I think that differing opinions among Quranists are important for understanding the essence of the Quran.
Hello,
Recently, I came across "NWario's" explanations here regarding certain religious texts, interpretations that many consider "wtf." Initially, I was among those who objected to him, which is perfectly understandable. However, I was unsettled by his translation of the words *rijāl* as "dominant structure" and *nisā'* as "potentially oppressed secondary structure." At first, I completely disagreed, because for me, these terms simply meant "men" and "women."
Later, I watched videos by a French Islamic scholar (whose name I've forgotten) about the Arab tribes of that era. She explained that society at the time was based on a power structure determined by the tribe's ability or inability to ensure its survival. The *nisā'* actually encompassed those deemed "incapable" (in the legal and physical sense of the time), namely orphans, the elderly, the disabled, and women. Men were expected to work and provide for the women, children, and the rest of the tribe.
Of course, roles were gendered: women took care of cooking, children, farming, or studies, while men were responsible for physical labor and defense.
Ultimately, I think NWario's argument is important for our community. It's interesting that he offers alternative translations of surahs based on this understanding, provided they are accompanied by clear explanations of the reasoning behind them. What do you think?