Monday, June 13, 2011

Things that make you go hmmm ...

There has been some furor over the Obedient Wives Club (sorry, no link to club, only reports) establishment. The main goal of the club, which many find offensive, is the idea that a wife should be a high-class hooker for her husband in bed in order for him to be happy and not leave them.


I suppose those ladies wants a return to the subservient Derma Taksiah who washed her husband's feet when he returned home and dried said appendage with her long and luxuriant hair. These are educated women, mind you. They have travelled and seen the world, yet they still hold such views.

Frankly, I thought the idea of the club should be offensive to men; bringing them down to the level of slobbering animals who care for nothing else but sex from their wives.


Although the club members avow that their point is about giving sexual satisfaction to their husbands will keep their marriage happy, it still smacks of a transaction between a hooker and a john. Lust without emotion. I give you something you want, you stay faithful to me. Quid pro quo. So why is it in this context, it appears as though a husband and wife cannot enjoy each other sexually in a mutually satisfying partnership without the need to lower one partner to the level of a sex worker?


The thing is, the Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) did mention on the importance of sex in a relationship. That a wife is deserving of physical and spiritual succor. That it is the duty of the husband to give her satisfaction. But he also stressed on other factors that is vital for a relationship to work as well.

The marriage solemnisation in Islam has no mention of obedience; unlike the traditional Christian wedding vows. So I don't understand where did this idea of obedience and subservience to your husband comes from. The longest and most fulfilling marriage of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was his first one with Siti Khadijah. She was older than him and was his boss to boot before they got hitched (she proposed to him, mind you.). He was monogamous with her and mourned her loss; it was some time after she passed away before he agreed to take another wife. He spoke of her fondly that some of his other wives were a little jealous of a dead woman.

Would an older woman likely to be subservient to her husband? I think not. An older woman would, however, likely to be a proper helpmeet and partner who will cherish her husband within the bedroom as well as without. It would appear that the secret of the success of their relationship did not hinge on whether Siti Khadijah knows the kama sutra, but rather because she was conversant with the Al-Quran.

I would like to think that men want a partner who is also a friend with whom they can converse; that they care for a smart woman who will raise their children well, and that they want someone who will cherish them even when the pole can no longer raise the flag.
 
But then again, perhaps I am just a hopeless romantic.

10 comments:

Seorang Blogger said...

also a helpless romantic here!

agree 110% with you

dan

masih tak faham itu kelab

mungkin juga masih tak faham realiti perkahwinan kerana kita helpless romantic yang hidup dalam movies dan buku cerita

naz said...

The club is a a bit narrow minded for me. Never thought that sex has to be the sole reason for happiness in any relationship.

aisyah said...

Here here! Dumb news to begin with.

Anyway, just to share my experience as a helpless romantic yang da kawen... Marriage is hard.. A lot of ingredient to make it work and sometimes, you can live out the romance in novels too.. But sex is definitely not the only thing.. Mutual respect, considerate bla bla bla...

*scratches head...
I don't know why this salih yakob thing made news anyway.
Ade aku kisah ko kawen empat? Eh eh emo plak.

me the martian said...

aku tak hopeless romantika, tapi lepas baca ni, mmg boleh jadi hopeless romantik :P

Snuze said...

Pidah: Sekurang2nya dalam buku dan movies, kita dijanjikan happy ending, betul tak? IRL, belum tentu. Kalu tak mo usaha, usah impikan bahagia.

Naz: I think a sex-centric relationship is a damned limited one. I am still holding out not just for someone to set the sheets on fire with me, but also someone whose conversation I shall enjoy. After all, bila dah tak leh naik lagi, at least you can still talk to him, no? *sengih bak kerang busuk*

Snuze said...

Aisyah:Thank you for sharing! It's good that you point out that sex is not the only think that keeps a marriage alive. I read a study that many couples seeking divorce actually have pretty good sex life; it's the other things that break the deal (financial issues mostly).

Itu Sallih Yaakop, keeping the dream alive for those yang teringin. :p

Zu@MtM:Hopeless romantic tak bermakna hopelessly unrealistic. It is actually the opposite in that one is hopeful AND realistic. *grin*

naz said...

Me too. I think companionship is what I am looking for. Someone who can really hold a conversation with me, about anything and everything. Sex is something to spice up the relationship...hehehe.

Snuze said...

Absolutely, Naz. Sometimes when I watch dating people who look at everyone else but each other, or talk to other people on the phone while together, it made me wonder about the quality of their relationship. Is it an accident of location (together at the same place at the same time) or is there really something more?

*grin*

aisyah said...

hehehe snuze, about couples looking around and not at each other... sometimes those couples are perv couples that like to interpret other people and make outrageous conclusions- so that they feel superiorrrr wahahahaha

like, watching other couples that might be fighting and making up conversation for them :)

*grinning guiltily..

another way to spice up the life. heheh: menyibuk perihal org lain dgn meletak sedikit garam kunyit

Snuze said...

OMG! Perviness, eh? Never thought of it, Aisyah. *grin*