Gender justice and the discourse of no change in women's jurisprudence

Deserving justice between men and women is the meaning of "gender justice" which is not related to equality between them at the real level. But at the perceptual level, when there is inequality in it, it will need to be justified. In Islamic jurisprudence, there are many individual and social rulings that differentiate between men and women. The common discourse of jurists regarding this fatwa is non-change. Meanwhile, the central issue of the article is how the performance of the said discourse is evaluated in terms of real gender justice and capacity building for the perception of gender justice. This research tries to examine the said discourse with a critical analytical method.This discourse, relying on some theoretical foundations such as "limiting reason in the position of inference", "relying on the absolute wisdom of the Shariah" and "relying on consensus and reputation", tries to infer the fatwa of distinction. Some supporters of this discourse also try to explain the wisdom of these distinctions from a verbal perspective.According to this article, on the one hand, the mentioned theoretical foundations are not able to justify all these distinctions, and on the other hand, the mention of the mentioned wisdoms will not justify all the fatwas of distinction. These problems cause this discourse to face gender justice neither at the real level nor at the perceptual level. Therefore, it is necessary in jurisprudential inferences, through "ijtihad in the principles of inference" and also "revision of jurisprudential evidences". According to the social requirements of the current era, the differentiation fatwa should be re-examined.