Even if they are both different the laws are extremely discriminatory towards women. Especially when put in practice. They work to harm women who are already vulnerable in religious societies.

I remember reading a comment on r/Islam about divorce rights for women and someone said the reason women can't divorce is because they get Mehr and a woman can divorce her husband after getting Mehr and go on to marry another man and divorce him too etc. Basically saying the law protected men from being exploited by gold diggers. Which is fair enough but 1) It assumes the worst of all women. How many women in Muslim societies which emphasize virginity will do something like this? 2) Mehr is peanuts these days. Why would a woman go through all of this to get a small sum of money? Meanwhile this law is exploited by men to the fullest.

On the other side Men are given far too much power over women. And there is an underlying assumption that they won't misuse it. So Islam just assumes that a man wouldn't pronounce three divorces in anger, emotional outburst etc. and will always make a clam, rational decision. It just assumes that a man will follow the three steps in wife beating and hopefully clear his head during step 1 & 2 so he never actually gets to beating her. It assumes that if a brothers is given more inheritance than his sister he will spend it on her and take care of her needs.

This just makes me think, Islamic laws are not based on egalitarianism but on assuming the worst of women and the best of men. They are centred around most women being irrational, potential adulterers (a man can accuse his wife of adultery), gold diggers etc. but men are projected as rational, fair, just and responsible.