Sex and Gender Identifications in the View of Islam and Western Thought
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contemporary debates on gender identity reveal a fundamental divergence between Islamic and Western perspectives, creating significant theoretical and practical tensions in addressing gender ambiguity. Islam upholds a binary framework where biological sex determines gender identity, while Western thought increasingly separates sex from gender, recognizing gender as a social construct independent of biological markers. This ideological divide raises critical issues regarding gender dysphoria management, gender transition legitimacy, and accommodation of gender-variant individuals within different societal frameworks. This study conducts a comparative analysis of Islamic jurisprudence and Western gender theory through qualitative content analysis of religious texts, scholarly works, medical literature, and policy documents to examine how each tradition addresses gender identification conflicts. The research investigates theoretical foundations and practical applications of both approaches to gender-related disorders and identity crises. Key findings reveal that while Islam maintains consistent binary classifications rooted in biological determinism since the Quranic era, it demonstrates flexibility in addressing intersex conditions through established jurisprudential mechanisms. Despite fundamental philosophical differences, the study concludes that potential convergence areas exist between Islamic principles and certain medical interventions, suggesting possibilities for nuanced dialogue rather than absolute opposition in addressing contemporary gender identity challenges and fostering cross-cultural understanding.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".