in the world. I will avoid Arab and Muslim scholars and cite the opinions of European and Western geniuses, so that our issue is neutral without leaning towards personal emotional desires. We must note a very important matter, which is that these sayings and testimonies in Islam and its various legislations, such as polygamy and the equality between men and women and the like, are nothing but a confirmation of existing facts and established principles in our religion and civilization [They Said About Islam, Dr. Imad al-Din Khalil (pp. 11-12)]; because the law of Allah Almighty does not need anyone's testimony to indicate its validity, comprehensiveness, and eternity – this is definitive, and no one should doubt or exaggerate it. From another perspective, this citation is only to refute those prejudiced deniers, so that they may know what was written by the pens of their thinkers and fair-minded individuals, and we also present it to those imitators who are not convinced by an idea unless the winds of the West blow and carry it to them, and they do not believe in the validity of what they have unless the Westerners testify to it [The Muslim Woman Between Islamic Law and Western Fallacies (p. 37)]. The famous German philosopher Schopenhauer stated in his essay 'On Women': 'It is futile to argue about polygamy as long as it is widespread among us (i.e., in an illegitimate form) and lacks only law and order' [Islam the Spirit of Civilization, by Mustafa al-Ghalayini (p. 226)]. He also said: 'The marriage laws in Europe are fundamentally flawed by equating women with men. They have forced us to restrict ourselves to one wife, thus depriving us of half our rights and doubling our obligations. And since they have granted women rights equal to men, it was necessary to also grant them an intellect equal to theirs... There is no lack of women among nations that permit polygamy who find a husband to take care of their affairs, while among us, married women are a small number, and the unmarried... their number is countless; you see them without a provider: between a virgin from the upper classes who has grown old, wandering and regretful, and weak creatures from the lower classes who endure hardships, bear the burden of work, and perhaps are exploited, living miserably, stained with shame and disgrace' [Islam the Spirit of Civilization, by Mustafa al-Ghalayini (p. 224)]. The famous French historian Gustave Le Bon spoke in his book 'The Civilization of the Arabs' about the system of polygamy among Muslims – and he himself lived for many years in some Islamic countries – saying: 'The principle of the Eastern system of polygamy is a good system; it raises the moral level in the nations that adopt it, increases family cohesion, and grants women respect and happiness that are not seen in Europe' [Gustave Le Bon, The Civilization of the Arabs (p. 379)]. He also says: 'I do not know on what basis Europeans judge the decadence of that system – the system of polygamy – compared to the system of monogamy among Europeans, which is tainted with lies and hypocrisy? Whereas I see that there are reasons that compel me to prefer the system of polygamy over all others, and it is not surprising after that to see the Easterners who come to us and move between our cities suffer from our harsh judgment on the system of polygamy' [Muhammad the Messenger of Allah, by Muhammad Rida (p. 365)]. And he said in his book 'The Spirit of Politics': 'I do not want to explain here the reasons that made the Easterners adopt polygamy, nor to mention that the legitimate polygamy among the Easterners is better than the corrupt polygamy that leads to an increase in illegitimate children in Europe. The reader should consult the book 'The Civilization of the Arabs,' where he will find a sufficient explanation of these and other issues, and see that in the days of Arab rule, virtuous and learned women appeared, just as they appear among us in these times. And it has been proven in our time that the stagnation of the progress of Muslims did not arise from polygamy' [The Rights of Women in Islam, by Muhammad Rashid Rida (p. 66)]. The former French Orientalist Étienne Dinet, who converted to Islam and took the name Nasir al-Din Dinet, says in his book 'Muhammad the Messenger of Allah': 'Reality testifies that polygamy is widespread throughout the world and will remain so as long as the world exists, no matter how strict the laws are in prohibiting it. But the only question is whether it is better to legislate and define this principle, or to let it remain a kind of veiled hypocrisy, with nothing to stand before it and limit its excesses?' [Muhammad the Messenger of Allah, translated by Dr. Abdul Halim Mahmoud (p. 395)]. And he said in his book 'Special Rays on the Light of Islam': 'The theory of monogamy, which Christianity outwardly adopts, involves numerous evils that have appeared especially in three very dangerous and serious real consequences: (prostitution), (spinsters), and (illegitimate children). These social diseases with their moral evils were not known in the countries where Islamic law was fully implemented, but rather entered and spread in them after contact with Western civilization' [Special Rays on the Light of Islam (p. 32)]. The Egyptian magazine 'Liwaa al-Islam' stated: 'The Archbishop of Canterbury announced that there is no cure to prevent the moral decay and family breakdown that spread after World War II except by permitting polygamy, for it – in his words – is what prevents the English woman from psychological collapse and committing crime and shame, and restores to her dignity and honor, where she is not a bed for a man except by the word of Allah' [Woman in the Quranic Conception, by Susan Fahd al-Hawal (p. 222)]. The English philosopher Spencer, despite his opposition to the idea of polygamy, sees it as a necessity for a nation whose men are decimated in wars, saying in his book 'Principles of Sociology': 'If a nation experiences a situation where wars sweep away its men, and each of the remaining men has only one wife, and many women remain without husbands, a decrease in the number of births will inevitably result, and their number will not equal the number of deaths. If two nations fight, assuming they are equal in all means of subsistence, and one of them does not benefit from all its women in procreation, it cannot resist its opponent, whose men procreate with all their women, and the result will be that the monogamous nation will perish before the polygamous nation' [Encyclopedia of the Twentieth Century (4/692-693)]. Dr. Braham says with all boldness and frankness: 'Christianity has not been able to solve the problem of polygamy (concubines and spinsters) in the past, and if it fails to do so in this era as well, the loss is its own. As for Islam, it looked at some social ills and, as a result, permitted polygamy as a social solution to human nature within firm limits and legitimate controls, but Western countries show great verbal enthusiasm for the subject of monogamy. However, in practice, they use polygamy... for no one is ignorant of the issue of concubines and the large role they play in Western society... From this perspective, Islam is considered a noble doctrine that allows a Muslim to marry a second wife openly and forbids him from taking any secret mistress, and that is for the sake of keeping human society morally pure' [What Fair-Minded Westerners Said About Islam and Muslims (pp. 47-48)]. The 'London Truth' newspaper mentioned an article by an English writer, in which it stated: 'The straying of our daughters has increased, calamity has spread, and those who seek the reasons for this are few. If I were a woman, I would look at those girls with a heart breaking with pity and sorrow for them, and what good would my grief and sorrow do them, even if all people shared it with me?! There is no benefit except in acting to prevent this vile situation, which is (that it be permissible for a man to marry more than one wife), and by this means, the calamity will inevitably disappear, and our daughters will become housewives. The entire calamity lies in forcing the European man to suffice with one woman... What suspicion and conjecture surrounds the number of married men who have illegitimate children, who have become a burden, shame, and liability on society? If polygamy were permissible, those children and their mothers would not have suffered the humiliation they are in, and their honor and the honor of their children would have been preserved... Permitting polygamy makes every woman a housewife and a mother of legitimate children' [Majallat al-Manar, by Muhammad Rashid Rida (4/485-486), The Rights of Women in Islam, by Muhammad Rashid (pp. 60-61)]. After all this, I apologize to you, Prof. Dr. María Herrera , and to dear Jane Elizabeth Thomas for this lengthy response. May Allah grant you success in what He loves and approves of. A greeting of love, honor, and appreciation from Baghdad to our people in Spain in particular and the world in general. May Allah protect you from all evil, be pleased with you, grant you a long life, and bestow upon you the treasures of this world and the hereafter."

Dear Mahmmoud Hussein A. Al Rahman, thank you for your detailed message. I see you have taken a deep interest in my name and its symbolism — you refer to it repeatedly, even spiritually. I appreciate the poetry in that. However, in the same way I honor the meaning behind my name, I’m also curious about yours: what would it mean if your name were celebrated in the same way, but through the voices and perspectives of women?

Your message spans a remarkable number of pages, texts, and citations — and yet, not a single woman appears among your sources. Except for me. My name is the only female name present, which speaks volumes. If the topic at hand concerns gender, relationships, and human dignity, I would encourage you to balance your reading list. The exclusive reliance on male scholars, philosophers, and religious authorities — even when Western — reflects a persistent blind spot: the invisibilization of women’s thought, authority, and intellectual production.

I would kindly invite you to read thinkers like Fatema Mernissi, Amina Wadud, Leila Ahmed, bell hooks, Audre Lorde, Silvia Federici, Judith Butler, Angela Davis, or Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, among others. Their works may offer you a broader and more nuanced understanding of gender, sexuality, and power — one that isn’t mediated solely through a male gaze. Hence, the female gaze is fundamental.

You speak of polygamy as a system of moral salvation. I would remind you that in many parts of the world today, women also have multiple partners, just as men do. The only difference is the term: we call it polyamory in Western contexts. Some people are monogamous, others are polyamorous, others are asexual — and all these identities deserve recognition and respect. To universalize one structure as divine truth is to erase the multiplicity of human experience.

I don’t write this to argue — I write to reclaim space for women in a conversation where we are too often spoken about, legislated, or symbolized, but rarely cited or truly heard. You spoke at length, but without us, women. That’s something I hope you will reflect on.

Respectfully,

Dr. María Herrera

Thank you very much, Prof. Dr. María Herrera , for your kind reply.

Meaning of the name Mahmmoud :

The name Mahmmoud is mentioned in the Holy Quran in Surah Al-Isra, verse 79: "And from [part of] the night, pray with it as additional [worship] for you; it is expected that your Lord will resurrect you to a praised station."

Mahmmoud is a masculine given name of Arabic origin. In Arabic, it means someone who is frequently praised and commended by people. "Mahmoud" is the opposite of "censured" or "disliked." This name is classified in terms of the parts of speech as a passive participle from "al-hamd," which means praise and gratitude. This name carries all the meanings of Muhammad; it is originally one of the names of the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him. The name Mahmmoud carries the meanings of praiseworthy qualities, or one who is praised by people, or one who is thanked and approved of by his parents and all people. This name carries nothing but the attribute of praise.

This name is considered one of the names of the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), which makes it an apparent name; it carries only meanings of praise, gratitude, and satisfaction. Therefore, it is a beloved and permissible name. And ِ Allah knows best.

Personality Traits of the Name Mahmoud:

The bearer of the name Mahmmoud is characterized by many beautiful qualities, especially since the name Mahmmoud is one of the names whose meanings are reflected in its bearer. These traits include: Self-confidence, the ability to challenge oneself, and the ability to be determined and achieve one's goals by any means. This is a personality that does not know how to give up. He is characterized by great loyalty to those he loves. He has a romantic personality that loves tranquility and nature, and he tends toward honest, pure relationships that do not involve any deception or fraud. People love him, and he has a balanced personality characterized by honesty, loyalty, and a rejection of betrayal. He does not like to break anyone's heart or let down his friends. He is characterized by extreme generosity, a love of doing good, and compassion for others. He has a calm personality that is not prone to violence, but he becomes irritable if someone provokes him or tries to ignore him. He likes to always be in the forefront, which is why he is very ambitious.

As for women: Women are subject to factors that prevent them from performing many duties and tasks, such as menstruation, pregnancy, childbirth, and postpartum bleeding. These are accompanied by psychological disturbances, aches and pains, in addition to the care required for the newborn. All of this prevents them from fulfilling many burdens and duties. No one can deny the role of women in human history. They have been and continue to be mothers, wives, sisters, and daughters. I mentioned their role and status previously, and they are an integral part of men. Their great role cannot be ignored. I have read about great women from the dawn of history to the present day. However, the constant principle is that God Almighty has assigned women a significant role in assisting and supporting men. You can refer to them in previous responses. I wish you all the best, dear Professor Dr. María Herrera .

Dear Mahmmoud Hussein A. Al Rahman , thank you for your message and for sharing the etymology and meaning of your name—it’s fascinating to see how meaning and identity can be carried in language across time, tradition, and scripture. I can see you value names deeply, as I do.

Regarding the final part of your message, I appreciate your acknowledgement of the many historical contributions of women. However, I respectfully maintain that honoring women cannot be separated from fully recognizing their autonomy—physical, intellectual, and social. Any system that sees women primarily through their biological roles or as assistants to men inevitably limits their freedom, regardless of the reverence with which those roles are described.

It is my belief—and experience—that women do not exist to support men’s journeys, but to lead their own. And when we all walk side by side, rather than one behind the other, that is when true justice begins to emerge.

Warm regards from Spain,

Dr. María Herrera Cárdenas

"Dear Prof. Dr. María Herrera , I thank you so much for every word and letter you have written to me. It is a great pleasure to encounter such a pure soul and a great spirit as yours. Yes, it is very true that a woman should have an independent life without any (absolute) partnership from a man. This exists in our Islamic religion. The Holy Quran provides us with many examples of a woman's independence from a man: whether he is a father, husband, brother, or son.

The Holy Quran presents two examples regarding disbelief and faith, and both examples are of women, to dispel the suspicion of a woman's dependence on a man in such a serious matter, and in other matters that are less serious and important.

The first example of disbelief: it was the fate of two women who were wives of two noble prophets of Allah , namely Noah and Lot (peace be upon them). Despite this, the two women chose, of their own free will, disbelief over faith, and became examples of that. One of them, the wife of Prophet Lot, was an aid to her people against her husband. Allah Almighty said: «ضَرَبَ ٱللَّهُ مَثَلًا لِّلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا۟ ٱمْرَأَتَ نُوحٍ وَٱمْرَأَتَ لُوطٍ ۖ كَانَتَا تَحْتَ عَبْدَيْنِ مِنْ عِبَادِنَا صَٰلِحَيْنِ فَخَانَتَاهُمَا فَلَمْ يُغْنِيَا عَنْهُمَا مِنَ ٱللَّهِ شَيْـًٔا وَقِيلَ ٱدْخُلَا ٱلنَّارَ مَعَ ٱلدَّٰخِلِينَ» (Surah At-Tahrim, Verse 10) [Allah has presented an example for those who disbelieved: the wife of Noah and the wife of Lot. They were under two of Our righteous servants but betrayed them, so those prophets did not avail them from Allah at all, and it was said, 'Enter the Fire with those who enter'].

In contrast to these two ungrateful wives, Allah Almighty set an example of faith with two other women: the wife of Pharaoh and Mary, the daughter of Imran. Allah Almighty said: «وَضَرَبَ ٱللَّهُ مَثَلًا لِّلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ ٱمْرَأَتَ فِرْعَوْنَ إِذْ قَالَتْ رَبِّ ٱبْنِ لِى عِندَكَ بَيْتًا فِى ٱلْجَنَّةِ وَنَجِّنِى مِن فِرْعَوْنَ وَعَمَلِهِۦ وَنَجِّنِى مِنَ ٱلْقَوْمِ ٱلظَّٰلِمِينَ ‎(١١) وَمَرْيَمَ ٱبْنَتَ عِمْرَٰنَ ٱلَّتِىٓ أَحْصَنَتْ فَرْجَهَا فَنَفَخْنَا فِيهِ مِن رُّوحِنَا وَصَدَّقَتْ بِكَلِمَٰتِ رَبِّهَا وَكُتُبِهِۦ وَكَانَتْ مِنَ ٱلْقَٰنِتِينَ ‎(١٢)» (Surah At-Tahrim, Verses 11-12) [And Allah has presented an example for those who believed: the wife of Pharaoh, when she said, 'My Lord, build for me near You a house in Paradise and save me from Pharaoh and his deeds and save me from the wrongdoing people.' And [the example of] Mary, the daughter of Imran, who guarded her chastity, so We breathed into her [through Our angel] of Our spirit, and she testified to the words of her Lord and His scriptures and was of the devoutly obedient].

Among the examples of kingship, authority, and soundness of mind is what Allah Almighty mentioned about Queen Bilqis the Queen of Sheba, to whom Prophet Solomon (peace be upon him) sent a letter inviting her to Islam. Her only response was to gather the chiefs of her people and consult them on the matter. Her interaction with Prophet Solomon (peace be upon him) is narrated by the Quran in the following words: «قَالَتْ يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلْمَلَؤُا۟ إِنِّىٓ أُلْقِىَ إِلَىَّٰ كِتَٰبٌ كَرِيمٌ ‎(٢٩) إِنَّهُۥ مِن سُلَيْمَٰنَ وَإِنَّهُۥ بِسْمِ ٱللَّهِ ٱلرَّحْمَٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ‎(٣٠) أَلَّا تَعْلُوا۟ عَلَىَّ وَأْتُونِى مُسْلِمِينَ ‎(٣١) قَالَتْ يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلْمَلَؤُا۟ أَفْتُونِى فِىٓ أَمْرِى مَا كُنتُ قَاطِعَةً أَمْرًا حَتَّىٰ تَشْهَدُونِ ‎(٣٢) قَالُوا۟ نَحْنُ أُو۟لُوا۟ قُوَّةٍ وَأُو۟لُوا۟ بَأْسٍ شَدِيدٍ وَٱلْأَمْرُ إِلَيْكِ فَٱنظُرِى مَاذَا تَأْمُرِينَ ‎(٣٣) قَالَتْ إِنَّ ٱلْمُلُوكَ إِذَا دَخَلُوا۟ قَرْيَةً أَفْسَدُوهَا وَجَعَلُوٓا۟ أَعِزَّةَ أَهْلِهَآ أَذِلَّةً ۖ وَكَذَٰلِكَ يَفْعَلُونَ ‎(٣٤) وَإِنِّى مُرْسِلَةٌ إِلَيْهِم بِهَدِيَّةٍ فَنَٰظِرَةٌۢ بِمَ يَرْجِعُ ٱلْمُرْسَلُونَ ‎(٣٥)» (Surah An-Naml, Verses 29-35) [She said, 'O eminent ones, indeed to me has been delivered a noble letter. Indeed, it is from Solomon, and indeed, it is [written], 'In the name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful. [Saying], 'Be not haughty with me but come to me in submission [as Muslims].' She said, 'O eminent ones, advise me in my matter. I would not decide a matter until you witness [to it].' They said, 'We are possessors of great strength and severe might, but the affair is yours, so consider what you will command.' She said, 'Indeed kings, when they enter a city, ruin it and render the noblest of its people the lowest; and thus do they do. But indeed, I will send to them a gift and see what [response] the messengers will return [with].'].

Thus, the Holy Quran affirmed woman's status in the world of politics, her ability to face crises, and how Queen Bilqis dealt with what befell her and her people with political acumen and refined diplomacy, without confiscating her people's right to participate in the administration of their kingdom's affairs.

Through that gift, Bilqis was able to discover the truth about Prophet Solomon (peace be upon him) and know his intentions, realizing from that his detachment from worldly matters and that he was inviting her to Islam, in which lay the good of this world and the hereafter for her and her people.

In Islam, a woman has an independent financial liability that no man, even her husband, can interfere with except with her consent.

This liability begins with the start of the marriage contract, where Islam emphasizes respect for her right to the dowry without interference from her father or any of her relatives, or even her husband. She is free to dispose of her dowry, which is the first wealth she owns through the marriage contract. Allah Almighty said: «وَءَاتُوا۟ ٱلنِّسَآءَ صَدُقَٰتِهِنَّ نِحْلَةً ۚ فَإِن طِبْنَ لَكُمْ عَن شَىْءٍ مِّنْهُ نَفْسًا فَكُلُوهُ هَنِيٓـًٔا مَّرِيٓـًٔا» (Surah An-Nisa, Verse 4) [And give the women [upon marriage] their [dower] gifts willingly. But if they, of their own accord, forego a portion of it, then eat it in satisfaction and enjoyment].

In Islam, a woman has the right to seek solutions to her problems. Here is a woman from the Muslim women whose husband ظَاهَرَها (zihar - a form of divorce in pre-Islamic Arabia where a husband would say to his wife, 'You are to me like the back of my mother,' which was considered a form of divorce), resulting in a major separation after she had reached old age and borne him children. He divorced her and deprived her of her children and his care for her. So she went to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) to complain and find the Sharia ruling for her problem. When she did not find the solution with him (peace be upon him), she turned to Allah Almighty, complaining about her situation. Allah Almighty heard her complaint and revealed in her case a Quran that will be recited until the Day of Judgment. Allah Almighty said: «قَدْ سَمِعَ ٱللَّهُ قَوْلَ ٱلَّتِى تُجَٰدِلُكَ فِى زَوْجِهَا وَتَشْتَكِىٓ إِلَى ٱللَّهِ وَٱللَّهُ يَسْمَعُ تَحَاوُرَكُمَآ ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ سَمِيعٌۢ بَصِيرٌ» (Surah Al-Mujadila, Verse 1) [Allah has certainly heard the speech of the one who argues with you, [O Muhammad], concerning her husband and directs her complaint to Allah. And Allah hears your dialogue; indeed, Allah is Hearing and Seeing].

This Muslim women gained the honor of pioneering the search for solutions for all women facing such a problem. Indeed, this woman's question was the reason for prohibiting such an unjust divorce.

A woman has the right to marry whomever she deems suitable and equal to her, and to whom she inclines. It is not for her father or his representative to prevent her from this right; they only have the right to offer advice. A girl came to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and said: 'My father married me to his brother's son to raise his status through me.' He said: 'He gave the matter back to her.' She said: 'I have approved what my father did, but I wanted to inform women that fathers have no authority in this matter.' Narrated by Ibn Majah, and its narrators are those of Sahih (authentic collections of Hadith).

Women participated with men in the call to Islam and were present at the two Pledges of Aqabah (early pledges of allegiance to the Prophet). They also participated in wars and battles as fighters and doctors. They were allowed to attend the Eid prayers and congregational prayers and participated in most of what men did. The Prophet (peace be upon him) would hold a separate gathering for women, just as he did for men, to receive knowledge from him (peace be upon him) and ask him about matters that concerned them.

These are some of the participations of Muslim women who have proven beyond any doubt the independence of women in Islam and that they have received rights that no woman in other nations has received. Indeed, they have received the right to life and its preservation. In very brief terms, the status of women in Islam is: (Woman is an independent state: politically, economically, and socially). In conclusion, I wish you, your family, the Spanish people in particular, and the peoples of the world in general, all the best. Important note: I sense through your bold correspondence, your refined, smooth, and sequential style, your measured expressions, and your constructive criticism, that all of this stems from a firm faith in your pure soul, which you cannot hide. This is my analysis of your beautiful, calm reactions. Another note: I wrote the verses in Arabic along with the translation and some Arabic words, so that you can refer back to them and read them in the Holy Quran itself. (May Allah protect you from all harm)."

Dear Mahmmoud Hussein A. Al Rahman , thank you for your response and for taking the time to share religious references that hold emotional meaning for you.

However, I must be direct: citing examples from scripture — however revered — does not prove systemic equality. Symbolic cases or selective autonomy do not erase the deeply entrenched structures that continue to limit women’s freedom across many contexts, including religious ones. Autonomy is not a gift granted by a system; it is a birthright.

Moreover, attributing my clarity of thought or conviction to “a pure soul” or “faith” — however poetically phrased — is reductive. I stand where I stand because of critical thinking, lived experience, and the undeniable right of every woman to define her life on her own terms — not because I am secretly aligned with your worldview.

Respectful dialogue must be grounded in mutual recognition, not veiled attempts at romanticization or persuasion. I hope this distinction is clear.

Wishing you all the best,

Dr. María Herrera Cárdenas

Dear Prof. Dr. María Herrera ,Thank you so much for your kind words, your refined critique, and your noble respect towards me. I believe that I have clarified for you the complete picture of the status of women in Islamic Sharia. I am a Muslim and I follow the path and laws of Islam , so I cannot deviate from that or transgress against it (Allah forbid). If my words contained any departure from the Islamic methodology and its laws, you would notice those who attack me from Muslims all over the world. I never write secretly with anyone, because I am watched by Allah alone, His angels, His Messenger, and all people, Muslims and followers of other religions alike.

I am a simple Muslim Arab from Iraq, and this response I have written to you is the response of every Muslim , regardless of whether they are a president, a religious scholar, a farmer, or a simple worker. I am speaking to you on this great platform (ResearchGate), where thousands, perhaps millions, of people read what I write. We Muslims fear nothing except Allah alone, who created us and defined our way of life and how we interact with one another. Therefore, I have answered you solely according to Islamic Sharia. I have not written any word to you outside the scope of this Islamic Sharia.

The concise and beneficial point, O great iron lady, Prof. Dr. María Herrera , is that the status of women in Islamic Sharia is a great status for them: (The status of woman in Islam is unmatched by any status they hold in other religions and philosophies, no matter how much doubters, alarmists, and proponents of intellectual invasion try, and this is something that reasonable and fair-minded people do not doubt. Islam has placed women in their rightful place alongside their brothers, just as it has done with all the guidance it brought to humanity, because it is a revelation from Allah , the Wise, the Praiseworthy, to all of mankind without specification. As for your words that you mentioned, they have already been answered in detail with rational and textual evidence. We ask you to read the answer to them carefully, patiently, and thoughtfully).

We follow a firm methodology that is never subject to flattery, lies, or transgression. Dear Prof. Dr. María Herrera , you hold a high academic degree and have the full ability to research and conclude from the esteemed scientific source books on this topic, if you have any doubt about it. You are a great woman, and I respect you very much. I pray to Allah alone to bless you, your family, your friends, your loved ones, and our honorable people in great Spain. May Allah grant you success and protect you from all harm.

Dear Mahmmoud Hussein A. Al Rahman thank you again for your reply. I appreciate the passion with which you approach this conversation and your desire to represent what you believe is a unified voice across the Muslim world. However, I must clarify: I did not invite a sermon. I invited a dialogue grounded in critical analysis and mutual respect—not theological absolutism disguised as universal truth.

To speak "on behalf of every Muslim," as you claim to do, is a rhetorical overreach that erases the immense diversity within Islam itself. Reducing women’s experiences and rights to a singular framework—no matter how devoutly held—does not reflect reality, but rather a controlled narrative. Faith is not monolithic. Neither is womanhood.

Your repeated assurances that your words are divinely sanctioned, and therefore above reproach, serve more to shut down discussion than enrich it. On an academic platform like ResearchGate, citation and interpretation are open to questioning. That is not a sign of disrespect—it is the basis of intellectual inquiry.

Despite the tone of authority you intend to project, I still believe in true leadership—one that listens, questions, adapts, and earns respect through dialogue, not declarations. What you seem to imply as moral superiority, I see as an unwillingness to engage in the complexity that leadership actually requires.

Hyperbole—whether in the form of poetic titles, sweeping declarations, or imagined audiences of millions—is not a counterargument. Reverence alone is not scholarship.

Respectfully (without flattery or embellishment),

Dr. María Herrera Cárdenas

Thank you so much, dear Prof. Dr. María Herrera , you're very refined in your discussion. I respect your beautiful style of addressing others. I neither like nor desire the end of this beautiful dialogue and the wonderful discussion and constructive criticism, but I informed you that we proceed according to Islamic laws; we cannot transgress them at all, for they are undoubtedly fixed laws, especially concerning women. Yes, there are some Muslims who transgress against women, as I told you before, but they do not represent Islamic Sharia. I personally fear Allah alone and follow His Sharia and the Sunnah of His Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him. There are millions of Muslims like me. We Muslims follow a fixed methodology that we cannot contradict (in what concerns women, trustworthiness, honesty, and avoiding adultery, theft, etc.) because we do not await the great reward in this world, but our greatest reward is the pleasure of Allah Almighty, and we aspire to enter Paradise and stay away from Hellfire. So, the oppression of women in Islam is a major crime.

I'll give you an example: I am a professor at the University of Baghdad, and my wife is a homemaker. I give her my entire monthly salary, and she manages all the household affairs. I have eight children (three sons and five daughters), and through our cooperation, some of my children have become professors in Iraqi universities and in higher education and medicine. My wife manages the house alone, and managing a house is not easy at all. We have been living in this unified leadership for 37 years, so where is the control over women? Or where is the oppression of her? I haven't just given her the entire salary, but I also registered the house in her name.

Warfare occurred in Iraq, as you know, so we left the house and its belongings, and then we took refuge inside Baghdad. We rented a modest house, and we lived in it to protect our children, until they grew up and became university students, as I told you. No problem occurred between me and my wife; we continued on the just path that Allah commanded us. My wife is the supreme leader in managing all family affairs. Even in some private matters, I consult her, and she gives me the answer to some issues I face because I am always busy with students at the university. You certainly know the great responsibility of a university professor. I am a simple example; there are many similar cases to mine. I ask you: Is there any oppression of my wife? In fact, sometimes I apologize to her if I fall short with her in anything (and she does the same) because we proceed according to the laws of Islamic Sharia.

May Allah reward you with all goodness, and may He grant you success and keep any harm away from you.

Dear Mahmmoud Hussein A. Al Rahman , thank you for your detailed response, Professor. I appreciate your willingness to share your personal experience as an example. However, I must respectfully point out that personal anecdotes, no matter how harmonious they may seem, do not negate the existence of structural gender inequality—particularly when the roles and expectations described are deeply fixed and rooted in religious or cultural prescriptions.

Entrusting one’s wife with household management and financial decisions is certainly a gesture of trust, but when framed within a framework where women's agency is limited to the domestic sphere and defined by religious law, it cannot be equated with gender equity. Delegation is not liberation.

Furthermore, describing your wife as the “supreme leader” in the home while simultaneously affirming immutable gender roles dictated by Sharia reveals a well-intentioned but ultimately paternalistic vision, where equality is measured by benevolence rather than autonomy.

Structural oppression does not always manifest as overt abuse; it often appears precisely in systems where women’s value is acknowledged—as long as it remains within predefined boundaries. Hence, women are denied ambition, autonomy, and the right to self-definition beyond the roles men assign to them. This too is a form of violence—systemic, normalized, and often disguised as respect

Respectfully,

Dr. María Herrera

Dearest Prof. Dr. María Herrera , thank you so much for your reply and your constructive criticism. I gave you a simple example of my relationship with my wife and how justice and equality are practiced between us. Believe me, most Muslims do the same with their wives. For instance, my nephew doesn't have a job, but his wife (an employee in the Ministry of Education) gives him her salary, and he manages the entire household. My brothers, sisters, and my friends and relatives do the same. Meaning, the duties and tasks between husband and wife are distributed equally. Women in our culture possess absolute liberal freedom. My late father registered the house and the 14-dunum orchard in my mother's name (may Allah have mercy on her). Why? Firstly, in honor of her according to Islamic Sharia. Secondly, we trust our women with absolute trust because everyone follows Sharia and the Islamic way. Believe me, this is not exaggeration, lying, or deception (Allah forbid), but this is our reality, passed down from our ancestors to the present day. Yes, there is injustice towards some women by some men, but it does not belong to the Islamic way and is rejected by the entire Islamic society. Our Islamic society bestows upon women a distinguished status, honorable respect, and a noble life. May our Lord bless our sisters, daughters, and mothers all over the world. I wish you happiness, peace of mind, and a noble, refined, and dignified life.