When has ABC News ever run a puff piece about a Christian entitled “Christian scholar makes educating America on Christianity his full-time job”? Or a similar piece about a scholar of any religion other than Islam? Right, never.
As for Islam being a feminist movement, in reality, 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
Muhammad’s child bride, Aisha, says in a hadith that Muhammad “struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: ‘Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you?’” — Sahih Muslim 2127
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
Another statement attributed to Muhammad: “If a husband calls his wife to his bed [i.e. to have sexual relation] and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning.” — Sahih Bukhari 4.54.460
I look forward to Jihad Turk’s exposition of how these passages are compatible with a “feminist movement.”
“Muslim scholar Jihad Turk makes educating America on Islam his full-time job,” by Amna Nawaz, ABC News, September 12, 2017:
Growing up in Arizona in the 1970s, Jihad Turk, now a Muslim scholar, doesn’t remember many other kids who shared his Palestinian-American identity.
“There wasn’t a lot of diversity. You were either Black, white or Mexican,” said Turk. “So people just assumed I was Mexican.”
Jihad, a traditional Muslim name, was always shortened to “Jay” while he was growing up. It was even printed that way in his youth soccer league program — until the day Turk’s father attended a game. His father saw the roster and corrected it — passing out the amended version to parents at the next game.
An embarrassed Turk protested.
“He goes, ‘No, your name has a great meaning and I chose it for a reason,'” Turk remembered his father replying. “[He said], ‘It means the struggle to do the right thing. And it might be unusual or unfamiliar for people, but it’s worth that extra effort.'”
Decades later, Turk has devoted himself to educating people on his faith. He spent years studying Islam, first independently at home in America, and later in Saudi Arabia and Iran. The lack of centers for higher study of Islam in the U.S. forced him overseas.
“There wasn’t really any institution. There wasn’t really any pathway to really growing my faith,” Turk recalled. “And so people who wanted to do that had to go to Syria, had to go to Egypt, had to go to Islamic University in Medina [Saudi Arabia] or Malaysia or Pakistan or somewhere else.”
But he found a disconnect between the narrow version of the religion as it was often taught in other countries, and the way in which he had been raised. The faith, he found, was always presented in the context of its culture — a practice Turk found not only foreign, but contradictory to the roots of his religion.
“Islam came, quite frankly, as a feminist movement, empowering women in ways that was uncomfortable for the people of their time,” Turk said. “In fact, culture trumps religion. And even though they nominally adopted Islam, as a culture, they disregard Islam when it comes to important cultural practices.
“Whatever is just traditionally done, or historically done, they just kind of lump it all under religion.”…
jihad3tracker says
OFF TOPIC BUT HUGE GOOD NEWS !!!!!!!
Pam Geller’s victory in getting “Stop Islamisation Of America” APPROVED by the USPTO:
https://pamelageller.com/2017/09/patent-approves-islamization.html/
If you have her email address, please take a minute to send congratulations. I am not publishing it here because Muslim trolls would flood it with SH*T.
gravenimage says
Thanks for the good news, jihad3tracker.
PATRICIA FRANCES KOENIG says
That nonsense claim is Taqiyya on steroids!
gravenimage says
The very definition of the Big Lie, Patricia.
Kay says
And people will believe it . . . because they want to and then quote him as an expert.
Ridiculous. And the statement “culture trumps religion” most ridiculous of all. With this he can diminish concerns about many Islamic practices and at the same time keep the West happily ignorant of their judeochristian foundation.
Pablo says
Islam came as a feminist movement just as Nazism came as a human rights moment.
For starters, maybe Turk can explain what is feminist about violating a 9 year old girl back then and now.
mgoldberg says
Why is it that the only conclusion this person comes to is the exact opposite of what any reasonable understanding of the Qu’ran, hadiths, and sira show and demonstrate historically?
Taquiya is the only answer, but even that doesn’t describe the denial such a ‘scholar’ works under.
I don’t know if he’s actually lying (taquiya) or if the self deception disorder is that strong.
I think it is that strong… it is such that for a muslim to exist as a muslim, he or she has to develop that self deception disorder, lest the whole house of cards, falls and crumbles.
gravenimage says
mgoldberg, that assumes that most Muslim scholars are actually morally horrified by what Islam truly is.
This may be true of a few ordinary Muslims, but those who have dedicated their lives to studying and spreading Islam *know* how harsh Islam is, and they like it that way. Lying to the “filthy Kuffar” about it in order to spread Islam is perfectly Islamic.
mortimer says
ALLAH AND MOHAMMED ARE TWO OF THE WORST COMMUNICATORS IN HISTORY, BECAUSE EVERYTHING THEY SAY MEANS THE OPPOSITE !!!
mgoldberg has observed what David Wood has also observed, namely, that Muslim apologists today spend virtually their entire life explaining why ALLAH didn’t really say what he plainly said in the Koran, but almost the EXACT OPPOSITE of the PLAIN MEANING of the texts, and also the MOHAMMED didn’t really say what he said in the hadiths and Sira, but almost the EXACT OPPOSITE of the PLAIN MEANING of the texts.
Islamic writers and scholars spend their lives explaining away the CLEAR and PLAIN meaning of the texts that have been understood for 1400 years by virtually ALL Islamic scholars to mean almost THE OPPOSITE of what Muslim apologists say today!
These modern Islamic apologists are plainly contradicting the received, classical, canonical Islam of the ‘consensus of Islam’.
Kay says
I think it’s a good point mgoldberg.
The mouth speaks what the heart is full of. A good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and an evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him.
Manny says
How laughable Jay’s position is. There is nothing pro-women about Islam.
gravenimage says
As his father harshly reminded him, he is not Jay–he is *Jihad*.
SDN says
Robert, you should make a list of the absurd apologetics of Islam.
St. Manuel II Palaiologos says
Initially, it was. But it hasn’t grown or developed at all since it’s inception. That’s what makes it anti-woman today.
Terry Gain says
Initially it was not, you fool.
gravenimage says
St. Manuel II Palaiologos wrote:
Initially, it was. But it hasn’t grown or developed at all since it’s inception. That’s what makes it anti-woman today.
………………………..
There was *never* a time when marrying little girls, beating wives, and keeping women as sex slaves was “feminist”–not even in dark ages Arabia.
Christianity–and Judaism–are older than Islam, and do not not teach such misogyny.
Given your username, you should know this.
St. Manuel II Palaiologos says
Compared to the standards of Arabia at the time. According to other cultures and civilizations predominating at the time, you’re correct.
gravenimage says
Thanks for the reply. But whatever the low standards for women in dark ages Arabia, Kadija was able to run a business in the pagan era–there was nothing like this under Islam.
Additionally, Aisha notes that Muslim women suffer more wife-beating than do other women.
I’m afraid there is no evidence that the lot of women improved under Islam, even at its inception. Certainly, both Judaism and Christianity were already more civilized.
Kay says
Thank you gravenimage.
As M twisted Scripture and killed Jews, he undoubtedly knew better cultures into which he attempted to infuse his evil dreams and schemes.
The result of his philosophy is fear and death so it’s easy to tell who the author is.
gravenimage says
Thank you, Kay.
Keys says
“Initially, it was.” (Islam was a feminist movement).
St. M P – Why would you even think, or post, that ?
CogitoErgoSum says
A man named Jihad says that Islam is a feminist movement but gives no evidence at all in support of that assertion. Then he says that all of what is historically or traditionally done “they” have dumped under religion. Who are “they” and, again, where is the support for the assertion? Hmmmm …….. let me think. Perhaps Muhammad was actually a hermaphrodite? Perhaps he had the brain of a woman trapped in the body of a man? Perhaps he actually spent his early years being raised by a band of Amazons? Perhaps “they” are the Amazon women who taught Muhammad that their history and tradition of being warlike is a part of religion? Yes, of course. It all makes sense to me now ….. now that a few more of my brain cells have died in the effort to make sense of utter non-sense. Thank you, man named Jihad. I have found the peace that comes from surrendering to the inner struggle against the illusion called reality.
Kay says
(:
Terry Gain says
No lie is so big that a Muslim won’t tell it
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
“Islam came, quite frankly, as a feminist movement, empowering women in ways that was uncomfortable for the people of their time,” Turk said.
The operative phrase in this sentence is, “for the people of their time.” Maybe Mohammadism appeared progressive to sixth and seventh century Arabs but by present day standards Mohammadism makes the European Middle Age’s attitude towards women look avant-garde.
gravenimage says
Even this is not accurate–Kadija was an independent business woman *before* Islam. No Muslim women had such a role after the establishment of Islam. For the most part, women last ground across the board with Islam.
The single thing Islam did was condemn infanticide of girls, which was grimly common at the time among pagan Arabs–but then, so did Judaism and Christianity, so this was nothing new.
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
Theologically, you are correct. Historically, you are probably not. Most historians who study this area and era cannot find any evidence of the existence of a historical Mohammad. In short, Mohammad the man probably never existed. (There is a very interesting debate between Robert Spencer and David Wood on this on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXf7uP9lhE8)
If changes were made in Mohammadism’s beginning years to improve the lot of women then there is no way to prove or disprove it historically. The really awful thing is that Mohammadism proposes that women should be treated the same today as they were in seventh century Arabia (as recorded in the Koran and Sunnah), and that this should continue FOR ALL TIME.
What I do know about the ancient world is that civil rights in most cultures were bound to military duty, ability and service (and women were just not included). Many women were affluent (often through widowhood) and influential but they still had no rights in the eyes of the civil authorities. So a woman would have to hire/pay a man to represent her. There is a little bit of a hint of this with Khadiga marrying Mohammad.
And then there is the red herring of Mohammad stopping the practice of female infanticide. This is a well worn laurel that Mohammadins love to adorn Mohammad with. But infanticide is such a common practice (even today) that this makes no sense. (We saw in China the last few years with the family size quota. And it’s so bad in India that its population’s sex ratio is measurably skewed!)
So girl’s lives may have been spared but for what purpose? So that they can enrich their fathers as chattels to be traded, bartered or sold?
Again, the important thing to stay focused on is that Mohammadins want to enforce a regressive ancient world value system on all of humanity and do so for all time.
Jack Diamond says
Echoing graven. Women had more rights before Islam. Muhammad’s first wife, who was an independent business woman, who hired men to work for her, who inherited her wealth from two dead husbands, is all the proof needed.
You see nothing like that after Islam, in fact, Muhammad reduced their rights to both inheritance and power. To assume he raised the status of women (to the level of sex objects and toys!) from pre-Islamic Arabia, is to believe the only source for that information, Muslim histories. Muslim history is tainted. Muslim history depicts the time before Islam as a period of great ignorance and darkness that needed to be rescued by Islam. Muslims are the ones who tell you the Arabs buried their girls alive or that women were worthless and only Islam raised them to the status of human beings. There is no reason to take it at face value.
In fact, it was Aisha, his favorite wife, who accused Muhammad of making women the equal to dogs and donkeys.
Guest says
In what way?!?
utis says
Well, if we’re throwing around screwball theories here’s mine: modern feminism generated the modern outbreak of islamism. Those Muslim Brotherhood founders were so terrified of women running loose unattended, and getting jobs that made them independent of the “generosity” of their owners (er, husbands) — or even worse, made them bosses of grown men — that the boys got a big boost of that old time religion and spread the word to third-world males everywhere to stand together and keep those broads where they belonged: cleaning house and churning out babies. Maybe that’s why Nouveau Feminists like Islam; they recognize their offspring.
gravenimage says
Uh huh…
mortimer says
Find the FEMINISM here:
Marital rape was regarded as acceptable husbandly conduct by others in the Hanafi legal school. For example, Zayn al-Din ibn Ibrahim ibn Nujaym (d.970/1563) argued that as long as a wife remains in her husband’s house, she is owed maintenance, even if she is disobedient and withholds sex. This is because as long as she remains in his house, a husband can dominate her (yaghlibu ‘alayha), forcing her to have sex with him. Likeal-Kasani, ibn Najaym was comfortable with marital rape, seeing it as a nutural consequence of a wife’s sexual disobedience. ‘Abd Allah ibn Ahmad al-Nasafi (d.710/1310) added an undeniable shade of violence to his discussion of marital rape. While he argued that a necessary condition of hitting one’s wife is to leave her intact or sound (bi-shart al salama), soundness is not a condition for sex, so if a wife dies while her husband is having sex with her, he is not liable.
gravenimage says
Muslim scholar: “Islam came, quite frankly, as a feminist movement”
……………………
Does “quite frankly” mean “I am lying through my teeth to the filthy Infidels”?
As noted, women’s testimony and inheritance is worth jut half of a man’s, and women are deemed to be deficient in intelligence and religion.
They are subject to forced and child marriages. In that marriage, they may be raped, beaten, or subject to summary divorce. Re this last, they have no such rights themselves.
Men may marry up to three more wives, and do not need the consent of their current wife.
And Infidel women may be raped in Jihad, and kept as sex slaves.
Sounds pretty “feminist” to me…sarc/off
mortimer says
Jihad Turk embodies the traits we see in Mohammed: pathological megalomania, narcissism and dishonesty.
There is nothing in Islam whatsoever that is remotely ‘Feminist’. Islam is a RAPE CULT and a MISOGYNY CULT, a SEX SLAVERY CULT, a POLYGAMY CULT and a PEDOPHILIA CULT. None of those cults are remotely ‘Feminist’.
Georg says
“Islam came, quite frankly, as a feminist movement”
No, it didn’t. And it’s not and won’t be. Saying it more doesn’t make it any truer. Grow up.
gravenimage says
It isn’t that he won’t grow up–it’s that he hopes we haven’t grown up.
Chris Malan says
Here is something few know; the first convert to Islam was a woman – Muhammed’s wife Gadija. Also, Muhammed started out working for a woman, again, Gadija. Instead of marrying the boss’ daughter, Muhammed went one better and married the boss. She was 10 or 15 years older than he was. He made up for it by later marrying Aysha. Gadija died before Muhammed.
gravenimage says
Chris, I think most at Jihad Watch are familiar with this.
No woman after Kadija in Islam would ever have this kind of freedom again.
Sarah says
Look – Islam is unarguably ‘feminist’ – with the sole, unshakeable condition that you view women and their rights specifically through the lens of Islam and Muslim culture. That’s where its all going wrong. Trying to apply Western notions of women and women’s rights, to Islam. Our ideas of gender equality just don’t match up with Islam. But the Islamic (and Arabic) versions of women’s rights certainly do.
Look at it, through the lens of Islam. A woman is an inferior creature. She is weaker physically than a male. She is inherently inferior in her emotional state and intellectual abilities. She is uneducated (why waste the time and money on educating her?) and overall, rather simple. Her role is to stay within the home, cloistered within those four walls, breeding children, raising children, cooking, cleaning and serving the men in her life.
Her abilities, are limited to housekeeping, child-rearing and breeding. This is what Islam dictates. This is what Islam and the Arab culture specifically (given that Islam arose from Arab culture and is to this very day, intertwined extremely heavily with Arab culture.)
A woman is a desirable object to the men around her. She is physically enticing to those men. She is incapable of physically warding off an attack from any man. She is also too intellectually ‘simple’ to avoid putting herself into scenarios where she inadvertently tempts any man in her vicinity. Just existing, she is a temptation to any man around her.
So Mohammed said – cover her up. A good Muslim woman should be covered up. This way, any Muslim male can identify on immediate sight, which women are ripe for the taking (read slaves, infidels etc) and which ones should be left alone – as they are already property of another man.
Then you add in a little quirk of Arab culture – the obsession with honour. So that a woman’s behaviour reflects on the honour held by the male that owns her, whether that be her father, brother, husband, cousin, uncle etc. Whenever her actions or behaviours result in an action that despoils her person in some way, such as a rape, that shame is felt by the male owner of the victim.
Kind of like spray-painting someone’s house. Who gives a rats as* about what the house thinks? Its just an object, owned by the male owner. Its the male owner who is angry that someone dared to deface his property. Replace inanimate object with female. Women don’t rate any higher on the scale of importance to them.
Another quirk of Islam and of Arab culture. For different reasons with the same outcomes. Men are raised to be Gods. Inherently superior to the female gender solely by the luck they have, in being born with a penis and testicles. Being surrounded by all these female objects that are bewitchingly tempting and who exist to please and to serve any male they are owned by, these men are never taught on any level, how to control themselves. So they see any female – especially one uncovered – as meat – and as fair game for their pleasure. These female objects exist to serve them and their religion and culture is remarkably sexually obsessed.
They are promised eternal rewards that revolve around sex and sexual pleasures. They are taught from birth that females exist to sexually pleasure them. They are taught that if a female they own does ANYTHING sexual (whether by her consent or not) with a male other than themselves, then she has bought shame upon them.
Remember – a Muslim male who dies in the fight for Islam, is rewarded with sex sex sex and more sex – as much as he can stomach, for eternity. A Muslim female – irrespective of whether she dies in the fight for Islam, or for any other reason – is most likely destined for Hell (as most women are destined for Hell in Islam) and if she goes there, she awaits her turn to be plucked from Hell by Allah and gifted to a warrior as an eternal sex slave. If she manages to avoid Hell, the best possible outcome for any female in Islam, is to spend eternity, quite literally, locked in a tent. She is to wait, locked in her tent in Paradise – because no Muslim male should ever have to come back to his tent and find his wife missing.
She gets eternity in Hell, waiting for the lucky shot to be given away as a sex slave – FOR ETERNITY – or to be locked in a tent – FOR ETERNITY. This is Islam. The fact that ANY female on the planet willingly worships within this faith, boggles my mind.
So – Islam is undeniably feminist, when you rationalize the actions of the average Muslim and when you believe in the teachings of Islam – because women are second-rate sexual objects who exist to serve and to please. By covering them up – its to keep them safe from rapine. By killing them in an honour killing, is to reassert the honour of the male who owns her. To mutilate her genitals in FGM is to make sure she never gets randy and since she’s such a simpleton and all – to make sure she never gets any sexual desires and acts on them. You don’t want her running amok, seeking out an orgasm, after all. By strictly controlling her choices and her freedoms, you are protecting her from herself. Because she isn’t smart enough to make her own choices – and she’s not safe in a world where she is surrounded by other Muslim males, who will use and abuse her. Because all women are worth nothing more,than to be used and abused. And to serve and to please their owners.
So yes, Islam is very feminist – as long as you view women through that framework.
The very fact that any Westerner can defend this cesspit of a religion given all of this – is astonishing. It is a sickening world view. Held by sickening animals.
Kay says
Well, Mohammedens redefine many concepts, putting their ugly twist on the world.
Nevertheless there is reality.
Gen Jones says
Excellent summary of the place of women in Islam.
Robert_k says
That’s like saying Nazism came to liberate Jews
WPM says
Or a cannibal in his heart is really a vegetarian just misunderstood by the noncannibal people of the world. You know the people who have an irrational fear of cannibals are cannibalphobia they need to be reeducated by progressives to love and embrace cannibals!
SAM says
I am speechless.
Mark says
This documentary needs to be shared as fast and widely as possible. Please give it a thumbs up and subscribe to his email before it is removed from Face book and YouTube. https://youtu.be/t_Qpy0mXg8Y
Wellington says
Rather like saying, “Nazism came, quite frankly, as a pro-Jewish movement” or “Marxism came, quite frankly, as a pro-capitalism movement.”
NotAFool says
Muslims love equality when they’re a minority. They preach tolerance. (They pulled that trick in Medina after being forced to leave Mecca due to their violence.) Not so much when their population grows to ~40% or more. Then they go on a killing spree, reducing all non-muslim populations to tiny enclaves if they’re lucky.
Kepha says
I’ll concede that I once read in the Qur’an a verse that condemned female infanticide (a very common practice in a lot of ancient cultures when times get tough): “When the girl child asks for what crime she was slain…” [re day of judgment].
However, if Islam is a “feminist” movement, I am the Pope, and I’m not even a Roman Catholic.
gravenimage says
Yes, Kepha–that is the *only* decent thing in all of Islam.
Of course, given that Judaism and Christianity already condemned infanticide, this was nothing new.