Why is Muhammad’s religion male-centered?

Some say ISIS is not Islam; however, what ISIS does (waging wars, taking women captive and using them as sexual slaves) is exactly the same as the methods used by the Prophet Muhammad. It is said that this is explicitly permitted in the Quran.

It is claimed that this religion is claimed to have double standards and to be male-centered: while consensual sexual intercourse is forbidden and punishable, it is permissible to have sexual intercourse with an enslaved woman without the consent of one party; it is not considered adultery and does not require punishment. Yet, it is also said that this religion advocates for the freeing of slaves and the abolition of slavery.

To someone who has studied Islam in depth, this situation shows that the religion is structured in a way that prioritizes men’s sexual desires above all else.

Dear Brother / Sister,

First, we should state that the aim of Islam is not to perpetuate the slavery it found, but to first improve the conditions of slavery and then abolish it. Those who perpetuate slavery today act contrary to the intent of Islam and damage the image of Islam.

The institution of concubinage, a historical phenomenon, is not practiced in any way today.

Muslims fight against unbelievers who attack their religion and homeland; that war is legitimate. Muslims invite unbelievers to convert to Islam, and if they refuse – as in the case of the massacre of Muslims in Andalusia who refused to convert to Christianity – they are not told, “Convert to Islam or be killed.” Instead, they are offered a treaty to cease hostilities against Muslims; and if they refuse that as well, war is waged to prevent a potential threat; that is also a legitimate war.

Let us consider what unbelievers would do if they took Muslim men or women captive in a legitimate war. However, Muslims treat captives humanely. Male prisoners are not killed; the state/government decides on different methods such as exchange with Muslim captives, ransoming them for a fee, or releasing them without ransom.

As for female captives, if the state grants them to Muslim warriors, they become their property from the moment they are granted, and this ownership is also regarded as marriage. However, if they are pregnant, sexual intercourse is prohibited, and intercourse is also not permissible until the woman has had her period.

Besides, Islam has established many grounds for the emancipation of slaves and concubines (female slaves). For example, the status of a concubine who becomes pregnant by her owner changes, and she can no longer be bought or sold.

Furthermore, “slaves and concubines are to be fed what their masters eat, clothed in what their masters wear, and not be ordered to do anything beyond their capacity.”

Then, why did Islam not abolish the status of slaves and concubines all at once?

Let us consider what the economic, social, and political consequences would be if you were to suddenly abolish the employer-employee relationship today and make workers partners in property, work, and decision-making. If you want to make such a revolution, would you not need to prepare the infrastructure and implement it gradually over time to avoid causing a crisis?

Islam, too, has advocated for such an approach regarding slavery and concubinage, but unfortunately, Muslims have not followed this path.

Questions on Islam