“It was a fact generally acknowledged by all but the most contumacious spirits at the beginning of the seventeenth century that woman was the weaker vessel; weaker than man, that is. ... That was the way God had arranged Creation, sanctified in the words of the Apostle. ... Under the common law of England at the accession of King James I, no female had any rights at all (if some were allowed by custom). As an unmarried woman her rights were swallowed up in her father's, and she was his to dispose of in marriage at will. Once she was married her property became absolutely that of her husband. What of those who did not marry? Common law met that problem blandly by not recognizing it. In the words of The Lawes Resolutions [the leading 17th century compendium on women's legal status]: 'All of them are understood either married or to be married.' In 1603 England, in short, still lived in a world governed by feudal law, where a wife passed from the guardianship of her father to her husband; her husband also stood in relation to her as a feudal lord.”

“Sheikh Bilal had takenhim aside the day before the wedding and spoken to him of marriageand his wife’s rights in the Law, stressing to him that there was nothingfor a Muslim to feel shy about in marrying a woman who was not avirgin and that a Muslim woman’s previous marriage ought not to be aweak point that her new husband could exploit against her. He saidsarcastically, “The secularists accuse us of puritanism and rigidity,even while they suffer from innumerable neuroses. You’ll find that ifone of them marries a woman who was previously married, thethought of her first husband will haunt him and he may treat herbadly, as though punishing her for her legitimate marriage. Islam hasno such complexes.”

“When a woman marries again, it is because she detested her first husband. When a man marries again, it is because he adored his first wife. Women try their luck; men risk theirs.”

“From "Not For Ourselves Alone:"In Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s time:Women were barred by custom from the pulpit and professionsThose who spoke in public were thought indecentMarried women were prohibited from owning or inheriting property: in fact, wives were the property of their husbands, who were entitled by law to her wages and her body.Women were prohibited from signing contractsWomen had no right to their children or even their clothing in a divorceWomen were not allowed to serve on juries and most were considered incompetent to testify. Women were not allowed to VOTE.”

“As he talked, I watched Emma and wondered what is to become of her. She is of an age to be married but she spends her time with people who are so much older than she, that she is never likely to meet a husband. And if she does, I do not know if she will wish to marry. She is too comfortable where she is. Her father is easy to please and she can do as she likes with the household. A husband will have his own views, and Emma is not likely to take to that way of living.”

“I think about how truly interesting and odd it is that when a woman marries, traditionally she loses her name, becoming absorbed by the husband's family name - she is in effect lost, evaporated from all records under her maiden name. I finally understand the anger behind feminism - the idea that as a woman you are property to be conveyed between your father and your husband, but never an individual who exists independently. And on the flip side, it is also one of the few ways one can legitimately get lost - no one questions it.”