What?

Islam, is in many parts of the world, tied into misogyny as an official part of the religion.

Please give one example where misogyny is an official part of Islam (as defined by dictionaries, not Wikipedia, as "hatred of women").

Well, first you do the definition wrong, "Dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women." https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/misogyny

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Islam

Look in a reputable dictionary first, not a no-name website or Wikipedia, then get back to me. Otherwise you are deliberately being disingenuous.

LOL, dictionaries wouldn't cover details on religions, but I guess you cannot be bothered to check the citations and then lied about my motives rather than listen to the facts while ruling out every source with a nonsense standard.
https://time.com/3751243/muslim-women-redefine-islam-feminism/

Yep. You are deliberately being disingenuous. YOU are the one who put forward the word "misogyny" and now YOU are the one refusing to cite the standard meaning of the word in the English language from a reputable dictionary. It has ZERO to do with religious details, and you know it. And you can shove that useless BS link up you know where. Not only have you FAILED to give any reference that misogyny is an official part of Islam as you claimed (from scholarly sources of Islam, not jew-owned TIME magazine), you refuse to even acknowledge the very word which is the basis of your thesis. This is how basic scholarship works. Did you even go to college?

Sorry if Oxford is not good enough for you., but thanks for pretending to know what I think, getting it wrong, and flying into a rage because you cannot bother to look at sources and then blatantly lying to cover your ass while giving zero sources of your own while wallowing in antisemitism, ignorance, and elitism.

You never quoted Oxford, asshole. Here is Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary definition of misogyny:
​"a feeling of hate towards women that is felt by some people"
You've also given ZERO evidence, the burden of proof is on YOU because you are one who made the assertion. Now after refusing to define the very word you use, then rambling and dissembling, do you care to give your first proof that misogyny, as defined by Oxford, is an official part of Islam?

Btw, "blatantly lying to cover your ass while giving zero sources of your own while wallowing in antisemitism, ignorance, and elitism" is EXACTLY what you are doing, hypocrite. I can only expect more of the same retreat into "you don't know I'm thinking". Amateur.

LOL, flying into a rage doesn't change that the linked definition comes from Oxford, nor did you even provide any citation or actual argument that it doesn't,

You also dismissed evidence based off an anti-Semitic attack and now are pretending it doesn't exist. Other evidence you dismissed because you didn't want to bother to check the provide citations.

So basically you're lying about the evidence because you refuse to take a few seconds to look into the source and claim that it up to me to prove your own separate claims wrong as you Nah-Huhing, NO! U!ing, and fling insults as if attacking me means anything at all.

Even with all that you're also starting to move the goal post from my original claim to a new easier to defend one, thus strawmaning as well. Thus showing that you do not rely believe that your position is one you can adequately and honestly defend.

Here's something else for you to fly into a rage over and then pretend doesn't exist later: https://www.amnestyusa.org/the-horror-of-honor-killings-even-in-us/

You are outright lying about some anti-Semitic attack. Please cite, it doesn't exist.

So your lexico link is indeed sourced from Oxford, although that clearly isn't evident from the link name. Now that you have your definition, for the THIRD TIME I'm asking you, please cite any Islamic source that says that misogyny, as defined by OXFORD as "Dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women" is an official part of the religion of Islam.

I'm guessing you can't because you are too pig-headed to admit you used the WRONG word. Sorry, links from non-Muslim and liberal NGO websites are zero as far as proof goes. Just because you can find some people who happened to be Muslim doing this or that does not prove it is an official part of Islam as taken from its sources. Everyone knows that could be done with the followers of any belief system.

You would have to start with something along a doctrine of blaming woman for Adam's Fall (Original Sin blamed on Eve) or a prayer said in the morning along the lines of "God, thank you for making me as a man and not a woman." Otherwise just admit you used the wrong word, and should have said something like, "according to my 21st century mindset set entirely in a Western country with a modern urban outlook it appears to me that Islam is discriminative against women."

It's people like you that is the reason why can't have nice things.

What crock of shit are you spewing now?

"jew-owned TIME magazine" antisemitism.

Also nice goalpost moving to " Islamic source" when it has actually already been given. You just to stubborn to read like you didn't bother to check the link to the definition from Oxford. Anyway here's a yet another source for you to ignore as you fly into a rage to cover your own lack of knowledge on the subject. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/it-s-ok-to-beat-your-wife-says-islamic-school-book-vll3jdjw7

P.S. If you want a good source for Christianity, being misogynistic try the Malleus Maleficarum also known as the Hammer Against Witches..

Pointing out that a magazine owned by a Jew would not be a good source to quote from to prove misogyny is an official part of Islam is anti-Semitism? What utter nonsense! This BS has been debunked. Time is owned by a Jew, Marc Benioff, so what? Why would I check a suspect link like lexico? It has no name recognition, let alone Wikipedia.

You accused the religion of Islam as being officially misogynist. So YOU must post something to back it up. Not a link to amnesty, not a link to a jew-owned magazine, not a link to a British newspaper. You need ACTUAL proofs from ACTUAL sources of Islam, get it? A schoolbook for kids is hardly an official source. You should know all the dumbed-down crap that is found in school textbooks.

I would expect someone making bigoted statements to admit to their bigotry and then try to justify it much like you are. And you still moving those gal posts even further and building a strawman to boot.

You should just admit that you do not want to call some people out on misogyny because because you believe that region is a cover for action as you keep asking for things that have already been given and scream of shout hoping I do not notice.

Try responding to my actual statement, rather than making up your own and look at the evidence rather than dismissing out of hand.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An-Nisa,_34
http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=4&verse=34

Claims someone is "moving the goalposts" by asking for proof about an official teaching of a religion from it's actually sources, posts a link from Wikipedia. Lol.

LOL, offered a second source for the same quote, but nice red herring. Now go back to screaming so you don't have to look at the evidence.

Wikipedia is not a valid source for anything except the most basic of facts which are not prone to being distorted by the bias of editors.

Blah, blah, blah, you cannot be bothers to check the citations and keep pretend the second source doesn't exist. You can go back to being triggered and so you can continue to ignore the facts you don't like.

Why would I bother mate? If there is a source then link it. I love these chain replies where the original shitposter cannot cite a single original source in defense of their tin can argument. After numerous replies you can't even cut and paste a basic proof that the religion of Islam is officially misogynistic, ie hates women. I guess if your knowledge comes from Wikipedia and Time magazine you already have shit for brains. Even a rabid Zionist professor wouldn't accept Wikipedia as a reference for what you are pushing. Here's a musician from Deep Purple expressing his utter indifference for it for being fallacious, careless, and no research being done.

https://youtu.be/lFgIFC9Ui10

Ok