Islamic State theologians have issued an extremely detailed ruling on when "owners" of women enslaved by the extremist group can have sex with them, in an apparent bid to curb what they called violations in the treatment of captured females.
Well, that settles that.
And as the article rightly states, this is about who can rape captives and not about sex.
You can see the translation:
For a U.S. government translation of the fatwa click http://graphics.thomsonreuters.com/doc/slaves_fatwa.pdf.
Why American feminists aren't leading supporters of the war against jihadi terrorists is beyond me.
Rather than fight actual misogyny, they'd rather resume their defense of Bill Clinton's one-man war on women.
(And as an aside, I know Democrats seemingly welcome another fight about Bill Clinton's sexual predator nature, but this is a brave new world of dangerous micro-aggressions, a so-called campus rape culture, and a mythical "war on women." In a day when "America's dad"--Bill Cosby--is being accused of and charged with sexual assaults against women--sometimes from long ago--is this really a battle they want to fight? Or is it only proper to raise such old charges against an African American man?)