Friday, August 04, 2006

Wives not satisfying husbands are abusive!

Am fed up with wars and political intriques. How about a bit of sex, everyone? This news is about 2 weeks old, and had been held up by more dramatic news. But it's an amazing revelation for men. I have to 'fess up I have been and still am quite excited.

Kelantan deputy mufti Datuk Mohamad Shukri Mohamad
told Berita Harian that wives would be deemed to be unjust and abusive if they cannot satisfy their husbands' sexual needs.


He explained that in a marriage, it's not always the wives who were abused as it could also happen to the husbands. He advised that Islamic laws protect both women and men.

He warned:
“Thus wives who do not provide proper care for their husbands, including not fulfilling their sexual needs, can be considered as being unjust and abusive towards their husbands.”

“These women can be charged under Section 128 (1) of the Kelantan Islamic Law Enactment 2002, which provides for a fine of RM 1,000 or jail of up to six months or both upon conviction.”

Wow and double wow, though unfortunately he didn’t elaborate on how the courts would determine any husband’s claims of his wife failing to satisfy his sexual needs.

As we know, some men/husbands may have excessive sexual needs, so the poor wives could be required to perform to supranormal Herculean standards, you know, 'above and beyond' the call of duty.

Then there would be some who, like me, could be quite kinky* - blush blush, please don't tell anyone - which may well put some shy or conservative women off.

* No, absolutely not! Don’t ask me for details or elaborations, as there could be kids reading this posting. All I am prepared to say is there is a very very wide range of kinky-ness.

Would it then be fair to accuse those women of abusing their husbands if they fail to ... er ... participate ethusiastically? Whaaat! Did I just hear a disgraceful, unsympathetic but resounding 'YES' from the men?

But the mufti advised:
“However, to date, no husband has ever complained that his wife has failed to sexually satisfy him, although he has the right to do so.”

Hmmm, I wonder whether this could be due to utterly wonderful sex in Kelantan or a complete unawareness of Section 128 (1) of the Kelantan Islamic Law Enactment 2002.

Then, there could well be the possible (and favourable) impact of
budu, a question I posed in Has Aphrodisiac Budu Been Responsible? when I commented on less noble (in fact, despicable) cases of sexual encounters. I have always suspected budu as viagra by stealth, a sort of Indonesian jamu-jamu (herbal tonic) or Chinese ginseng..

But whichever, I reckon it’ll be a win-win situation for those lucky Kelantan blokes. I have taken a cutting of the article to show some very assertive ladies. I wonder whether those fiercesome cuties would go ballistic. Now, weren't we just discussing kinky-ness? ;-)


  1. The mufti not 'getting any'?

    He could always asks politely or get his Missy some bling-bling, that ought to git him 'some'.

  2. Another mutant mullah for My Asylum !

    Am sure Walski69 will say something in his blog.

  3. This reminds me of a joke. To use the feather of a duck is sensuous; to use a duck is kinky!

  4. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.