They are historically documented rulers of major empires, one in Egypt (Mamluk dynasty), one in India (Sultanate of Delhi). The former was admittedly only a matter of months; the latter also relatively short (four years or so), but lost her power along with her life in an offensive war, so it's not that she was removed from power for being a woman.

If you want to make it a contest between Christianity and Islam, of course the former can list significantly more women rulers in medieval and early modern times, but frankly I'd rather view everything in its proper historical context - religion was an important factor in those days, but not the only factor, there were plenty of particular Islamic societies in certain times and places that were in many ways more progressive than certain Christian societies in other times and places, whether you focus on the position of women or on other aspects. Any attempt to simplistically reduce history to that kind of black and white comparison between Christianity and Islam is going to miss a lot. That's not 'apologetics for Islam', it's just refusing to engage in revisionist history viewed strictly through the lens of your present-day ideology. No doubt it's inevitable for all of us to do that to at least some extent, but you can at least try to see more nuance.

Nice job ignoring everything I wrote, but no, this is still bullshit. It's practiced overwhelmingly in African countries, of which many may be predominantly Muslim, but they also have large Christian and animist populations and the religion isn't the determining factor for FGM. It long predates Islam, has been practiced all throughout Islamic history by non-Muslim groups as much as Muslim ones, and most importantly is almost or entirely absent from a good number of otherwise quite devout Muslim countries or population groups outside of Africa. For the simple reason that it's a cultural practice, not a religious one.

You'll note I didn't comment on for instance the honour killings part - you find those in other religions too, in certain cultures, but indeed it's predominantly a phenomenon in Muslim countries, so I wasn't going to split hairs about that. FGM is a quite different story.

Yes, but in the context of female princesses like Jasmine, it seemed worth pointing out.

What he writes about the role of women in wider Russian society, at that particular time, isn't too much better though. Sure, most of them may've had no choice but to work outside the house, but he repeatedly mentions how very unusual it was when Peter allowed women to participate in banquets or parties, and how special it was for visitors to even get to see the lady of the house for a brief moment during social calls.