Here is a comment from my Axiological Atheist page:

“Cmon rape sucks I’m sure. But let’s not make it something it’s not. Religion however is a scourge on our society and needs to be eliminated.“ – Challenger

“Oh yeah…rape is a piece of cake. No big deal. Don’t even know why it’s illegal….said no rape victim ever.” – A female page member

“I’ve never heard a male rape victim claim it “ruined his whole life” – Challenger

My response, rape is a big deal. Rape often destroys one’s long-term internal well being and is a violation of one’s dignity at a core level disrupting one’s sense of body integrity commonly producing possible lifelong PTSD symptoms and emotional hijacking responses in even some loving relationships. So, it is a very big deal.

“Rape trauma syndrome (RTS) is the psychological trauma experienced by a rape victim that includes disruptions to normal physical, emotional, cognitive, and interpersonal behavior. The theory was first described by psychiatrist Ann Wolbert Burgess and sociologist Lynda Lytle Holmstrom in 1974. RTS is a cluster of psychological and physical signs, symptoms and reactions common to most rape victims immediately following and for months or years after a rape. While most research into RTS has focused on female victims, sexually abused males (whether by male or female perpetrators) also exhibit RTS symptoms. RTS paved the way for consideration of complex post-traumatic stress disorder, which can more accurately describe the consequences of serious, protracted trauma than posttraumatic stress disorder alone. The symptoms of RTS and post-traumatic stress syndrome overlap. As might be expected, a person who has been raped will generally experience high levels of distress immediately afterward. These feelings may subside over time for some people; however, individually each syndrome can have long devastating effects on rape victims and some victims will continue to experience some form of psychological distress for months or years. It has also been found that rape survivors are at high risk for developing substance use disorders, major depression, generalized anxiety disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and eating disorders.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_trauma_syndrome

“Well, here’s your first, then – it’s had serious effects on my life and relationships for the last two decades.” – Another male page member

My response, here is my video on my life and I was a victim of sexual abuse too and it affected me a lot even when I did not realize it I was not great at being touched during sex as it felt too unsafe, a mental issue lasts after one’s dignity has been so violated. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMIeuzfus9Q

The concept of rape, both as an abduction and in the sexual sense (not always distinguishable), makes its first historical appearance in early religious texts. The rape of women or youths is a common theme in Greek mythology. Among the rapes or abductions committed by Zeus, the supreme deity of the Greek pantheon, are Europa and Ganymede. In Roman law, raptus (or raptio) meant primarily kidnapping or abduction; sexual violation was a secondary issue. The “abduction” of an unmarried girl from her father’s household in some circumstances was a matter of the couple eloping without her father’s permission to marry. Rape in the English sense of “forced sex” was more often expressed as stuprum, a sex crime committed through violence or coercion (cum vi or per vim). Raptus ad stuprum, “abduction for the purpose of committing a sex crime,” emerged as a legal distinction in the late Roman RepublicThe Lex Julia de vi publica, recorded in the early 3rd century AD but dating probably from the dictatorship of Julius Caesar, defined rape as forced sex against “boy, woman, or anyone”. Although Roman law in the historical period recognized rape as a crime, the rape of women is a pervasive theme in the myths and legends of early Rome.

Attitudes toward rape changed when the Roman Empire became Christianized. St. Augustine interpreted Lucretia’s suicide as a possible admission that she had secretly encouraged the rapist, and Christian apologists regarded her as having committed the sin of involuntary sexual pleasure. Augustine’s interpretation of the rape of Lucretia (in The City of God Against the Pagans 1.19) has generated a substantial body of criticism, starting with a satire by Machiavelli. Historian of early Christianity Peter Brown characterized this section of Augustine’s work as his most vituperative attack on Roman ideals of virtue. Augustine redefines sexual integrity (pudicitia) as a purely spiritual quality that physical defilement cannot taint; the Romans had viewed rape and other forms of stuprum (“sex crime”) within a political context as crimes against the citizen’s body and liberty. The first Christian emperor Constantine redefined rape as a public offense rather than as a private wrong. Since under Roman law raptus could also mean cases of abduction or elopement without the head of household’s permission, Constantine ordered that if the female had consented, she should be punished along with the male “abductor” by being burnt alive. If she had not consented, she was still considered an accomplice, “on the grounds that she could have saved herself by screaming for help.” As a participant to the rape, she was punished under law by being disinherited, regardless of the wishes of her family. Even if she and her family consented to a marriage as the result of an elopement, the marriage was legally void. Ref

Women have historically been considered second-class citizens who were not thought to deserve the same rights as their male counterparts. Rape laws existed to protect virginal daughters from rape, often through their fathers. In these cases, a rape done to a woman was seen as an attack on the estate of her father because she was his property and a woman’s virginity being taken before marriage lessened her value; if the woman was married, the rape was an attack on the husband because it violated his property. The rapist was either subject to payment (see wreath money) or severe punishment. The father could rape or keep the rapist’s wife or make the rapist marry his daughter. A man could not be charged with raping his wife since she was his property. Author Winnie Tomm stated, “By contrast, rape of a single woman without strong ties to a father or husband caused no great concern.”

In the United States, during slavery, the law focused primarily on rape as it pertained to black men raping white women. The penalty for such a crime in many jurisdictions was death or castration. The rape of a black woman, by any man, was considered legal. As early as the 19th century, American women were criticized if they “stray[ed] out of a [dependent] position…fought off [an] attacker…[or] behaved in too self reliant a manner…” in which case “the term rape no longer applied…”. Similar to rape myths and double standards applied to women today, description of rape in the 1800s depicted women who needed to behave or else face the inevitable consequences.

In the United States, prior to the 1930s rape was considered a sex crime that was always committed by men and always done to women. From 1935–1965, a shift from labeling rapists as criminals to believing them to be mentally ill “sexual psychopaths” began making its way into popular opinion. Men caught for committing rape were no longer sentenced to prison but admitted to mental health hospitals where they would be given medication for their illness. Because only “insane” men were the ones committing acts of rape, no one considered the everyday person to be capable of such violence. Transitions in women’s roles in society were also shifting, causing alarm and blame towards rape victims. Because women were becoming more involved in the public (i.e. searching for jobs rather than being a housewife) many people believed that these women were “loose” and looking for trouble. Giving up the gender roles of mother and wife was seen as defiant against traditional values while immersing themselves within society created the excuse that women would “not [be] entitled to protection under the traditional guidelines for male-female relationships”. So to me religious culture is very involved in “Rape culture,” a sociological concept used to describe a setting in which rape is pervasive and normalized due to societal attitudes about gender and sexualityBehaviors commonly associated with rape culture include victim blaming, slut shaming, sexual objectification, trivializing rape, denial of widespread rape, refusing to acknowledge the harm caused by some forms of sexual violence, or some combination of these. Ref

Until 2012, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) still considered rape a crime solely committed by men against women. In 2012, they changed their definition from “The carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will” to “The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.” The previous definition, which had remained unchanged since 1927, was considered outdated and narrow. The updated definition includes recognizing any gender of victim and perpetrator and that rape with an object can be as traumatic as penile/vaginal rape. The bureau further describes instances when the victim is unable to give consent because of mental or physical incapacity. It recognizes that a victim can be incapacitated by drugs and alcohol and unable to consent. The definition does not change federal or state criminal codes or impact charging and prosecution on the federal, state or local level; it rather means that rape will be more accurately reported nationwide.

Health organizations and agencies have also expanded rape beyond traditional definitions. The World Health Organization (WHO) defines rape as a form of sexual assault, while the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) includes rape in their definition of sexual assault; they term rape a form of sexual violence. The CDC lists other acts of coercive, non-consensual sexual activity that may or may not include rape, including drug-facilitated sexual assault, acts in which a victim is made to penetrate a perpetrator or someone else, intoxication where the victim is unable to consent (due to incapacitation or being unconscious), non-physically forced penetration which occurs after a person is pressured verbally (by intimidation or misuse of authority to force to consent), or completed or attempted forced penetration of a victim via unwanted physical force (including using a weapon or threatening to use a weapon).

Some countries or jurisdictions differentiate between rape and sexual assault by defining rape as involving penile penetration of the vagina, or solely penetration involving the penis, while other types of non-consensual sexual activity are called sexual assault. Scotland, for example, emphasizes penile penetration, requiring that the sexual assault must have been committed by use of a penis to qualify as rape. The 1998 International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda defines rape as “a physical invasion of a sexual nature committed on a person under circumstances which are coercive”. In other cases, the term rape has been phased out of legal use in favor of terms such as sexual assault or criminal sexual conduct. Some laws have eliminated the term rape altogether.

Some research purposes, incidence of rapes are classified into a number of categories. These can be gender, age, ethnicity, geographical location, culture or historical periods. Other categories of rape describe the relationship of the perpetrator to the victim and the context of the sexual assault. Rape is categorized as date rape, gang rape, marital rape, incestual rape, child sexual abuse, prison rape, acquaintance rape, war rape and statutory rapeVictims of rape or sexual assault come from a wide range of sexual orientations, genders, ages, and degrees of impairment or disability. Perpetrators sometimes use objects for penetration, force the victim to penetrate the perpetrator, force the victim to perform oral sex or assault the victim with anal penetration. Those experiencing non-consensual, forced sexual experiences and sexual assault include women, heterosexual men, homosexual men, boys, adolescent males, spouses, girlfriends, boyfriends, prepubescent girls and boys, adolescent girls, children, the elderly, and even infants. Forced sexual activity can be committed over a long period of time with little to no physical injury.

In an early study of U.S. 1,632 students from 79 different schools, boys and girls were surveyed and asked if they had, at some time, been asked to engage in unwelcome sexual behavior. 85% of the girls and 76% of the boys said that this had occurred. The boys and girls indicated that the behavior they experienced included pinching, grabbing, touching in a sexual manner. One fourth of the girls had been forced to kiss someone and 10% of both the girls and the boys reported having been forced against their wills to do something sexual other than kissing. Students reported that 80% of the unwelcome sexual behavior had come from other students, and 20% had come from teachers, coaches, or other adults. Out of the total of child abuse rates, slightly more than 75% were neglected, 18% were assaulted and slightly more than nine percent were sexually abused. Ref

There is a heavy influence of sexism in the Major World Religions

From the ancient past, evidence shows that sexism was near nonexistent and females were highly valued. Currently in the world with the male dominant thinking, male centric religions, and the many cultures of societies marginalizing women and promoting of sexism, which all seem to devalue, give a lesser status, or limit the value of women. Moreover, it should be understood that before there were any male god myths, there were only or mainly female goddesses and animals or aspects of nature, which were held as spirits or something like deities. Many present day thinkers may find it difficult to comprehend that women could have been valued, be equal to some extent, or even hold a position of power, especially political power in early historic or prehistoric times. However from some of the earliest writing we see that as far back as at least around 6,000 years ago women were documented as leaders and other positions of political authority that went on for thousands of years starting with Legendary Queen of Ethiopia. Likewise, according to a scientific study, there is further confirmation which shows that sexual equality is nothing new, even if it is something long forgotten. In contemporary hunter-gatherer tribes, evidence shows that men and women tend to have equal influence on important decision-making. Such findings challenge the idea that sexual equality is a recent invention, which suggests that it has been the norm for humans for most of our evolutionary history. Getting back to the timeline, by at least by 12,000 years ago, female goddesses and not male gods were created; however, the female goddesses may have been created as early as 40,000 years ago or earlier. Furthermore, I surmise around 12,000 years ago the possible beginnings of the hints of sexism and latter patriarchy began. Before 12,000 years ago, women seemed to have a special power of giving life but then things started to change, women started to lose this perceived special or magical status. However, as time went on women were starting to be seen as an object, since animals were being domesticated and humans started understand birthing. Nevertheless, do not get me wrong, this was not a dramatic shift; it was a slow process of sexism gaining power that took thousands of years to reach full fruition as we think of it today. One of the oldest written religion is of the Sumerians who’s creator being was a Female and not a Male. The Sumerian religion is around 6,000 years old but it could be much older 7,000 to 8,000 years old. In human history, when did the religious subjugation of goddess and by extension all women occur? Well, this can also be conserved to happen around 6,000 years ago also. Although, it can be hypothesized that male gods hit the scene in full force around about 5,000 years ago, when women started to lose more, and eventually all value. The introduction of Proto-Indo-Europeans marked the patriarchalization of agrarian culture. The earliest extant written sources demonstrate that these invading patriarchal peoples accommodated their divinities to those of the indigenous goddess-worshiping cultures, and they did not immediately belittle the importance of the great mother. Instead, the literature from the 5,000 years ago, recorded after the invasions, demonstrates the fusion of the goddess worshiping with the god worshiping culture. In Turkey, archaeologists found 4,000-year-old tablets that cite women’s rights. However, more progress sexism continued to develop after 4,000 years ago. Even today, women hardly have any value or even regained a fully equal status.. The devaluing, disrespecting, and degrading of women came before societies developed the more fixed class/sex structures as we think of today. Around 2,000 years ago, the manmade god concept which had taken time to develop finally started to be finalized completely as the only or the main gender of believed gods. It can be said that one of the male god concept’s goal was or seems to be for male control and domination of female sexuality and their reproductive potential. Once the male god concept is fully established and by extension men with the promotion of patriarchy, it was relatively easy to maintain and enforce through holy books and laws written by men, which established women’s lower status that deny women of education, their rights to their bodies, and exclude them from decision-making. Eventually, male dominance and its sexism were establish in nearly every known religion as well as every human society and has lasted now for a few millennia. All religions have or are prone and promote sexism, some more than others but it is a shame they all share.


The Bible and Rape

By Evil Bible.com

1) Murder, rape, and pillage at Jabesh-gilead (Judges 21:10-24 NLT)

So they sent twelve thousand warriors to Jabesh-gilead with orders to kill everyone there, including women and children.  “This is what you are to do,” they said. “Completely destroy all the males and every woman who is not a virgin.”  Among the residents of Jabesh-gilead they found four hundred young virgins who had never slept with a man, and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh in the land of Canaan.

The Israelite assembly sent a peace delegation to the little remnant of Benjamin who were living at the rock of Rimmon. Then the men of Benjamin returned to their homes, and the four hundred women of Jabesh-gilead who were spared were given to them as wives.  But there were not enough women for all of them.  The people felt sorry for Benjamin because the LORD had left this gap in the tribes of Israel.  So the Israelite leaders asked, “How can we find wives for the few who remain, since all the women of the tribe of Benjamin are dead?  There must be heirs for the survivors so that an entire tribe of Israel will not be lost forever.  But we cannot give them our own daughters in marriage because we have sworn with a solemn oath that anyone who does this will fall under God’s curse.”

Then they thought of the annual festival of the LORD held in Shiloh, between Lebonah and Bethel, along the east side of the road that goes from Bethel to Shechem.  They told the men of Benjamin who still needed wives, “Go and hide in the vineyards.  When the women of Shiloh come out for their dances, rush out from the vineyards, and each of you can take one of them home to be your wife!  And when their fathers and brothers come to us in protest, we will tell them, ‘Please be understanding.  Let them have your daughters, for we didn’t find enough wives for them when we dest60royed Jabesh-gilead. And you are not guilty of breaking the vow since you did not give your daughters in marriage to them.’”  So the men of Benjamin did as they were told.  They kidnapped the women who took part in the celebration and carried them off to the land of their own inheritance.  Then they rebuilt their towns and lived in them.  So the assembly of Israel departed by tribes and families, and they returned to their own homes.

Obviously these women were repeatedly raped.  These sick bastards killed and raped an entire town and then wanted more virgins, so they hid beside the road to kidnap and rape some more.  How can anyone see this as anything but evil?

2) Murder, rape and pillage of the Midianites (Numbers 31:7-18 NLT)

They attacked Midian just as the LORD had commanded Moses, and they killed all the men.  All five of the Midianite kings – Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba – died in the battle.  They also killed Balaam son of Beor with the sword.  Then the Israelite army captured the Midianite women and children and seized their cattle and flocks and all their wealth as plunder.  They burned all the towns and villages where the Midianites had lived.  After they had gathered the plunder and captives, both people and animals, they brought them all to Moses and Eleazar the priest, and to the whole community of Israel, which was camped on the plains of Moab beside the Jordan River, across from Jericho.

Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the people went to meet them outside the camp.  But Moses was furious with all the military commanders who had returned from the battle.  “Why have you let all the women live?” he demanded.  “These are the very ones who followed Balaam’s advice and caused the people of Israel to rebel against the LORD at Mount Peor.  They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the LORD’s people.  Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man.  Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves.

Clearly Moses and God approves of rape of virgins.

3) More Murder Rape and Pillage (Deuteronomy 20:10-14)

As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace.  If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor.  But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town.  When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town.  But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder.  You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.

What kind of God approves of murder, rape, and slavery?

4) Laws of Rape (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NAB)

If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.  Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.

What kind of lunatic would make a rape victim marry her attacker?  Answer: God.

5) Death to the Rape Victim (Deuteronomy 22:23-24 NAB)

If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has relations with her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife.

It is clear that God doesn’t give a damn about the rape victim.  He is only concerned about the violation of another mans “property”.

6) David’s Punishment – Polygamy, Rape, Baby Killing, and God’s “Forgiveness” (2 Samuel 12:11-14 NAB)

Thus says the Lord: ‘I will bring evil upon you out of your own house.  I will take your wives [plural] while you live to see it, and will give them to your neighbor.  He shall lie with your wives in broad daylight.  You have done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all Israel, and with the sun looking down.’

Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.”  Nathan answered David: “The Lord on his part has forgiven your sin: you shall not die.  But since you have utterly spurned the Lord by this deed, the child born to you must surely die.”  [The child dies seven days later.]

This has got to be one of the sickest quotes of the Bible.  God himself brings the completely innocent rape victims to the rapist.  What kind of pathetic loser would do something so evil?  And then he kills a child!  This is sick, really sick!

7)  Rape of Female Captives (Deuteronomy 21:10-14 NAB)

“When you go out to war against your enemies and the LORD, your God, delivers them into your hand, so that you take captives, if you see a comely woman among the captives and become so enamored of her that you wish to have her as wife, you may take her home to your house.  But before she may live there, she must shave her head and pare her nails and lay aside her captive’s garb.  After she has mourned her father and mother for a full month, you may have relations with her, and you shall be her husband and she shall be your wife.  However, if later on you lose your liking for her, you shall give her her freedom, if she wishes it; but you shall not sell her or enslave her, since she was married to you under compulsion.”

Once again God approves of forcible rape.

8)  Rape and the Spoils of War (Judges 5:30 NAB)

They must be dividing the spoils they took: there must be a damsel or two for each man, Spoils of dyed cloth as Sisera’s spoil, an ornate shawl or two for me in the spoil. (Judges 5:30 NAB)

9) Sex Slaves (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are.  If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again.  But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her.  And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter.  If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife.  If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

10) God Assists Rape and Plunder (Zechariah 14:1-2 NAB)

Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst.  And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished; half of the city shall go into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be removed from the city. (Zechariah 14:1-2 NAB)


Islam and Rape

By The Religion of Peace.com

It is against Islam to rape Muslim women, but Muhammad actually encouraged the rape of others captured in battle. This hadith provides the context for the Qur’anic verse (4:24):

The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain.  They met their enemy and fought with them.  They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers.  So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: (Sura 4:24) “And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess.” (Abu Dawud 2150, also Muslim 3433)

Actually, as the hadith indicates, it wasn’t Muhammad, but “Allah the Exalted” who told the men to rape the women in front of their husbands – which is all the more reason to think of Islam differently from other religions.

Note also that the husbands of these unfortunate victims were obviously alive after battle.  This is important because it flatly contradicts those apologists who like to argue that the women Muhammad enslaved were widowed and thus unable to fend for themselves.  (Even if the apologists were right, what sort of a moral code is it that forces a widow to choose between being raped and starving?)

There are several other episodes in which Muhammad is offered the clear opportunity to disavow raping women – yet he instead offers advice on how to proceed.  In one case, his men were reluctant to devalue their new slaves for later resale by getting them pregnant.  Muhammad was asked about coitus interruptus in particular:

“O Allah’s Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?”  The Prophet said, “Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence.” (Bukhari34:432)

As indicated, the prophet of Islam did not mind his men raping the women, provided they ejaculated within the bodies of their victims.

As one might imagine, Muhammad’s obvious approval of raping women captured in battle and his own personal participation as recorded in many places is of intense inconvenience to the Muslim apologists of our time.  For this reason, some of them attempt to explain away these many episodes and Qur’anic references to sex with captives by pretending that these are cases in which women have fled bad marriages and sought refuge with the Muslims.  Some apologists even refer to them as “wives,” even though the Qur’an makes a clear distinction between “those whom thy right hand possesses” and true wives (see Sura 33:50).

Beyond the desperation of the 21st century apologist however, there is absolutely nothing in the historical text that supports this rosy revision of Muslim history.  The women of the Banu Mustaliq were sold into slavery following their rape:

“We went out with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter (Sahih Muslim 3371)

In fact, female slaves were traded like any other simple commodity by Muhammad and his band of devoted followers:

“Then the apostle sent Sa-d b. Zayd al-Ansari, brother of Abdu’l-Ashal with some of the captive women of Banu Qurayza to Najd and he sold them for horses and weapons.” (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham/Hisham 693)

Is it Islamic to sell one’s wife for horses?  Clearly these were not wives!

More importantly, by definition a “captured” woman is not one who is fleeing her husband.  She is fleeing her captor (ie. the Muslim slave raider).  This hadith describes a typical raid, in which the women and children are captured as they are attempting to flee the attacking Muslims:

“…and then we attacked from all sides and reached their watering-place where a battle was fought.  Some of the enemies were killed and some were taken prisoners.  I saw a group of persons that consisted of women and children [escaping in the distance]I was afraid lest they should reach the mountain before me, so I shot an arrow between them and the mountain.  When they saw the arrow, they stopped.  So I brought them, driving them along” (Sahih Muslim 4345)

The Muslim narrator sees the women trying to escape (following the massacre of their men) and cuts off their route by shooting an arrow into their path.  These aren’t women trying to seek refuge with the Muslims.  They are trying to avoid capture by the Muslims.

The same hadith goes on to recount that Muhammad personally demanded one of the captured women for his own use:

I drove them along until I brought them to Abu Bakr who bestowed that girl upon me as a prize.  So we arrived in Medina.  I had not yet disrobed her when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) met me in the street and said: “Give me that girl.”(Sahih Muslim 4345)

The prophet of Islam and his companions used war to collect women for personal sexual use and for trading.  Unless she was arbitrarily declared as someone’s wife, the woman became a sex slave.  In no case was her fate tied to anything that she had personally done, nor was she given a choice about her future.


Sexism, Prejudice, and Killing in Vedic Culture (Hinduism)

There are some points about Vedic society brought out by this text of Gita, which are difficult to swallow in this regard:
 
There does exist social distinctions between women and men
There are no such thing as women being of the four varnas and ashramas, it is only for men. Women obtain varna practically as a result of who they marry. This point is not entirely true – as we will find that when a brahman lady marries a kshatriya, the child is considered a hybrid. Therefore the caste of the woman does have some independant status. There does exist social distinctions between various types of men.
 
“Those who take shelter in Me, though they be of lower birth — women, vaiśyas [merchants] and śūdras [workers] — can attain the supreme destination.” – Krsna in Bhagavad Gita (9.32)
 
 
Bhagavad-gita (16.7) “Those who are demoniac do not know what is to be done and what is not to be done. Neither cleanliness nor proper behavior nor truth is found in them.”
 
So who are they talking about well unbelievers (us atheists) those who do not follow the scriptural injunctions are supposed to be demons. So to the Bhagavad-gītā demons neither like nor follow all these rules for external and internal cleanliness and because they do not follow the experience of great sages and the rules and regulations laid down by the sages, the social condition of the demoniac people is very miserable.
 
 
Bhagavad-gītā has an appeals or call for violence such as how Krishna exhorts a confused Arjuna
 
“that taking up war and killing is the duty of a Kshatriya (casteist call) and that not waging war and killing his enemies is unmanly (sexist bias) and that since the people killed in the violence do not really die as only their body dies and the soul cannot be destroyed (metaphysical argument) and that the death of the enemies is already ordained by him as the Lord (fatalistic super naturalism) and that since body is unreal, violence and killing is of the unreal body or matter and not of the soul which is the only real thing (metaphysics again), so war, violence and killing are all fine and indeed a duty to be carried out.”
 
Of course the Bhagavad-gītā does not care to bother or explain that if the soul cannot be killed, what is the point of killing the body and how is the destruction of a so-called unreal thing, a righteous victory for the protagonist engaging in war and killing.
 

How Religion Might Influence Rape Culture