The issue of ‘women’ has been among the most controversial doctrinal issues in Iran since the era of Constitutionalism. Allameh Tabatabai was among the first persons who theorized about gender, women and family to defend religious doctrines. In this article, Allameh Tabatabai’s approach in explaining legal differences is criticized and evaluated as a naturalistic approach. Allameh Tabatabai’s initiative in using the naturalistic approach in defending the Islamic doctrines, including the legal differences between men and women, has attracted the attention of his pupils and the expositors of his views. Paying attention to ‘dominion of emotional life’ and ‘the role of pregnancy’ in women, alongside the typical dominion of rational life in men, have made the Holy Legislator consider somehow different legal systems for men and women, which is rooted in the different nature of men and women. In this article, we have explained that this view lacks internal cohesion and is inconsistent with Allameh Tabatabai’s other views; and, most importantly, considering the existence of theological explanations, there is no need for naturalistic explanations. The objection of essentialist nature of naturalistic explanations remains in effect.