From Semantics to Normative Law: Perceptions of Liwāt (Sodomy) and Sihāq (Tribadism) in Islamic Jurisprudence (8th-15th Century CE)
In: Islamic Law and SocietySearch for other papers by Sara Omar in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
The present essay is an examination of classical jurists' legal determinations pertaining to liwāt (sodomy) and sihāq (tribadism), both of which have been little studied in their legal context. In exploring jurists' logic and legal categorizations, I argue that three major factors contributed to their legal injunctions: (1) their use of zinā (illicit sex between a man and a woman) as the paradigm by which to punish liwāt and sihāq, (2) their perception of sexual intercourse as an exclusively male act of phallic penetration, and (3) an individual's legal status within the social hierarchy as reflected in jurisprudential discussions of illicit sexual intercourse (zinā). Juristic disagreements over the semantics and definitions of these three factors extended to the treatment of liwāt and sihāq and, ultimately, became normative doctrine.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1440 | 220 | 10 |
| Full Text Views | 264 | 20 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 236 | 50 | 2 |
From Semantics to Normative Law: Perceptions of Liwāt (Sodomy) and Sihāq (Tribadism) in Islamic Jurisprudence (8th-15th Century CE)
In: Islamic Law and SocietySearch for other papers by Sara Omar in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
The present essay is an examination of classical jurists' legal determinations pertaining to liwāt (sodomy) and sihāq (tribadism), both of which have been little studied in their legal context. In exploring jurists' logic and legal categorizations, I argue that three major factors contributed to their legal injunctions: (1) their use of zinā (illicit sex between a man and a woman) as the paradigm by which to punish liwāt and sihāq, (2) their perception of sexual intercourse as an exclusively male act of phallic penetration, and (3) an individual's legal status within the social hierarchy as reflected in jurisprudential discussions of illicit sexual intercourse (zinā). Juristic disagreements over the semantics and definitions of these three factors extended to the treatment of liwāt and sihāq and, ultimately, became normative doctrine.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1440 | 220 | 10 |
| Full Text Views | 264 | 20 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 236 | 50 | 2 |