The Suffering of Intersex People Under Unjust and Illogical Islamic Teachings

The decree Muhammad made regarding intersex individuals is one of the darkest chapters in Islamic history, a decree that condemned innocent lives to suffering for no reason other than their natural existence.

Muhammad ordered that all intersex people be expelled from their homes and banished from society, never to return. No crimes were committed, no offenses had been made, yet these individuals were torn away from their families and loved ones, exiled to the harsh desert with nothing but their loneliness and isolation. The very essence of their existence was treated as something shameful, something to be hidden away from the world.

Even in their suffering, those poor souls weren't allowed a simple right like earning a living or leading a life free from want. When they were forced to enter the city, once, maybe twice, it was only to beg for scraps of food. And then, with their stomachs empty and their hearts heavy, they were sent back to the desert, back into isolation, where their cries went unheard and their lives were marked by abandonment.

And why was all this inflicted upon them? What crime could they have committed to deserve such cruel treatment? The answer, disturbingly, lies in one incident where an intersex person described the beauty of a woman's belly, one who was soon to become a captive/slave.

But what’s truly chilling is this: Islam itself made slave women to be exposed publicly, with their bodies on display for anyone to see. The hijab was not allowed for them, and their breasts were kept NAKED in public. Their 'awrah (nakedness) was defined in Islam from the navel to the knee, and they were sold for their beauty, and their bodies treated as commodities, their humanity lost.

Now, the question arises: If simply describing the beauty of a slave woman’s belly was considered such a serious crime that Muhammad had to expel all intersex people from society, then what does that say about the system that allowed thousands of women to be publicly exposed and sold? How is it that the real criminals, the ones who allowed the dehumanization and exploitation of these slave women, are not held accountable, but the intersex individual who only spoke of belly's beauty was banished, forced to live in misery?

In this light, the cruelty of Muhammad's ruling appears even more heartbreaking and hypocritical. Because while the intersex individual was punished for a minor transgression, Islam itself enforced a system where women were publicly shamed and degraded, and where even their modesty was beaten away, as Umar ibn Khattab did when he tore the hijab from a slave woman and beat her for daring to wear it, and told her not to try to RESEMBLE like Free Muslim women by wearing the Hijab. 

This isn't just a historical injustice, but it’s a powerful reminder of how systems of control and exploitation can distort and warp human compassion. The pain of these intersex individuals and enslaved women echoes through the ages, reminding us of the inhumanity that often goes unnoticed and unchallenged.

The Deception of Islamic Apologists 

The commands attributed to Muhammad regarding intersex individuals were not just unjust, but they were deeply inhuman. They reveal a troubling truth: these rulings were not the words of a divine being, but the decisions of a man. A man who made mistakes, like any human does, but claimed those mistakes to be revelations from God.

No just God would ever decree that innocent people be ripped away from their families, exiled to the wilderness, and forced to live in starvation and isolation, simply because they were born different. Only a flawed human system could allow such cruelty and label it as divine justice.

But today, Islamic apologists try to cover up this cruelty. How?

They use deception, deliberate distortion of words and meanings, in order to mislead those who seek truth.

Tactic #1: Distorting the Word “مخنث” (Mukhannath)

The Arabic word “مخنث” originally referred to those who were intersex, i.e.  people born with physical traits that don’t clearly fit male or female categories. These individuals were innocent, and their condition was not a choice.

But Islamic apologists have deliberately changed the meaning, claiming it refers instead to “effeminate men”, i.e. men who choose to act like women but who are still sexually attracted to women. This is a gross manipulation of historical language and context.

Tactic #2: Justifying Muhammad’s Actions Based on the Distorted Meaning

Once they change the meaning, apologists argue:

“See? The Prophet was right to expel these men. They were pretending to be harmless, but they were interested in women.”

And from there, they go even further:

“Muhammad was also right to banish them from society because they bring fitna (discord) through their feminine behavior.”

This twisted logic is used to justify violence, exile, and dehumanization of innocent Intersex people, all while pretending it was the will of a merciful God.

But the reality is heartbreaking

According to authentic hadith, the incident happened before the siege of Ta’if (8 AH), after the verse of Hijab had already been revealed (in the 5th Hijri year). That means Muhammad had already put strict boundaries in place around his wives’ private spaces.

So ask yourself: Would Muhammad really allow just any man into his wives’ home at that stage, especially one with known desire for women?

Of course not. That’s why scholars of the time recognized this person as being different , likely intersex or eunuch, someone believed to be “harmless” around women.

And yet, because this individual once described a woman’s physical features (something Islam itself does shamelessly in its treatment of slave women), he was not just punished, but used as a justification to exile all intersex people from their homes and cities.

Dear Reader,

Before accepting the apologetic spin, understand these essential distinctions:

• Intersex (مخنث): Born with natural variations in sex characteristics. Not a choice. Not a sin.

• Eunuch: Castrated male, usually not by choice. Used historically in slave systems.

• Effeminate Man: A man with soft or feminine behavior. Still male, with interest in women. Still human. Still deserving of dignity.

Let’s be honest

If merely describing a woman’s belly is considered such a terrible act that it warrants lifelong exile of an entire group…

Then what about the Islamic system that allowed thousands of enslaved women to walk around with exposed breasts and no hijab?

What about the caliphs like Umar ibn Khattab, who beat slave women for trying to wear hijab, shouting that they had no right to resemble free women?

Isn’t this the greater injustice?

(1) Muhammad Ordered Muslims to Expel All Intersex Individuals from Their Homes

The Background Story:

Muslims were preparing to attack the city of Taif the following day, where they hoped to get hands to captive women (whom Muslim Jihadists used to rape after turning them into slaves)

An Intersex person, named Hit, visited Um Salama (the wife of Muhammad, who was present with him during that war) and instructed her brother to try to acquire a specific woman among the opponents as a slave after their victory. He described her beauty, noting that she had "four folds" in her stomach, which was considered a sign of beauty at the time.

Muhammad overheard this conversation and subsequently ordered Muslims to expel ALL intersex individuals from their homes, regardless of whether they had committed any wrongdoing.

Sahih al-Bukhari, 4324 (Translated by Mohsin Khan):

حَدَّثَنَا الْحُمَيْدِيُّ، سَمِعَ سُفْيَانَ، حَدَّثَنَا هِشَامٌ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ زَيْنَبَ ابْنَةِ أَبِي سَلَمَةَ، عَنْ أُمِّهَا أُمِّ سَلَمَةَ ـ رضى الله عنها ـ دَخَلَ عَلَىَّ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَعِنْدِي مُخَنَّثٌ فَسَمِعْتُهُ يَقُولُ لِعَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ أَبِي أُمَيَّةَ يَا عَبْدَ اللَّهِ أَرَأَيْتَ إِنْ فَتَحَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْكُمُ الطَّائِفَ غَدًا فَعَلَيْكَ بِابْنَةِ غَيْلاَنَ، فَإِنَّهَا تُقْبِلُ بِأَرْبَعٍ وَتُدْبِرُ بِثَمَانٍ‏.‏ وَقَالَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ "‏ لاَ يَدْخُلَنَّ هَؤُلاَءِ عَلَيْكُنَّ ‏"‏‏.‏ قَالَ ابْنُ عُيَيْنَةَ وَقَالَ ابْنُ جُرَيْجٍ الْمُخَنَّثُ هِيتٌ‏.‏ حَدَّثَنَا مَحْمُودٌ حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو أُسَامَةَ عَنْ هِشَامٍ بِهَذَا، وَزَادَ وَهْوَ مُحَاصِرٌ الطَّائِفَ يَوْمَئِذٍ‏.‏

As previously mentioned, this translation is misleading and dishonest. The Arabic word مُخَنَّثٌ in this hadith does not refer to an effeminate man but rather to an intersex (hermaphrodite) individual. The reasons are as follows:

1. It is highly improbable that Muhammad would have permitted effeminate men to freely enter and interact with his wives in their homes, especially after the verse of Hijab was revealed. This verse (Quran 33:59) was revealed in the 5th year of Hijri, while the Siege of Ta'if mentioned in this narration occurred in the 8th year of Hijri.
2. Effeminate men are typically either attracted to other men (homosexuals) or attracted to women. They are not castrated and do not exhibit EUNUCH-like behavior.
3. In the case of homosexuals, Muhammad did not order exile but prescribed the death penalty.

So why would Muhammad (and his Allah) not have known this and still allowed these effeminate MEN to enter his home and interact with his wives for years, despite potential attraction toward women?

The simple answer is that they were not effeminate men, but intersex individuals whom Muhammad had allowed to interact with his wives. 

Luckily, we have still one English Translator, Aisha Bewley, who translated it correctly: 

Sahih Bukhari, 4069 (Translated by Aisha Bewley):

Even if we accept that Hit committed a crime by describing the beauty of the woman, why were all other intersex individuals punished? They committed no wrongdoing.

• Why was it not sufficient for Muslims to simply expel them from their homes and not allow to enter their homes (like other men)?
• After being expelled, intersex individuals would no longer have the opportunity to describe the beauty of any woman. So why was exile from the city necessary, which caused them extreme pain of separation from their families and hardships of living in deserts?