Obedient wives club: Good sex to keep hubby happy, curb social ills

A new organisation is stirring up controversy in Malaysia.


[The Obedient Wives Club] launched on Saturday, says it can cure social ills such as prostitution and divorce by teaching women to be submissive and keep their men happy in the bedroom. "Islam compels us to be obedient to our husband. Whatever he says, I must follow. It is a sin if I don't obey and make him happy," said Ummu.

Just wondering, but is female submission the only thing that makes men happy and keeps societies afloat? You hear this argument again and again all over the world, and the saddest thing is when you hear it coming from women.


Views: 625

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

When you immediately cry wolf about sexism, man-bashing and whatnot you do make assumptions about motivations of people involved. 


I don't usually discuss that much with people that start complaining to others about being offensive, now I remember why. Over-reacting? Ehm... yeah right TByte, everybody else is overreacting, you are the lone bastion of reason here.


Read my original post, people!  I rightly said I was offended by her generalized comment demeaning men.  Which it was.  The man-bashing did not occur until everybody jumped on me, telling me that I had no right to be offended or state my opinion.

Get your facts straight, people.

And STILL nobody on here has had the courage to answer my questions.  Not one of you.  Not one question.

When you get offended by obvious sarcasm and consider it an affront to all men you aren't screaming about men-bashing?

Frankly, Sandy's words came across to me more like something directed at the members of this "Obedient Wives Club".  I don't see any misandry in it whatsoever.  It seems like a question asked in irony to those women who had initiated said club.


Yes, there has been a great deal of misandry on this site placed here in place of feminism, and yes, such is objectionable.  However, this is not some of that stuff.  You've pulled out the Pooper-Scooper for a piece of novelty rubber dog-doo.

As I have pointed out, Sandy's commentary on the article was not directed at Indonesian men, or Islamic societies, but at men in general.
I still don't see how that's directed at men in general.

@Sandy was it meant as such?

No it wasn't Dustin. As you and Jared and Rob all realised, I was directing my comment at the so-called Obedient Wives using what I thought was sarcasm but might have been irony (I've always had trouble telling the difference). Take your pick.

sarcastic characterized by words that mean the opposite of what they seem to say and are intended to mock or deride.
ironic deliberately stating the opposite of the truth, usually with the intention of being amusing.

I have to say I'm taken aback by TByte's response, not only to my original post, but also to my explanation of it. He's convinced that my only motive was to attack men, and nothing I say can shake him of that conviction. He seems to have had some bad experiences with heavy-duty feminists, so I can understand why, but I still feel deeply misunderstood and I think he's doing exactly what he's railing against feminists for -- applying generalisations and stereotyping the opposite gender.

Exactly where in your short comment did you indicate that you were limiting your observation to Indonesian men (and even that is offensive).  If I were to post a link to a story about prostitutes in Los Angeles and supplied a comment such as "Why are women such whores?" would you have assumed I meant only prostitutes in California?

No, you would not.

And if I defended myself by claiming that I am misunderstood, and wondering why you can't take a joke, would you be satisfied?

No, you would not.  And your attempts to explain away your motivations rather than simply apologizing and recognizing the implications of your post are convincing me that you are fully aware of the double standard.

If you did it in a sarcastic way and you have history of sarcasm.

Well there was that stereotyping comment about women spending too much money on purses and shoes, and you've made other similar comments.


You're harping on one sentence (which you've also done before). The thread is about something entirely different. So far there has never been a thread about women's rights that you haven't managed to derail into a tirade about how oppressed men are. I will readily acknowledge that sexism affects men as well as women. I don't see how sexism against one sex makes sexism against the other sex any more acceptable. So far, regardless of subject matter, you have only been able to change the subject to gripe about women.


Can you actually give your opinion on the Obedient Wives' Club without changing the subject to "yes, but men blah blah blah"? Why don't you just start a men's rights group since that is the only subject you have any interest in?


Wrong, of course.  It is easy to find many threads on the forum regarding feminism and women's rights on which I have not posted, because they did not involve slandering men.  Either you are too lazy to actually check your facts before posting your opinion, or you were well aware of this and you are just flat out lying.

Also, I gave my opinion on the obedient wives club already.

Also, I am not interested in starting a "Men's Rights" group.  I'm an Equalist, and seek fair treatment and equal opportunity and respect regardless of gender.


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service