Tuesday, June 7, 2011

OWCh! ( Obedient Wives Club, hmph!)

So there I was, drinking a nice cup of teh tarik at the mamak, tucking into my seat, opening the newspaper, just brimming in anticipation of more political pandemonium and high ranking hypocrisy. I opened it, and the first thing I see is "FREE SEX LESSONS".

Whoa! I rub my eyes, clean my glasses, turn back to the front page to ensure I am reading the News Straits Times and not the News Strips Times. And to my horror, I realize that an Obedient Wives Club (OWC) has been set up to ensure women are compliant, submissive, obedient to the commands of their husbands; and that apparently all social ills in the world can be solved by sex. Makes me want to be a criminal.

Fauziah Arifin from the Obedient Wives Club (second from left) giving a token of appreciation to Datin Zainah Abdul Ghani (executive director Positive Image Resources Sdn Bhd) while Sakinah Rahmanuddin (second from right) and Datuk Mohd Nasir Ibrahim (Selayang Umno chief) look on after the launching of the Obedient Wives Club at Perangsang Templer Golf Club.
Poking around aside( No, you dirty bugger, not that kind of poking), this OWC really made my heart go OWCh! all day long.  Apparently, by being obedient, and by being I quote, 'an excellent sex worker, better than a first class prostitute' a marriage can remain strong, adultery can be prevented, and social ills can be curbed. After all, crimes only happen because sex starved men cannot find anywhere else to channel their energy, right??? What about female criminals then? Or single adults?

The Sex Guru herself.
Furthermore, the sex lessons are to be taught by the Vice President of the club, Dr Rohaya Mohamad. An expert in the field apparently. The course will include how to keep your husband, how to 'service' him, and apparently, she encourages wives to be 'whores' to their husbands and wear sexy clothes for them. ( P.S. Practical lessons have not been confirmed as of yet. )

Coming so soon after Barrack Obama praised Malaysia as a progressive, moderate country, this movement is truly a disappointment, and also an insult to both men and women. The existence of such a club reveals the members' shallow thinking and understanding of the sacred constitution of marriage.

This frame of thought implies that any adultery committed by the husband is the woman's fault for not 'servicing' him properly. By comparing wives to personal prostitutes, the OWC objectifies and degrades women as sex machines, and men as sexual animals. Blind obedience to husbands will not advance the role of women in society in any way either. The whole incident is a blatant mockery of marriage.

Marriage is trust. It is a sacred bond between two individuals who have decided they want to live together, eat together, love together- two parts that make up a greater whole. If we view marriage simply as a sexual matter- that being, if devoid or lacking in sex, the marriage will fall apart, ignoring the issues of trust, commitment and love- we are no better than animals who come together simply to mate and reproduce. If a woman must resort to 'servicing' and becoming a 'sex slave' to her husband to ensure his loyalty, then marriage becomes no more than a prolonged trip to a brothel. It is the duty of both husband AND wife to maintain a commitment to each other, and if a man commits adultery, it should not be the fault of the wife, and he should be accountable for his own actions.

In a few words,

Cooperate not just copulate,
Compromise not just sodomize,
Communicate not just fornicate.
Then problems will meet their demise.

Hmph. If women have the Obedient Wives Club, then surely there must be a Loyal Husbands Club* coming up too?

( Free shopping lessons provided. Practical lessons includes trip to mall with wife, or wives. Cash not inclusive)


  1. I like that you pointed out that this whole issue also portrays men as sex-driven animals and nothing else. Men, also, should be indignant and enraged. AND you're right about how this completely makes a mockery of marriage. Sex is only ONE of the elements of deepening the relationship, but not the ONLY one.

    And I love your little "poem" at the end :D

  2. From my point of view, OWC is just a movement to remind wives that in a relationhip, one must work together with their spouse to form and maintain a happier bond with each other (however, they're focusing more on the role of the wives).

    of course its true, that they advised women to please their husbands sexually to deepen their relationship but has any1 truly looked at their reasons for doing so?

    1) in OWC's opinion, being obedient to one's husband is part of a woman's responsibility (this is in accordance to the Quran) but please be reminded that nowhere in the framework of islam says that women must cook, wash or clean for their husband. the fact that many muslim women being oppressed in countries such as afghanistan, pakistan, or even malaysia is more of a result of cultural expectations of a woman than an obligation in islam . thus, if a wife does all those work, it is for the sake of a happy marriage. *note: FOR THE SAKE OF A HAPPY MARRIAGE*

    therefore, being better at sex so as to please the husband (or lets say their soulmate)is for the sake of a happy marriage n not because all men are animals that could be pleased by sex alone. (c'mon if one person is great at sex, both of them would be happier)

    2)another reason is that OWC believes that in the effort to fight social ills such as prostitution and domestic violence, the wives needs to know how to please their husbands better sexually.

    sex is a significant part of marriage. if dissatisfaction occurs, (whether its because of the husband's fault or the wife's) it COULD turn into annoyance, anger or domestic violence. this turn of events could only happen if the couple do not work hard to fix the situation (ie the person causing the dissatisfaction should work on his flaws while his/her spouse should help that person).

    another scenario could happen when the husband is dissatisfied and would turn towards prostitution. (the same could happen to their wives, they could also find a gigolo)

    although the 2nd reason might seem somewhat illogical to some, it is but a step towards fighting prostitution and domestic violence (it doesnt mean that total eradication of social ills would be the result)

    Vacivius - u wrote, "and that apparently all social ills in the world can be solved by sex". this assumption of urs sounds as if it came from someone who doesnt truly know the subject matter. i hope u would revise on ur research. total eradication of social ills through sex is not what they're sending across.

    OWC is simply pointing out that in a relationship, working hard to make each other happy is important.(again, they're focusing more on the roles of wives)
    knowing how to please their husband better sexually is just another step.

    Liz - u wrote, "Sex is only ONE of the elements of deepening the relationship, but not the ONLY one".
    i bet the OWC club would surely agree with u because they never said that sex is the only element in deepening a relationship between a married couple.

    i think part of the reason why all these misunderstandings of the exact reasons why they said so is due to the media trying to hype up the 'sex stuff' when the true message is to promote a happier marriage

    it saddens me that people judge without truly understanding n trying to put themselves into the shoes of those sending a message across. ur negative assumption of the OWC's message as shallow thinking shows that u are also a shallow thinker.

    these are muslim women sending a message to be better, not a message to become 'whores' like u said.
    learn more about their reason. try to understand.
    ur summary (i think its more of a personal assumption) insults muslims.

  3. i also thought at first that the OWC is downgrading women but after researching, i dont think that's true. their message is good n they are actually trying to champion women's rights

    islam has been championing women's rights ever since it existed. sometimes it might not sound like it is but after u learn y islam has certain rules regarding women, u'll see y it champion women's rights

    i advise u to read this article as a start

  4. Malaysian: Yes, the main purpose of the club is to promote happier marriages but "First class prostitutes"? Do men marry women to make them their sex slaves?

  5. Malaysian: First of all, thank you very much for your insight into the matter and taking your time to reply. I appreciate it very much.

    I don't deny that sex is a very important part of a marital relationship. I don't deny that perhaps their intentions are good. However, statements like " whores", "first class prostitutes" do not further women's dignity in any way.

    Even from a point of Islam, which I recognise as one of the most peaceful and forward looking religions in the world, no doubt, the OWC is still a matter of contention. ABIM's chief, Sisters In Islam, and many Muslims themselves have spoken out against this OWC.

    The grandest good intention is no good if it is backed up by wrong actions. Thank you once again, Malaysian, and I hope you reply. =)

  6. It's only words and words are all I have to take your heart away - Bee Gees
    Whores, first class prostitudes, these sort of words; what do they say to you personally ? For me, whores, prostitudes are the human flesh trade. You pay RM 5 to put your penis into an orifice in some stranger's body. Or depending on the business agreement, you pay for whatever sex package there is. First class means it is not just anyone found in the backlane. It can be a highly qualified professional who for some reason or another does prostitution as a part time business. Somebody like Doctor Rogayah Mohamad. Prostitution is a general term. Don't forget the giggolo, male whores. Can we substitude those words ? Boleh. Try an orgasmic filled fun good satisfying sex. Afterall satisfaction comes when there is great orgasm and great climax. There is no satisfaction when there is no orgasm and no climax. So what is the actual problem ? The actual problem is no orgasm and no climax. Foreplay can help to achieve orgasm and climax. When you play with a prostitude, most of the time she will fake because you are just her business client. Remember when you were a kid and you play with your doll. You just know it is fake, it is imaginary. The best people to join the obedient wives club would be the real whores. They will teach out of experience. Not just talk. We all have to read the Quran to understand it, if not to believe in it.

  7. Suet Tyng - thanks for understanding what i had said :).

    regarding the statement of "first class prostitutes", neither Dr Rohaya or OWC had said anything about wives being first class prostitutes.

    she only said, "A man married to a woman who is as good or better than a prostitute in bed has no reason to stray"

    *note: NO REASON. its just an advice to help women to be better to their partners. men in return should do the same (he would be stupid not to)

    while NST (journalist Rozanna Latif) wrote, "A wife must obey and serve her husband like 'a first-class prostitute' to keep him from straying and to prevent greater social ills, according to the Obedient Wives' Club."

    NST 'TWISTED' her words and not her true intentions. she didnt use these words because thats not what she meant.

    Do men marry women to make them their sex slaves? hahaha no of course not. like vacivus said,"It (marriage) is a sacred bond between two individuals who have decided they want to live together, eat together, love together- two parts that make up a greater whole." sex is just another part of the equation n not (marriage = sex alone)

    im a man and even though i have had previous relationships (im currently single), i have never thought of my partners as sex-slaves or people that i would like to have solely for sex. the women in my life are the people that i turn to when im in need of emotional comfort and support. they're the ones i turn to for wisdom. if i am ever going into marriage, it would b due to these reasons n not for having them as 'sex-slaves'. love is the foundation of matrimony.

    Vacivus - allow me to quote "statements like ' whores', 'first class prostitutes' do not further women's dignity in any way."

    i totally agree with that statement but please realise that those are not words used by OWC. however, those are words used by NST (the media).

    moreover, she (Dr Rohaya and OWC) also said
    "We are not blaming women for prostitution or divorce, as we believe God-fearing men would never patronise brothels, or abuse their wives.

    "Both sides must fulfill their duties."

    see where im getting at? it didnt surprise me that the last statement i mentioned was less emphasised than statements regarding sex.

    many muslim in malaysia have begin to question the credibility of ABIM n Sisters in Islam because of their actions n words.
    in my perspective, Sisters in Islam does not have enough credibility.

    in Islam, a women must wear a headscarf or a tudung. it is not just a symbol of modesty but it is also a symbol of submission towards God besides being an obligation. sadly, many members of sisters in islam do not wear headscarves or tudungs. the fact that they dont, clearly shows they're not following what God wanted them to do. could u still call them 'Sisters in Islam' when they dont follow this simple islamic rule? (i dont even know why they call themselves "...in Islam" when they're only muslims by name n not by practice)

    in addition, the fact that a number of their members do not follow this rule, clearly shows that they do not have a deep knowledge of islam. however, if they do know about this (which im confident every1 of them does) and still do not follow it then how could they say what is right or wrong in relation to islam?

    the OWC's message is simple. both partners must work hard to achieve a happier marriage (again, they're focusing more on wives)

    "The grandest good intention is no good if it is backed up by wrong actions." - and what wrong actions would that be? the ones said by Dr Rohaya and OWC? or the ones by NST?

    Good intentions could sometime be deceived as negative when it is presented by somebody else without adhering accurately to the original speaker :)

    Anonymous - i agree with wat u said :)

  8. A few questions...

    1. Wasn't the headscarf/tudung introduced into Malaysia by Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim? During my parents generation, very few Muslim women wore tudungs & it only came into "fashion" in the last half century...

    2. Who has ever said there must be "constant" sex in marriage for it to be successful? I know of many married couples, including my parents, who have survived without it for around 20 years...they're still happy & contented with each other and I see no signs of divorce...

    3. Exaxtly why would it be a woman's fault if she is not in the mood to make love to a man?
    Malaysian - you make it sound like as if it is a woman's obligation to give her body entirely away to a man...I clearly remember that marriage vows involve loving each other forever & "till death do us part" but I have never heard of "fornicating forever"... O.O
    Since when has a man have total control over a woman, even when they are married? A woman has every right to refuse that man/husband and if it he still lusts for sex...then it is his fault for not keeping it under control. Don't you dare say that it is natural human instinct to fornicate...if so...then what would you call monks who abstain from such "worldly" pleasures??? "Inhuman"???

    Personally, I think that movements like OWC are taking a wrong approach. I believe they mean well but their methodology is just going in the wrong direction. What should be done is to educate men on respecting women as people and not as an "orifice of physical pleasure". Women should not be forced to retain their husbands when both entered into a marriage with equal status as humans.

  9. Void Freedom -

    1) the headscarf was first popularised by ABIM and Anwar, though i couldnt remember who first introduced it. i heard PAS was involved but i cant guarantee the truth of that statement.

    2)no one here said that there must be constant sex in a marriage. as far as i can see, neither Dr Rohaya, OWC, Vacivus nor I had ever said that there must be 'constant' sex in a marriage. I only said sex is a significant part of marriage NOT THE ONLY ONE.

    oh and another thing, how do u know ur parents have survived without sex for 20 years? (out of curiousity) i mean, the culture here seems like expressions of love between a married couple (ie, kissing, sex, etc) are not usually shown or directly stated infront of the children (at least in most families i know).
    for all u know, they could be doing it behind ur back unless they themselves said that they havent had sex for 20 years or have conditions which unables them to do so.

    3. i didnt say that it was the woman's fault if she is not in the mood for sex. i didnt say that it was the woman's fault if she isnt good at sex either. i only said that OWC FOCUSES on the woman's role in a marriage to correct n better herself (that doesnt mean the husband shouldnt do the same). i also said that OWC stated that both sides must fulfill their duties.

    i never said that it is a woman's obligation to give her body entirely away to a man. those are ur words. im sorry if i made it sound that way but that wasnt my intentions. i said that marriage is based on love. n my message (apart from correcting views on OWC) is that sex is a significant part of marriage, i never said that u couldnt survive without it. im sure u can, many elderly couples have done so :)

    i simply intended, that if u love the person u married, ur so called soulmate, then if u find urself not good at sex then try to be better at it for the sake of ur beloved. the husband should also do the same if his the one who's flawed.

    oh and im not going to say anything about fornicating as part of natural human instincts :)
    if u took bio or at least understand the basic of survival for living things,you'll know what is needed. however, humans have always have the great ability to think and choose. abstaining for monks is their choice, sex for couples are their choice if they want to. if they dont then its fine. to me making these choices are all "human" and something i truly looked up upon.

    i respect ur view on OWC's methodology. however, i believe u somewhat misunderstood.
    i also believe that education should also be equal to both males n females. so if u say what should be done is to educate men on respecting women, then i'd say the same should be done by educating women on respecting men. see if this equality is maintained, everybody will be happy.

    again i never said that women are an "orifice of physical pleasure" neither did Dr Rohaya nor OWC.

    u know i've never said these words or even intended to but it seems as if whoever reads them gets my message wrongly. i apologise if im unable to make things clearer for every1.

    Void Freedom, i hope u would read what i wrote carefully. u'll see that i never said stuff like "constant sex", "women's fault if she's not in the mood", "its a woman's obligation to give her boy entirely away to a man" or "women as an orifice of physical pleasure".
    never said them n never intended for ideas such as those :)

    Dr Rohaya, OWC n i only said that for a happier marriage, u need to work hard at it. sex is only a part of trying to work hard on a marriage, dont get it wrong.

  10. Well, blame me if i'm wrong, but the words 'sex lessons will help them serve their husbands better than a first class prostitute' and 'why not be a whore to your husband' came from Dr Rohaya's mouth.

    The club had also offered sex lessons to help wives “serve their husbands better than a first-class prostitute”.

    However, Johor Islamic Council advisor Datuk Nooh Gadut said the use of the term “first-class prostitute” was extreme, adding that marriages in Islam should not be just for sex but for, among others, love.

    When asked whether it was the wife's fault for being abused, she said: “Yes, most probably because she didn't listen to her husband.”

    Her catchphrase — “what is wrong with being a whore in bed to your husband?” — smacks of the surrendered wife who gives up equality for "marital bliss".

  11. i just finished watching the video clip of the interview. thanks for pointing out what she said. i do agree that what she stated about wives being whores, sex objects n sex workers (i missed this out before) to their husband is wrong. i sincerely apologise for my misguided comments.

    i initially though that her intentions of reminding wives to work harder at their marriage were misinterpreted by the media n her words somewhat twisted by NST. from what was written in the original article by NST, she only said "a man married to a woman who is as good or better than a prostitute in bed has no reason to go a stray." the article did not actually quote her (using her exact sentences) as saying that wives are whores to their partners

    what i understood from this statement was that the doctor only wanted to advise wives to be better in bed. i didnt think this statement downgraded women because she didnt say that wives are whores or prostitutes.

    however i didnt realise about statements that regard wives ass sex objects, sex workers, or whores to their husband until i wathed the end of the clip (which i didnt before). *however, i couldnt find her saying wives to be 'first-class prostitutes' as said by NST after watching the clip twice. i might have missed it though.*

    after all i've said about not being thorough n misunderstanding, i myself misunderstood. now i sound like a complete hypocrite. im deeply sorry vacivus, void freedom n every1. although this is a small error on my part, this is a serious issue n i understand if u are angry with me.

    vacivus - im sorry about calling ur summary as an insult to muslims. after comprehending the true nature of this issue i feel obliged to say that it (ur summary) is not an insult to muslims at all. i would vouch for women's rights any day but this time i did not due to my error in analysis. feel free to delete my comments or keep it as a reminder to every1 who could also b mislead like me.

    void freedom - i agree with u in regards to the OWC's good intention but poor approach. their methodology in this case does downgrade women. i hope u'd forgive me for my remarks about ur thoroughness n comprehension

  12. that last part was a typo.
    what i meant to say was "i would vouch for women's rights any day but this time i did not do it appropriately due to my error in analysis"

  13. Dear Malaysian,

    Please just answer me one question. As I quote your phrase,

    "OWC is simply pointing out that in a relationship, working hard to make each other happy is important.(again, they're focusing more on the roles of wives)
    knowing how to please their husband better sexually is just another step."

    Why is the focus on women to "work hard" when it is the men committing all sorts of social ills ie seeking prostitutes (by ratio, there are more prostitutes than gigolos), domestic violence, rape etc? As a woman myself, it feels as if they want women to clear up the mess created by men.

    I do have many more questions for you, but let's leave it here for now.

    Btw, please don't tell me it is because these women wanted to do something about these issues but they simply can't get men to start a Loyal Husbands Club or something similar.....

    Thank you. :)

  14. If a society, body or government is religiously driven, it is set to be a failure, regardless of which religion. Conflicts may arise as one religion may have views and values that may not be consistent with the other. Mind you, I have a religion but I will not join a society that works on religious basis because religion is a belief not a solution. If religion is prioritised, it will affect the solution making process in a way that any steps that may be productive but not in line with the religion will be frowned upon. Neutrality with a common goal that is not driven religiously, politically, racially and definitely not sexist will flourish.

    Union between two individuals is a complex relationship and breakdown of such a union may be caused by many reasons and should be attended on a case to case basis. solution to any problems may only be resolved via involvement of both partners, participation from the wives alone will not suffice; it needs two willing partners and a genuine heart to communicate their problems and convey to each other their personal needs and expectation. It needs a good wife AND a good husband for a union to work, otherwise by just being a good wife is a futile exercise; a total waste of time. If shallow men with insatiable needs are not educated to respect and be responsible, they will resort to seduction and seeking prostitutes whom they find may satisfy their desire. Desire has no boundary like drugs, you will want more. I am a male and I do not wish my wife to resort to such an exercise. I will speak to her and we’ll have an open and frank discussion of what we expect of each other, not making her go through a lesson of how to be a good wife; I have a part to play too. Women are again subjected to play a passive role which is very degrading, especially when one’s own wife is so passive. But let’s face it; if a spouse resort to another person for companionship, it is highly likely that the marriage is hanging on a breaking string. I suggest a marriage counsellor, not sex lessons.

    Come on, if Malaysians have such a serious lack of sex skills, just uplift the bar on the internet and let’s not be too sheltered. I think the whole issue revolves around the name of the club, I suppose “The Happy Couple’s Club” that welcomes participation by both partners and sex lessons as part of the whole vision and taught so only and when required will be alright. And perhaps also appoint spokesperson that is good.

    p/s: I doubt it is the wives’ responsibility to curb domestic violence. I feel it’s more on anger management- I don’t hit my wife just because she is not good at being a spouse.
    p/s 2: I believe the purpose of headscarves is to tutup aurat. By logic it is just a piece of cloth, no use of it if a woman is being all bitchy and cheap but with a headscarf on. It is her behaviour as a whole that is important. My point is, submission to rules is one thing but submission without understanding is another.