India-based Islamic cleric Maulana Sajid Rashidi has once again triggered fresh controversy after making derogatory remarks about women’s intelligence, decision-making abilities, and personal freedom. During a recent podcast, Rashidi said, “Ladki chahe Hindu ki ho ya Musalman ki, ladkiyon ki akal ghutno mein hoti hai” (Whether a girl belongs to a Hindu or Muslim family, girls have their brains in their knees). His comments, which generalized about women across religious communities, also questioned their ability to make independent decisions about relationships, careers, and personal lives.
Rashidi made the remarks during a discussion about Muslim women’s growing attraction towards Hindu men, and the factors that influence their relationship choices. The conversation examined why some Muslim college students might prefer relationships with Hindu men over Muslim men. Rashidi argued that Muslim men often discuss Islam and religious obligations with women, whereas Hindu men might avoid such discussions. He also referred to Islamic restrictions on unmarried men and women meeting privately, and suggested that some Muslim women prefer relationships that do not involve such religious expectations.
As the discussion progressed, Rashidi questioned women’s ability to evaluate relationships and make sensible decisions. He claimed that women could easily fall for men who offered them expensive restaurant meals, clothes, mobile phones, and other material attractions.
Rashidi also extended his rant against women’s participation in the workforce and questioned women’s motivations for pursuing employment and promotions. He alleged that some women make inappropriate decisions in exchange for attractive salaries, professional opportunities, and career advancement. His comments effectively questioned women’s professional judgment and suggested that men could influence their career decisions through material incentives.
During the podcast, Rashidi also claimed that rape cannot occur without a woman’s consent, and that a lone man cannot commit rape. His remarks effectively shifted responsibility for sexual violence onto women, and triggered criticism over his attempt to undermine the seriousness of rape and victim consent.
The latest controversy adds to Rashidi’s long record of provocative comments about women, Hindu religious beliefs, and contentious political issues. In July 2025, he sparked a massive controversy after making derogatory remarks about prominent political leader Dimple Yadav. Rashidi criticized her for entering the mosque without covering her head and commented on her clothing. Referring to a photograph of Yadav wearing a saree, he commented, “Look at her back. It is naked.” His comments sparked protests; supporters of Yadav filed a police complaint, and Lucknow Police registered a case against Rashidi under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. But Rashidi invoked Islamic religious principles to defend his remarks, and argued that Dimple Yadav had not followed Islamic beliefs while sitting inside the mosque.
In February 2023, he triggered outrage after claiming that Mahmud of Ghazni had not destroyed the Somnath Temple, but had, in fact, stopped alleged immoral activities inside it. His remarks appeared to justify Ghazni’s 11th-century attack on the historic Hindu temple. The Somnath Trust strongly objected to his comments, and filed a police complaint. Following the backlash, Rashidi apologized to the Somnath Trust.
In August 2020, Rashidi sparked another controversy during the groundbreaking ceremony for the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, questioning the construction of the Temple at the site and suggesting that people might demolish the newly constructed Ram Temple to build a mosque in its place. Rashidi also attracted criticism in May 2022 during the controversy surrounding the discovery of a structure similar to a Shivling inside the Gyanvapi mosque complex in Varanasi. He dismissed the Hindu religious significance of the structure and described it as an old fountain rather than a Shivling.
Earlier in July 2026, he blamed delayed marriages for rising rape cases, and advocated early marriage as a way to protect women, and again in August 2026, he argued that women would not remain safe in India without implementing Islamic laws.
Rashidi’s repeated derogatory remarks about women reflect a deeply patriarchal, hardline Islamic worldview that places women beneath men. His views are perfectly aligned with the Sharia, which assigns women’s testimony half the value of men’s in legal matters and imposes a four-witness requirement for proving zina (a sexual crime such as fornication, adultery, etc.). Such radical religiosity has historically reinforced restrictions on women’s freedom, mobility, and independence in countries that Islamic doctrines rule. Saudi Arabia, for instance, prohibited women from driving until 2018, while Afghanistan continues to impose severe restrictions on women’s rights. Rashidi’s outlook aligns more closely with such Islamic societies, and stands in clear contrast to the secular, democratic tenets enshrined in India’s Constitution. Yet figures such as Rashidi continue to exploit India’s democratic freedoms while propagating hardline Islamic ideologies and harboring ambitions of transforming this secular, democratic nation into an Islamic state.
somehistory says
What words to describe this filth? son of satan the devil, doing his “father’s desires.” Psychopaths always blame their victims.
“You made me do it,” is an often repeated sentence by an abuser to his victim.
Siddhi Nasranni says
Quote from the Islamic cleric, ” girls have their brains in their knees).
I say to you, that Muslims men have their brains in their penis’s.
gravenimage says
+1
rick says
Will India please put him on a donkey, point it to Pakistan and slap the ass of the ass.
Rob Porter says
Like so many imams, this one has his brains – if by any chance he has any – up his anus.
James Lincoln says
I ran the article through chatgpt:
Overall assessment
My conclusion: Rashidi’s reported statements deserve unequivocal condemnation. They are not simply conservative opinions about modesty or traditional family roles. They deny women’s intellectual autonomy and minimize the reality of sexual violence.
At the same time, the article would be more persuasive if it concentrated on those demonstrable problems rather than making broader political accusations that it does not substantiate.
One further point deserves emphasis: Criticism of discriminatory religious doctrines is entirely legitimate, and it should not be confused with hostility toward people merely because they belong to a religion. It is possible to scrutinize Islamic jurisprudence rigorously, including its historical treatment of women, without attributing one cleric’s views to all Muslims.
That distinction makes the criticism more accurate, not less forceful.
Rob Porter says
James, I haven’t seen anyone, let alone the writer, attributing one cleric’s views to “all Muslims”, but incessantly I read outrageous. insulting and mindlessly stupid, insulting comment made by Muslim clerics and others.
Anyone who frequently reads jihadwatch sees “demonstrable problems” that are substantiated. Robert Spencer and others frequently point out that there are peaceful Muslims and do not tar every Muslim with the same brush. However, having dealt with this subject for more than 24 years and seen such insanely cruel acts by Muslims whether on October 7 in Israel or those brutal jihad attacks in London, Paris, Mumbai, Nairobi, Nice, Brussels, Berlin, Orlando, Boston, and daily in Nigeria – by Muslims – I no longer care much if writers paint with a sweeping brush regarding Islam and Muslims.
James Lincoln says
Agree 100%, Rob.
somehistory says
those muzzies who never speak publicly, but go to the barracks and agree with what they hear, buy their special foods sacrificed to demons, wearing their special garb and their neighbors think they don’t hate them, add a lot to the problem.
gravenimage says
This is orthodox Islam, Rob.
James Lincoln says
This was chat’s conclusion.
John Smith says
+1
Sentinel says
Muslim men think with their little head. Arrogance won’t get you anywhere. Typical male 🐷
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Well, Sheikh Rashid’s comments speak for itself – won’t dwell further on that
But on the issue of Hindu men being attractive to muslim women, there are more factors at play than just the usual misogyny of islam itself
1. In India, laws are now lopsidedly anti-male, and the ruling establishment has tried, w/ some success, to split the muslim vote and at least win over muslimahs. Its success has been mixed, but on the social front, muslimahs are no longer the victims
2. Also, the same disproportionate laws have caused an escalation of crimes against men. On the Hindu side, Hindu men, being at the receiving end of it, have either gone the western track and forsworn marriage, or look for anyone but Hindu women. Russians are a favorite, but within India, muslimahs are what’s there
3. As a result, while love jihad is still an issue, there are sections of both populations who think the grass is greener on the other side, and exploring those respective womenscapes
4. In the meantime, as one might expect, there is a good population of muslimahs who admire Hindu festivals and even rituals/customs and have started following them. Sometimes they go all the way, converting to Hinduism, but often, they practice them while still being muslim. When they do, and produce Instagram reels, they get abused by muslim men, mainly guys like Sheikh Rashid
So now for my comments on these
Misandric laws are a real problem in India. That said, the answer to Hindu men don’t lie w/ muslimahs. Just like Hindu women are asking for trouble warming up to muslim men, the converse is true as well: Hindu men are asking for trouble warming up to muslim women. While some may be like what I describe above in #4, there are others for whom islam is still pretty overarching
I have read stories where Hindu or other guys marry muslimahs, have kids and then the muslimahs insist on circumcising them, and trying to get both hubby & kids to islamize. More often than that, sometimes a muslimah may agree that faith does not matter and that she’d respect the husband’s faith and let their kids pick when they grow up, but then, even if that’s genuine, her side of the family tries to pressure the husband to islamize. Finally, there have also been love traps – love jihad of muslimahs trying to entice Hindu men to marry them, and then pressurizing them to convert to islam
It used to be that muslims would jealously and zealously prevent Hindu men from getting anywhere near Hindu women, going as far to murder anyone who dares. While that still happens, now things have changed where muslimahs too are participants in love jihad, and when that happens, it’s not the muslimahs but the Hindu men who are targeted and pressurized to convert – by her clan, especially if they live in Muslim enclaves
So just like Hindu women ought to keep their distance from muslim men, Hindu men too ought to keep their distance from muslim women. Both should explore people from other communities for their companionship, if they have issues getting along w/ one another
Tim gallagher says
2026 and you have knuckle draggers spouting bullshit like this Muslim scumbag. One thing is for sure and that is that pretty well every woman in the world would leave this moron way behind when it comes to intelligence.
England Invaded says
As if all the problems with India are down muzzies. Same with Africa. Third world holes.