The Huffington Post continues its endless PR campaign for Islam.
In reality, Muhammad never “explicitly taught the radical equality of women and men.” The Qur’an taught that men are superior to women and should beat those from whom they “fear disobedience”: “Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them.” — Qur’an 4:34
The Qur’an likens a woman to a field (tilth), to be used by a man as he wills: “Your women are a tilth for you, so go to your tilth as you will” — Qur’an 2:223
It declares that a woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man: “Get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as you choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her” — Qur’an 2:282
It allows men to marry up to four wives, and have sex with slave girls also: “If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if you fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly, then only one, or one that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice” — Qur’an 4:3
It rules that a son’s inheritance should be twice the size of that of a daughter: “Allah directs you as regards your children’s inheritance: to the male, a portion equal to that of two females” — Qur’an 4:11
It allows for marriage to pre-pubescent girls, stipulating that Islamic divorce procedures “shall apply to those who have not yet menstruated” — Qur’an 65:4
Islamic law stipulates that a man’s prayer is annulled if a dog or a woman passes in front of him as he is praying. “Narrated ‘Aisha: The things which annul the prayers were mentioned before me. They said, “Prayer is annulled by a dog, a donkey and a woman (if they pass in front of the praying people).” I said, ‘You have made us (i.e. women) dogs.’ I saw the Prophet praying while I used to lie in my bed between him and the Qibla. Whenever I was in need of something, I would slip away. for I disliked to face him.” — Sahih Bukhari 1.9.490
Another hadith depicts Muhammad saying that the majority of the inhabitants of hell are women:
“I looked into Paradise and I saw that the majority of its people were the poor. And I looked into Hell and I saw that the majority of its people are women.” — Sahih Bukhari 3241; Sahih Muslim 2737
When asked about this, he explained:
“I was shown Hell and I have never seen anything more terrifying than it. And I saw that the majority of its people are women.” They said, “Why, O Messenger of Allah?” He said, “Because of their ingratitude (kufr).” It was said, “Are they ungrateful to Allah?” He said, “They are ungrateful to their companions (husbands) and ungrateful for good treatment. If you are kind to one of them for a lifetime then she sees one (undesirable) thing in you, she will say, ‘I have never had anything good from you.’” — Sahih Bukhari 1052
And in another hadith:
The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) went out to the musalla (prayer place) on the day of Eid al-Adha or Eid al-Fitr. He passed by the women and said, ‘O women! Give charity, for I have seen that you form the majority of the people of Hell.’ They asked, ‘Why is that, O Messenger of Allah?’ He replied, ‘You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religious commitment than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you.’ The women asked, ‘O Messenger of Allah, what is deficient in our intelligence and religious commitment?’ He said, ‘Is not the testimony of two women equal to the testimony of one man?’ They said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Is it not true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?’ The women said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘This is the deficiency in her religious commitment.’” — Sahih Bukhari 304
“Muhammad Was A Feminist,” by Jim Garrison, Huffington Post, October 28, 2016:
The prophet Muhammad would be appalled by how current Islamic Fundamentalists are treating women under their control. This suppression is done in the name of Islamic Law, known as Sharia. But the current suppression of women is shaped by cultural and history. It has little basis in the Quran and it is certainly not consistent with anything we know about what Muhammad taught or how he treated women. Of all the founders of the great religions – Buddhism, Christianity, Confucianism, Islam and Judaism — Muhammad was easily the most radical and empowering in his treatment of women. Arguably he was history’s first feminist….
Muhammad was fundamentally different. He both explicitly taught the radical equality of women and men as a fundamental tenet of true spirituality, and he took numerous concrete measures to profoundly improve the status and role of women in Arabia during his own lifetime. Muhammad was sensitized to the plight of women because he was born poor and orphaned at a very early age. He was also illiterate. He knew as few did what poverty and social exclusion meant.
Confucius was born into the gentry scholar class of ancient China. Buddha was born a wealthy prince in Nepal. Jesus was born the son of a carpenter with royal lineage and within a tightly knit Jewish community in Palestine. Moses was born into a Hebrew family and raised in the palace of the Pharaoh of Egypt. Muhammad had none of these advantages. Thus while other religious leaders seemed strangely silent about the oppression of women, Muhammad dramatically raised the status of women as a matter of religious conviction and state policy. Consider the following:
During seventh century Arabia, female infanticide was commonplace. Muhammad abolished it. A saying in the Hadith (the collection of sayings of Muhammad) records that Muhammad said that the birth of a girl was a “blessing.” Women in Arabia at that time were essentially considered property and had absolutely no civil rights. Muhammad gave them the right to own property and they were extended very important marital and inheritance rights.
Prior to Muhammad, the dowry paid by a man for his bride was given to her father as part of the contract between the two men. Women had no say in the matter. Muhammad declared that women needed to assent to the marriage and that the dowry should go to the bride, not the father; furthermore, she could keep the dowry even after marriage. The wife did not have to use the dowry for family expenses. That was the responsibility of the man. Women were also given the right to divorce their husbands, something unprecedented at that time. In a divorce, the woman was empowered to take the dowry with her.
Women were extended inheritance rights as well. They were only given half as much as their brothers because the men had more financial responsibilities for family expenses, but with Muhammad, women became inheritors of property and family assets for the first time in Arabia. At the time, this was considered revolutionary.
Muhammad himself was often seen doing “women’s work” around the house and was very attentive to his family. His first marriage to Khadija was monogamous for the entire 15 years they were married, something rare in Arabia at that time. By all accounts, they were deeply in love and Khadija in fact was the first convert to Islam. She encouraged Muhammad from his very first encounter with the angel Gabriel and the recitation of the first suras that were to become the Quran.
After Khadija’s death, Muhammad married 12 wives. One was Aisha, the daughter of his closest friend and ally Abu Baker. The rest were nearly all widows, divorced women, or captives. He preached consistently that it was the responsibility of men to protect those women who had met with misfortune. This was one of the reasons polygamy was encouraged. Even with female infanticide, women in seventh century Arabia far outnumbered men because so many men were killed in the inter-tribal warfare of the day. Several of Muhammad’s wives were poor and destitute and he took them in, along with their children, into his household.
In his Farewell Sermon delivered shortly before he died in 632, Muhammad said to the men, “You have certain rights over women but they have certain rights over you.” Women, he said, are your “partners and helpers.” In one of the sayings of the Hadith, Muhammad says, “The best men are those who are best to their wives.”
His wife Aisha took a leadership role after his death in bringing together the Hadith and another wife played a leading role in gathering together the suras that comprise the Quran. Each of the 114 suras that comprise the Quran with the exception of sura 9 begin with the words Bismillah al Rahman al Rahim. Translated most commonly as “In the Name of God, all compassionate, all merciful,” the deeper meaning of this phrase is “In the Name of the One who births compassion and mercy from the womb.” This invocation of the feminine aspect of Allah is key to an Islamic Renaissance.
Finally, there is nothing in the Quran about women wearing the veil, the Hejab. That was certainly the custom in Arabia at that time and Muhammad’s wives wore the Hejab to designate their special status as “Mothers of the Believers,” but the only thing the Quran says directly is that women should dress “modestly.” Muhammad said the same thing to men. For him, modesty of dress was expressive of modesty of the heart. Muhammad himself, even when he was supreme leader, never wore anything more than simple white woolen attire….

Islam_Macht_Frei says
Next up from this clown:
“Hitler was a friend of the Jews.”
“Spanish Conquistadors were all about indigent peoples’ rights”
etc
If we are flat out making stuff up, let’s go whole hog!!
Westman says
This picture seems to summarize Mr. Garrison’s article. True B.S.
http://www.ajc.com/news/national/truckload-manure-dumped-front-ohio-democratic/5aw6IfqhH6ut0HK8jVpuRP/
hiding says
Now that’s funny! thanks for sharing!
gravenimage says
Grimly hilarious, IMF.
cs says
This person is pathetic, and this photo is pathetic, and Huff post is pathetic. It is disgusting and disturbing, basically insane.
cs says
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeXVP7TlSxY
an example of Muslim feminist.
cs says
Daria says
Good argument. You took her apart completely.
billybob says
God is she ugly and hard to look at in a close up. Women like her should wear a niqab.
cs says
gravenimage says
Thanks for posting that, cs–Sye Ten Atheist’s animations are always hilarious!
For those unfamiliar with him, Google his stuff–he has lots of Anti-Jihad work.
cs says
JOHN SPIELMAN says
what a stupid man, at least even the Huffo post readers aren’t so stupid. this writer has been slapped down in their comments section
Rev g says
HuffPo needs to “fact check” about islam…of course those “inconvenient truths” are ignored because it is in their best interests.
gravenimage says
Great to hear, John!
Islam_Macht_Frei says
“Women in Arabia at that time were essentially considered property and had absolutely no civil rights. Muhammad gave them the right to own property and they were extended very important marital and inheritance rights.”
Wasn’t Khadija a wealthy woman I had always heard that, and that she was Muhammad’s “Sugar Mommy.”
As for not practicing infanticide – first I hear of that, but let’s grant it’s so. Fine and good, but likely because Muhammad had the insight that that little girls grow up to bear male children – the highest calling of a female. With polygamy and the ownership of female sex slaves firmly established, Islamic breeding stock and breeding mills were secured – it was likely little more than thinly disguised demographic jihad, masquerading as “saving the girls.”
mach37 says
Khadija was reportedly a successful business woman before she married Muhammad. She apparently was strong enough to keep him “subdued” until that marriage ended.
gravenimage says
Yes–Khadija was a successful and wealthy business women *before* any of Muhammed’s supposed “reforms”. He started out as an employee of hers.
This would not have been possible, according to this idiot.
As for condemning infanticide–yes, this is the *single* decent thing in the whole of the Qur’an. But it was hardly as revolutionary as this tool makes out–Judaism and Christianity condemn such things, as well, and *much* predate Islam in Arabia.
vlparker says
The left lives in a world of lies and deceit. Always has, always will.
JOHN SPIELMAN says
leftistism is a condition that eventually ROTS YOUR BRAIN!
Issa says
Muhammad must be turning in his grave reading all this nonsense about himself in Huffington Post
JOHN SPIELMAN says
he and Satan (allah) are laughing at how easily non muslim leftards are deceived by allah – the GREATEST of DECEIVERS”
Kathy Brown, Esq. says
Oh no John.
Satan is allah all right, and HE is definitely laughing. But no one else in Hell is ever laughing. Ever.
Emilie Green says
How dare you, along with lots and lots of other HP commentators on Garrison’s HP nonsense, criticize Garrison the Great!
GtG is the president and FOUNDER of Ubiquity University where tout de monde studies “hyper-complexity” in order “to ignite, nurture, and amplify the profound genius of you.” (Seriously, that’s what the web page says!)
Apparently though this objective of UU has managed to escape the genius who founded Ubiquity University who can’t understand the black-and-white on Islam and its founder.
In the binary, non-hyper complex, world of Islam, you’re either with Islam or you’re at war with Islam. And that’s the way Muslims themselves phrase it. The House of Islam or the House of War.
KrazyKafir says
Is it possible he is this stupid and ignorant, or is he willfully shilling for Islam?
Mirren10 says
Wilfully shilling. I’ve no doubt he is trousering large sums of money from islamic supremacists.
Hindu American says
A little from column A, little from column B and a little from column C. Potent mix.
Vincent Scopa says
having worked in Islamic countries for 15 years I can honestly say this professor is a F(*&%%## IDIOT. come and see for yourself; fool.
gravenimage says
Yes–he does not explain how, if Islam is so “feminist”, that Muslim countries are the worst places on earth for women and girls.
Son of Albion says
Comparing Islam and Christianity
Muhammad…
Jesus…
Said Allah does not love
those who reject Islam.
(Quran 30:45, 3:32, 22:38) Said God loves everyone.
(John 3:16)
“I have been commanded to fight
against people till they testify that there
is no god but Allah, and that Muhammad
is the messenger of Allah”
(Muslim 1:33) “He who lives by the sword
will die by the sword.”
(Matthew 26:52)
Stoned women for adultery.
(Muslim 4206) “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”
(John 8:7)
Permitted stealing from unbelievers.
(Bukhari 44:668, Ibn Ishaq 764) “Thou shalt not steal.”
(Matthew 19:18)
Permitted lying.
(Sahih Muslim 6303, Bukhari 49:857) “Thou shalt not bear false witness.”
(Matthew 19:18)
Owned and traded slaves.
(Sahih Muslim 3901) Neither owned nor traded slaves.
Beheaded 800 Jewish men and boys.
(Abu Dawud 4390) Beheaded no one.
Murdered those who insulted him.
(Bukhari 56:369, 4:241) Preached forgiveness.
(Matthew 18:21-22, 5:38)
“If then anyone transgresses
the prohibition against you,
Transgress ye likewise against him”
(Quran 2:194) “If someone strikes you on the right
cheek, turn to him the other also.”
(Matthew 5:39)
Jihad in the way of Allah elevates one’s position in Paradise by a hundred fold.
(Muslim 4645) “Blessed are the peacemakers, for
they will be called Sons of God”
(Matthew 5:9)
Married 13 wives and kept sex slaves.
(Bukhari 5:268, Quran 33:50) Was celibate.
Slept with a 9-year-old child.
(Sahih Muslim 3309, Bukhari 58:236) Did not have sex with children.
Ordered the murder of women.
(Ibn Ishaq 819, 995) Never harmed a woman.
“O you who believe! Fight those of the
unbelievers who are near to you
and let them find in you hardness.”
(Quran 9:123) “Blessed are the meek, for
they shall inherit the earth.”
(Matthew 5:5)
Ordered 65 military campaigns
and raids in his last 10 years.
(Ibn Ishaq ) Ordered no military campaigns, nor
offered any approval of war or violence.
Killed captives taken in battle.
(Ibn Ishaq 451) Never took captives.
Never killed anyone.
Encouraged his men to rape enslaved women.
(Abu Dawood 2150, Quran 4:24) Never encouraged rape.
Never enslaved women.
Demanded captured slaves and
a fifth of all other loot taken in war.
(Quran 8:41) “The Son of Man came not
to be served, but to serve.”
(Matthew 20:28)
Was never tortured, but tortured others.
(Muslim 4131, Ibn Ishaq 436, 595, 734, 764) Suffered torture, but never tortured anyone.
“And fight them until there is no more persecution and religion is only for Allah”
(Quran 8:39) “Love your enemies and pray
for those who persecute you”
(Matthew 5:44)
Blessed the brutal murder of a half-blind man
(al-Tabari 1440) Healed a blind man
(Mark 8:28)
Ordered a slave to build the very pulpit
from which he preached Islam.
(Bukhari 47:743) Washed his disciples feet.
(John 13:5)
What are the Greatest Commandments?
“Belief in Allah and Jihad in His cause”
(Muslim 1:149) What are the Greatest Commandments?
“Love God and love thy neighbor as thyself.”
(Matthew 22:34-40)
Demanded the protection of armed bodyguards, even in a house of worship
(Quran 4:102) Chastised anyone attempting
to defend him with force.
(John 18:10-12)
Died fat and wealthy from what was
taken from others in war or
demanded from others in tribute. Demanded nothing for himself.
Died without possessions.
Advocated crucifying others.
(Quran 5:33, Muslim 16:4131) Was crucified himself.
According to his followers:
Had others give their lives for him.
(Sahih Muslim 4413) According to his followers:
Gave his life for others.
(John 18:11 and elsewhere)
Differences Between
Early Muslims and Christians
Muhammad’s
Companions…
Jesus’s
Disciples…
Lived as warriors. Lived like harmless hippies.
Slew and persecuted religious minorities. Were slain and persecuted
as a religious minority.
Emphasis on Jihad (the way of Muhammad)
“He who fights that Allah’s word should
be superior fights in Allah’s cause”
(Bukhari 53:355) Emphasis on Evangelism (the way of Jesus)
“Go ye into all the world and preach
the gospel to every creature”
(Matthew 15:16)
Attacked and conquered the populations in
parts of 28 modern countries in just the first
three decades following Muhammad’s death.
Did not resort to violence of any sort,
despite tremendous persecution.
Declared holy war on the people of five
major world religions in just the first
100 years following Muhammad’s death.
Went centuries without declaring ‘holy war’.
Plundered and lived off the wealth of others. Gave away their possessions to those in need.
(Acts 2:44-45)
Captured and enslaved non-Muslim people. Considered themselves to be slaves of others.
Waged war to keep members from leaving
the religion. Put apostates to death.
No record of aggression toward apostates.
Muhammad’s own family members quickly
fell into armed warfare against each other.
Jesus’ disciples never resorted to violence
against one another (or anyone else).
First 240 Years:
11 of the first 32 caliphs were
murdered by fellow Muslims.
First 240 Years:
14 of the first 25 popes were martyred by
pagans (none by fellow Christians).
Caliphs were polygamous and maintained harems of hundreds of captured sex slaves. Popes were expected to be celibate.
Charli Main says
Yes, indeed. The Koran is awash with examples of Muslim women with four husbands and male sex slaves, always on hand for their pleasure.
Paul says
His daughters, if he has any, should marry Saudis, and they should go live there. Then he’ll experience Muslim feminist enlightenment first hand.
Angemon says
(1/2)
Jim Garrison? What is he, the feminist version of Craig “Cowardly” Considine – i.e., someone who supposedly is a scholar representing a whole group and describing how amicable muhammad allegedly was to said group, assuring us that current day islamic mainstream has nothing to do with muhammad and the quran?
Didn’t you forget something after muhammad? Try again: “The prophet Muhammad (salad all salami all wasabi salami)”. Please continue.
Ah, Jim Garrison is indeed to feminists what Cowardly Considine is to Catholics. Let me guess: you’ll now claim that the oppression of women in current day islamic world has no basis in the quran and is inconsistent with the actions of muhammad, who taught his followers to love and respect Christians. Sorry, I meant women – seriously, it’s like reading Cowardly Considine’s platitudes only with a key term replaced.
And, of course, let’s not let his attempt to whitewash islamic orthodoxy slide: “current islamic fundamentalists”? Sorry Jim – the islamic oppression of women isn’t limited to a handful “islamic fundamentalists”, it’s rampant in the entire islamic world. Isn’t it amazing how all through the islamic world, which encompasses a myriad of people with different cultural backgrounds, muhammad and the quran were “misinterpreted” in exactly the same way? What, are you going to argue that the mistreatment of women was a “cultural” norm before islam? Because it’s funny how that works – muhammad allegedly came to bring islam in order to combat said alleged cultural practices. He allegedly got into problems because he refused to abide by said cultural practices and instead preached islam. And yet, when it comes to his marriage with a 6-year-old girl, we’re told “ah, you see, that was the cultural norm at the time”. You can’t have it both ways, Jim.
Expected/10
The quran and ahadith are quite explicit: men are superior to women. Yours is a speech meant to reel in gullible ignorant who haven’t read islamic texts and are just looking for their daily fix of “can’t we all just get along?”. Which would be OK if it weren’t them moving from “can’t we all get along” to “you act as I say and start respecting foreign cultres and people as I demand so we can all get along”.
His first wife was a rich and influential merchant woman. How would a woman reach such a status if they were so oppressed and disadvantaged in the pre-islamic arab culture?
Never forget: islam is supposedly true because muhammad was illiterate.
My, my, that must be music to the hears of young marxists – “see, muhammad, unlike those guys from other religions, waged a class struggle. He was shouting “Proletarians of all countries, unite!” long before Marx came along”. I wonder how those young, impressionable marxists would react if they learned that muhammad was taken in by a rich uncle, taught trade and was given a place in the family business, a business he inherited after the death of his uncle, married a rich business woman and took 20% of the profits made by his raiders even when he didn’t participate in raids? That’s right, he literally made money simply by standing with his ass in the air. Oh, wait, that’s probably the origin story of college-level marxists – raised in wealthy families, claim to defend the poor and downtrodden, only to kick it to the curb when their rich daddies give them a place in their firm.
Maybe because those other religious leaders were just that – religious leaders who were only concerned about religious matters such as the salvation of souls and had no desire to impose a political system on their countrymen.
Citation needed.
And yet, despite this allegedly endemic practice, muslims were allowed to marry up to four women (unless you were muhammad, in which case your rules didn’t apply to you) and have as many sex slaves as they wanted. It’s almost as if there was a surplus of women during muhammad’s time…
Citation needed. There are ahadith where muhammad unequivocally states that women are inferior to men – is that what passes as “equality” to you?
How, then, did Khadija became a rich and successful business woman? And what relevance does this alleged 7th century pre-islamic practice has in our day and age? Women in Western countries are free to pursue any career they want. They are not considered property and they have the same rights as men.
Again: his first wife was a successful business woman. How did she achieve that if she was considered “property” and had no right to own property?
They were allowed to inherit half that of a man. How “progressive” of muhammad… Anyway, what does that have to do with our current day and age? The fact of the matter is that if you were to enforce muhammad’s “raising the status of women” and say what he said about women nowadays you’d be lynched as a misogynist (and probably not just figuratively).
Angemon says
(2/2)
I don’t remember Aisha saing she wanted to marry muhammad. I remember, however, of an hadith saying that “silence is consent”.
Again: hadith, “silence is consent”. Is that really the standard you want to set for women nowadays?
A muslim man can divorce by saying “I divorce you” three times. A muslim woman must present a valid set of reasons to a jury of muslim men and they decide whether or not she can get a divorce. There’s a hadith where muhammad wanted to divorce one of his women because she was growing old, fat and ugly. She begged him not to divorce her and told him he could spend the nights he was supposed to sped with her with whomever he wanted. Is that what passes as “radical feminist” to you?
Can you imagine the s***storm if Trump were to come out and say that women should only get half that of a man in inheritances? And yet, you’re defending it and claiming that muhammad was a “radical feminist”. You0re half right – he was radical, just not feminist.
Again: Khadija. Successful business woman. Please explain that.
“Women’s work”? First of all, that’s very sexist and misogynist of you, because it implies that there is some sort of work that’s the exclusive domain of women. Second, such as? I remember a hadith where it says that Aisha used
to scrub semen stains out of muhammad’s coting, so whatever work he did around the house certainly didn’t involve laundry.
An alternate explanation would be that Khadija wore the pants in their relationship and she kept him muzzled, whipped and with a tight leash.
Khadija assured muhammad that, despite hearing voices in his head, he was not crazy.
Ah, I see you left out that Aisha was six years old at the time of her their marriage and nine when muhammad consumed the marriage. She also lost all of her hair when she was told she was marrying muhammad. Oh, and you’re making it seem that was an abundance of women despite your claims of female infanticide.
“Met with misfortune”? Oh, you mean the captive girls raped by muhammad and this gang of thugs after they murdered their families and took them as slaves? Is that the “misfortune” you’re talking about? And isn’t there a hadith where muhammad rebukes one of his men for marrying a widow instead of a young virgin girl?
Isn’t polygamy illegal in our day and age? Wouldn’t anyone suggesting today that men should be able to marry more than one women while women should not be able to marry more than one man be met with violent rebutals (and rightfully so, I might add)? Why are you defending the practice? Doesn’t polygamy reduce women to the status of property, which is what you chastised the pre-islamic society for doing? Why are you whitewashing islamic polygamy? Oh, and wasn’t polygamy commonplace in pre-islamic arabia because wars amongst the many different tribes routinely took the lives of men? I thought islam came to replace existing culture, not to carry on with it.
So you’re saying there was a reason for the female infanticide. Oh, and wasn’t polygamy commonplace in pre-islamic arabia because wars amongst the many different tribes routinely took the lives of men? I thought islam came to replace existing culture, not to carry on with it.
Citation needed.
Here’s the part you’re selectively quoting from:
Exactly what rights women have over men? Well, they get food, drink and clothing if they behave. I have to treat them well just as long as they behave, including not being friends with people I don’t want them befriending, because it’s my right that they don’t befriend whomever I don’t want them to. Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that how one would treat a pet, chattel or a slave?
Sura 9 is the sura where muslims are instructed to attack non-muslims because of their religion.
Huh, what? Women are simply being seen as baby-making machines, in accordance with quran 2:223.
quran 24:31
And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms, and not to reveal their adornment save to their own husbands or fathers or husbands’ fathers, or their sons or their husbands’ sons, or their brothers or their brothers’ sons or sisters’ sons, or their women, or their slaves, or male attendants who lack vigour, or children who know naught of women’s nakedness. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And turn unto Allah together, O believers, in order that ye may succeed.
The quran specifically states that muhammad is the best example of conduct. If muhammad’s wives wore a veil then muslim women must wear the veil.
Citation needed.
Let’s pretend for a moment, and for the sake of your argument, that everything you wrote is true. That muhammad raised the status of women in 7th century Arabia. So f***ing what? Women in 21st century Western nations have much more rights and perks than women in post-muhammad 7th century Arabia. Mohammad’s teachings regarding women are not needed in our current day and age. Your piece, Jim, is as pointless as it is ridden with lies and half-truths.
Mirren10 says
”Women in 21st century Western nations have much more rights and perks than women in post-muhammad 7th century Arabia. Mohammad’s teachings regarding women are not needed in our current day and age. Your piece, Jim, is as pointless as it is ridden with lies and half-truths.”
A succinct summation of Garrison’s tripe.
Westman says
Bravo, Angemon! That was a great illumination and inspection of Mr. Garrison’s article of half-truths and dishonesty.
Frankly, I don’t believe Muhammad, as a caravan manager for his wealthy wife, was ignorant or short on mathematical skills. It’s simply a founder’s myth to point out how “Allah” raised a man from obscurity, when in fact, he was the equivalent of todays wealthy individual living in a gated community. I doubt many men of his day had time and money to meditate in a cave and think up the Quran. He would, by necessity in the caravan trade, have been multilingual, able to read, and able to organize men for an objective. Those skills, and the observations of the communities he visited in the caravan trade, gave him the tools to recognize a need and to generate a religion that would place him as the most important person of his society.
The only glaring falsehood that Garrison forgot in his “Muhammad raised women to equality with Muslim males” article was to write that Islam is “the religion of peace”. As we all know, Islam is the religion of dishonesty. Mr Garrison should join.
gravenimage says
Not necessarily. Muhammed probably was cagey and at least relatively intelligent–he would have to have had some numeracy, but might well have been illiterate. A lot of caravan traders at the time and place were.
The irony is that Khadija, who actually ran the business, almost certainly would have been able to read.
mgoldberg says
Actually, there’s so much wrong with the articles assertions: the nation of Israel were slaves, and Moses was thrown out of his egyptian adopted home when he discovered his people, and lived in a desert with scorptions tossed out to die by the Pharoah. He and the Torah, recognized the women’s rights with the
‘Ketubah’ which guarentees a jewish women could not be abandoned by her husband. The Jews had prophets who were female, six of them, and Devorah was the first who lead ‘the children of Israel’ during the time of the Judges.
Mohammed molested the captured women of the jews(and others) raping them and giving the other captives to his band of thieves. He never worked a day after his rich wife Khadija died, raping, murdering, pillaging, and cheating on his wives… including Aisha.
For this loser Puffho writer to peddle the idiotic lie that Mo’ had an equality of and for women is to simply lie bout the theology and history of Mo’ and Islam. Period.
Others here have shown this with the actual Qu’ranic quotes, and hadiths. There is no such equivalent history of leadership in Islam by women, nor any idea of equality, and nothing of a spiritual equality.
It is a tyranny, through and through, living off all other religions and cultures, like a vampire for the most part.
Kay says
Clear post.
Would like to give to anyone who seems confused about Mohammedism and women.
gravenimage says
Good post.
Richard Paulsen says
Maybe he is longing for death ny being beheaded by muslims somewhere in U.S.A. some day? He should at least think of others not willing to loose any parts of their bodies in any unnatural way.
Don McKellar says
How do such crackpots get so much traction and publicity when everything they say is demonstrably a lie or distortion of facts that anybody can look up for themselves?
DFD says
My first impulse was to wonder if the publisher for the “Huff & Puff Post” is identical with the publisher for “Mad Mag.”.
But then I thought:”NO! Alfred E. Neumann wouldn’t come up with such bullocks.” Impossible.
Jerry says
Mohammad was effaminate who used to rub himself against males for sexual gratification.
Jay Boo says
The Enticement of Allah with Islamic Seduction
Muslims to this day still bend over with a deep bow to assume the ‘position’ in hopes of enticing Allah with their prayer of Islamic submission.
Mark Berlinger says
In Reality…
World Hijab Day Is Actually World Misogyny Day.
Supremacist Muslims and the Leftist•PC•Enemy•Amongst•Us pretend that the hijab is a fashion statement.
Know the Qur’an and Hadith.
From the very beginnings of Islam, Purdah is the necessary coverage by veil of every female approaching and after puberty.
The veil is the ever present reminder of the second class status of women in the Islamic world.
Purdah In Islam Is The Mandatory Female Expression Of Submission To Islamic Law http://tinyurl.com/kxd8sng
Eric Jones says
The Prof. is only correct about one point. Muhammad did supress the practice of female infanticide. In Surah Takvir ‘When the female infant buried alive, is questioned, for what crime was she killed?’. This is the verse in the Koran that has always stayed in my mind. i no longer read the Koran. On this one point Mohammad may have been advanced for his time. As for the rest of his behavior, Mohammad and his followers behaved as atevistic savages from pre- human times.
Eric
Jay Boo says
Shortage of six year old brides?
Charli Main says
Mohammed was smart enough to realise that women were needed as breeders to produce Muslims for his armies.
Simple maths. One hundred men and one women—one kid a year.
One man and a hundred women– 100 kids a year.
I believe Adolf Hitler once said ” a nation does not die because it loses its men. It dies because it loses its women”
gravenimage says
This is the *single* decent thing in the whole of the Qur’an.
But no–it was not particularly advanced, even for the time. Judaism and Christianity already condemned such things, and had for centuries.
Arthur says
Well, perhaps Mohammed was less severe on women than the existing Arabic culture of his time. Better than worst does not justify the claim of good.
How about,
Mohammed instituted certain practices which elevated the status of women relative to the foregoing Arabic culture. However, by today’s standards the treatment of women as proscribed in the Koran is considered unequal and primitive. Therefore, advancement of Islamic ideology in present society would represent a large step backwards in human rights compared to modern views. Primitive ideologies which are inflexible and unable to provide moral guidance in modern culture represent a serious problem for integration with present society. Adherents to these incompatible ideologies have no authority to dictate the reversal of current concepts of equal rights and reinstitute primitive practices such as slavery. Followers of a faith which is incompatible with modern culture must decide for themselves whether they can reconcile these disparities through selective commitment to their faith, or whether they must simply choose between one or the other incompatible ideologies.
Norger says
Very well said. Unfortunately such intellectual honesty is now called “Islamophobia.”
gravenimage says
Even this does not hold, since Khadija was able to run a large business in pagan Arabia. It is notable, in fact, that this happened *pre*-Islam.
Jack Diamond says
Khadijah clearly had the right to inherit property, she inherited the wealth of her dead husbands, ran their business, and hired men to work for her. Did women after Muhammad “liberated” them run businesses and hire men to work for them?
It seems more like Muhammad lowered the worth of women. Muhammad who regarded women as mere sex objects, property, compared them to domestic animals, said they were deficient in intelligence, denizens of Hell, made their word worth half that of a man. Muhammad raised the status of women? Is that why his favorite wife Aisha would ask him “do you make us (women) equal to dogs and donkeys?” (in Sahih Bukhari).
There isn’t a lot of pre-Muslim Arab history. They either didn’t write it or the Muslims destroyed it. Muhammad taught all Arabs before the coming of Islam were barbarian. Muslim historians teach that, that Arabs burned their daughters and women were worthless. They teach all cultures before Islam were worthless. Yet we can see that not only did women have a higher status before Muhammad, as Khadijah demonstrates, the Jews also got along fine in Arabia before the coming of Muhammad; and the caravans, the lifeblood of the economy, were never raided or robbed until Muhammad came along either. One might conclude Muhammad was no mercy at all…
Jack Diamond says
http://alisina.org/?p=4635
Ali Sina “Women in Islam, was Muhammad a Misogynist?”
Jay Boo says
Khadijah the inventor of Islam, must have had many regrets.
Muhammad stole all the credit and demoted her value through his alleged ‘revelations’
gravenimage says
All true, Jack.
Jay Boo says
Here is one view point on feminists and Islam
http://judgybitch.com/2015/06/09/feminists-dont-challenge-radical-islam-because-real-misogynists-are-terrifying/
Jay Boo says
Extreme Fundamentalist Liberal Leftist dogma is never examined and scrutinized at their circle-Jerk conferences, only regurgitated.
WCM says
Didn’t this site used to have a “Dhimmi of the Week or (Month) recognition?” Robert, it’s time to reinstate this practice using this “scholar” as designee.
gravenimage says
Yes–it was an annual thing. I’d like to see it reinstated, as well, WCM.
PRCS says
“After Khadija’s death, Muhammad married 12 wives. One was Aisha, the daughter of his closest friend and ally Abu Baker. The rest were nearly all widows, divorced women, or captives.
Marrying a 6 year old girl, and having women captives is his idea of feminism?
gravenimage says
Good points.
Lesley says
Can someone… anyone please find and chop down the tree that is growing all these nuts, once and for all??
Good Lord :-/
Michael Copeland says
“Of all men, I hated the prophet the most—for he killed my husband, my brother, and my father,”
Safiyah,
Safiyah was daughter of Kinana of Khaybar, the Jewish village surprise-attacked by Mohammed.
Kinana, taken prisoner, would not tell Mohammed where the money was.
Mohammed had a fire lit on his chest. He still would not tell. A companion cut his head off.
Safiya, teenage and very beautifu,l was taken by Mohammed (from one of his companions).
Mohammed “consummated the marriage” that evening.
Michael Copeland says
citation: http://raymondibrahim.com/2014/10/15/muhammad-and-islams-sex-slaves/
Jerry says
Safiya was Kinana’s wife, not daughter.
Jay Boo says
Unlike Muslims where the wife and daughter are often the same.
RAB says
I can appreciate the sincere efforts of all the commentators here on this deliberately misleading article about Muhammad and women. Perhaps I should say more about it but this Jim Garrison is such a liar I have to ask if it really is worth the effort to respond? When anyone can so misrepresent Islam in order to give it a good name , is he or any of his readers going to listen to anyone point out the truth? I do my small bit to try and inform people about the true nature of Islam but there are so many lies circulating and so many ignorant people and Islamic apologists out there to spread the lies that I’m asking myself if it isn’t already too late. Is it?
John Hawk says
No, I don’t think so. There is lots of wishful thinking and ignorance. Many people just assume that since Islam is a “religion,” it must be more or less like any other. But Islam has more in common with Nazism than Buddhism or Christianity.
Islam thrives on ignorance and coercion. That works in an insular world where critical thinking about Islam is prohibited on pain of death. But it won’t work with the Internet.
The Internet is like acid to Islam, relentlessly corroding and undermining the whole rotten structure. And in the end, it will collapse under the weight or its lies and contractions.
So keep the acid coming.
gravenimage says
It’s not too late–but time is short. Keep at it!
Duncan Thorburn says
How can anyone be this stupid? It is the VERY NATURE of Islam NOT culture. Clearly NEVER studied Muhammad, the Mass Murderer, the Paedophile, the Sex Slave Maker, Owner, Trader, and User.
PLEASE READ THE RIGHT BOOKS:
The Story of Mohammed Islam Unveiled by Harry Richardson
Is THE Quran The Word of God? By Aaron Goerner
The People vs Muhammad by J.K. Sheindlin
Did Muhammad Exist? By Robert Spencer
Jerry says
La Allah Illah YAHVE ueMuhammad Rassoul Shaitan.
abad says
I clearly recall my History of Islam college class – one point “explicitly” made: women could own property, girl babies were no longer buried alive – yet Christianity never buried baby girls alive period.
But you see, the average liberal “mind” does not “think” that way.
Liberals simply parrot preconceived notions about Islam to fit in with their particular view – in this case, their global view.
Case closed.
gravenimage says
Very true, abad.
Kepha says
Here we have the boy orator from some river that is six inches deep and a mile wide at the mouth.
What credentials does Jim Garrison have to speak about Islam and its view of women, apart from being an American liberal (which, of course, makes him more knowledgeable about Christianity than all the theologians from John the Apostle through Charles Hodge; more knowledgeable about Islam than the faculties of Qom and al-Azhar combined, with Bukhari and a few others thrown in for good measure; and more knowledgeable about Buddhism than all the patriarchs of every Mahayana and Theravada set put together)?
I can only say that I’m glad to know that he was royally trashed in HuffPo’s comments section. Maybe there’s some hop for this country after all.
billybob says
There can’t be anything more degrading and humiliating to a woman than to be expected to share her husband with three other wives.
Well, I correct myself – actually there is. How about being a sex slave? Muhammad mandated both these degradations for women. Then anything else he may have done, even if praiseworthy, is all for nothing. Islam, by the measure of these two things alone, is undeniably misogynistic.
Isabel says
Sometimes, when I read news like this one, I have the feeling that the world population has been infected with some design virus to make them see reality exactly the opposite as it is… It is a nightmare
Alex says
This is what you get when you give power to pot smoking idiots, self righteous delusional fools, who want to save the world by themselves, by getting along with everyone.
These people must be followers, never the leaders, as their decisions ruin everything it touches.
Carolyne says
If this weren’t so ridiculous, it would be funny. Mohammed, the great emancipator of women. Hogwash.
mgoldberg says
http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/toronto-pd’s-muslim-chaplain-wives-must-be-available-sex
Here’s today article about the new, modern, hip chaplain, educated in Medinah Saudi Arabia, but raised in Toronto Canada. His lectures on the ‘rights’ and duties of the wife are straight up Islam.
In short, the wife must make herself available to the husband for sex.
The author who writes about this guy notes…”That a woman should need permission from her husband to leave the house is demeaning and oppressive, putting women under archaic control of her husband.
That she should force herself to have martial relations when she knows it is not coming from the right place due to problems in the couple’s relationship at the time means a woman can be used like an object.”
I also note that the exact opposite actually describes jewish law on the matter. It’s the man’s obligation to offer his wife the pleasure, but it is actually her privilege to say no when she’s too dammed tired or not in the mood. That’s for three thousand plus years.
The tyranny of Islam is just that…. tyranny, not freedom.
Bonnie Loranger says
The Huffington post is a shitty and bias paper .This man is a piece of liberal stupid shit.
Geppetto says
The progressive intellectual mindset. They have a view, think it’s true and so it must be true, because any other view, no matter the factual evidence, cannot possibly be more true than the faculty lounge version where like minded individuals conjure up their convoluted,biased views of reality. And so all who dissent must have their character and reputation destroyed. For these self possessed geniuses to admit they might be mistaken is to destroy their sense of intellectual superiority, a fate worse than death. They must be right because they can’t be wrong. Unfortunately there are many who are and will be willingly indoctrinated by these faux geniuses.
gravenimage says
Huffington Post: Muhammad was a feminist, “explicitly taught the radical equality of women and men”
…………………………
Of all the lies told about the vicious “religion of peace”, this is one of the most egregious. Islam specifically considers women “deficient in intelligence and religion”, says that the majority of the inhabitants of hell are women, and that they are there for disobeying their husbands.
Muslim men can marry little girls, can rape their wives, can beat their wives, can use the “Triple Talaq” for summary divorce, and can even “Honor Kill” them with few or no consequences,
They can also engage in rape Infidel women in Jihad, can kidnap them, and can use them as sex slaves.
The appalling “Prophet” lived this–he “married” a little six-year-old and raped her at nine; he “married” and raped women whose families he had just killed; he took and kept sex slaves.
There is no faith so savage toward women, or less respecting of their rights as human beings.
c matt says
Ol’ Mo’ was completely about the equality of women, somewhere around 1 man = 3 women (or was it camels?).
Baeticus says
Not only he looks stupid, he is stupid.
Cretius says
Garrison makes a lot of assertions in his article but without the required religious citations. Also, I do not believe he has a firm understanding of the basic teachings of other religions.
Islam is the only mainstream religion currently carrying out global holy war and commiting global terrorist acts. They even butcher Muslims who are not ‘true’ believers. Then there is the ongoing Muslim invasion of Europe.
Islam is not a race. It is a fascist, totalitarian, anti-democratic belief system dedicated to the destruction of western democracy, culture and religions. If Garrison cannot see this then his ignorance is not only monumental but also culturally suicidal.
Western leaders are committing cultural suicide. Just look at what is being let into the U.S. and Canada and the chaos in Europe caused by the Muslim invasion. The vast majority of ‘refugees’ are Muslims with token numbers or persecuted Christians and Yazidis.
This is social engineering, not a genuine response to a refugee crisis. Ten percent of Syria was Christian before the war, and the Christians have been particularly brutalized, often by Obama-backed jihad groups. The refugee population should thus be at least 10% Christian. Instead, Christians accounted for less than one percent of the refugees admitted into the U.S. Obama is clearly pursuing a strategy to increase the Muslim population of the U.S. He may be doing this out of the confidence that they will vote Democrat.
In Canada Justin Trudeau is following the same policy hoping to capture the Muslim vote for the Liberal Party Of Canada. Such ignorant ‘leadership’ poses a threat to the survival of democracy in North America in the long run.