This is an old but unanswered question:
Why should men provide for and protect women when generally and naturally women can provide and protect themselves (except some situations, for example pregnancy)?
I mean women and men equally can help, protect and provide each other and themselves in normal situations. So, why should be women dependent on men and men get more share of inheritance?
Please note i wrote men not husbands.
Most of traditional writers believe men should be Qawwamoom of women because God bestowed to men more physical strength, however, this is not a view based on equallity and it also seems biased in 21th century. (Most of modern scholars as G.A. Parwez do not point to physical strength as the reason)
Lets read some opinions so far:
Brother Jawaid believes that women in some cases are earners but they can keep all they earned unless they wish to help their famliy financially.
This is because women have child not men.
However, brother Yusuf Desai once wrote that in 4:32, the Quran says women have a PORTION from what they earn not ALL, so the rest of what they earn distributed in family expenses, tax etc.
So women should help husband and family if they are earner.
But lets back to above question, why should be men Qawwamoon of women when men and women can be protector and provider of each other equally (except in the case one of them cannot do so for example pregnancy of women or even illness of men/women)?
Is 4:34 not conditional as some feminists believe? If it is conditional so why do men/sons get more share of inheritance by default?
Your comments warmly welcomed.