Wonderful sex

Sweet dahleeng kaytee is just like all Malaysian red-blooded males, in that we love ... er ... sex, yes we do, though not to the extent of discussing our 'love' in public, wakakaka.

Thus in a way I admire the Muslim clerics who talk openly and publicly about yummy and not so yummy sex.

In Malay Mail Online's Muslim husbands can’t ‘pull out’ during sex without wife’s consent, says Perlis mufti, we have been informed by the mufti that:

... a Muslim husband is obliged to fulfil his wife’s sexual desires, to the point that he should not even perform coitus interruptus without consent from the wife.

Weighing in on the marital rape debate, the Perlis mufti said that despite the obligation, sexual relations between husbands and wives must happen in a “harmonious situation” without physically harming each other.

“Rough and painful sex is forbidden in Islam. Therefore, all couples must find the best sexual method that fulfils the personal desires of both parties,” the mufti said on his official Facebook page.

“Although the act is allowed in the hadith, it must receive consensus from the wife since the wife might have yet to savour the intercourse. This shows that forced and rough intercourse that is not enjoyed by one party is indeed forbidden in marriage,” Mohd Asri said of coitus interruptus.

By the by, MM Online tells us that 'Coitus interruptus refers to the act of withdrawing the penis from the vagina before ejaculation as a form of birth control during sexual intercourse.'

It's just marvelous that Dr Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin is looking after the interests of women on matters of conjugal union. Contrast his balanced advice to the one from Kelantan about 10 years ago.

Yes if can recall, in 2006 the mufti of Kelantan, Mohamad Shukri Mohamad, then only as the deputy mufti of Kelantan, told Berita Harian that wives would be deemed to be unjust and abusive if they cannot satisfy their husbands' sexual needs.

See the difference with Dr Asri's caution to hubbies?

Wakakaka, and which has been why I applaud Dr Asri's advice because prior to his recent statement, it's always women who have been blamed and bullied, even on matters of conjugal interaction.

Mind, the Kelantan religious edict was not unlike what our world-famous Perak Mufti, Harussani told us, that Muslim men can always have sexual intercourse with their spouses even if the latter did not agree, saying that a Muslim woman has “no right” to reject her husband’s demand.

And it may be timely at this juncture to remind ourselves of what Dr Asdri has just said, that “Although the act is allowed in the hadith, it must receive consensus from the wife since the wife might have yet to savour the intercourse. This shows that forced and rough intercourse that is not enjoyed by one party is indeed forbidden in marriage.”

But alas in Perak, to pound home his authoritative warning to wives, the Mufti just had to drop names, that of the Prophet (pbuh). Quoting the Prophet (pbuh) Harussani said that couples, even when riding on the back of the camel, have to have sex whenever the husband demands of the wife an immediate conjugal "union" - no ifs nor buts.

dromedary camel 

Yes, our remarkable mufti was talking about doing it right on the back of the dromedary, and not about dismounting (excuse the unintended pun) to "roll in" the hay desert sand. After all, the camel is also known as the ship of the desert, thus it would be a "romp" on a "love boat".

In this sense, Chinese Muslims have an advantage - stop dreaming Ridhuan (wakakaka) as I'm referring to those in NW China - as the camels that live in their domain are Bactrian camels and not the dromedary species which the Arabs have - see photo to know what I mean, wakakaka. The Bactrians are virtually built like 'love machines' and true 'love boats' of the desert, wakakaka

Thus, if mufti Harussani is thinking of importing camels into Malaysia to make his point in any 'show & tell' I would strongly recommend the Chinese- Central Asian Bactrian camel, where one can get two humps (excuse the unintended pun, wakakaka) instead of a mere one, wakakaka again.

Of course Harussani also said that there’s no such thing as rape in marriage as that silly belief was conceived by European people and therefore there was no necessity for Malaysians Muslims to follow such a stupid idea.

But let's now return to the Kelantan religious edict on wives being potentially abusive to their hubbies' sexual needs.

In his (note ‘his’ and not 'the') most brilliant exposition of Islamic doctrines, mufti Mohamad Shukri Mohamad 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."

But in a manner not unusual of either important big shots (CEOs, ministers, preachers, etc) or impossible big bullshitters, he skipped the details, yup, by neglecting to elaborate on how the syariah courts would determine any husband’s claims of his wife abusive failings to satisfy his sexual needs as per, wakakaka, Section 128 (1) of the Kelantan Islamic Law Enactment 2002.

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

Dahleeng, use a Kryptonite to 'soften' his super sex needs

wakakaka  

If their wives cannot satisfy their super sexual needs, would those poor wives be still deemed as unjust and abusive by this mufti as per, wakakaka again, Section 128 (1) of the Kelantan Islamic Law Enactment 2002?

But truthfully, I would be very interested in how he would impartially gauge that a husband has attained sexual satisfaction in his legal act of consummation.

I've been informed that in the West it's supposedly measured by how loud the man (or woman) screams 'OH GOD', wakakaka again.

perhaps inspiring the drafting of an Enactment

wakakaka

Or would he just rely on the hubby's say-so, that the undutiful wife should be jailed for 6 months while hubby gets a new young doll of a wife?

Poor Malaysian Muslim women.

And it seems SEX SEX SEX would always be in the picture if you were to read Malaysiakini's K'tan deputy MB admits error on 'unnatural sex'.

We gather from Kelantan's Deputy MB Mohd Amar Nik Abdullah said last year that: "Some scholars argue that since wives belong to their husbands, their husbands can do as they like."

The wife belongs to the husband and he can do as he likes? Wow. Incidentally, the deputy MB of Kelantan was referring to anal sex between the married couple.

And he added that this wife-as-a-chattel (mere property) comes from the differences of interpretation of the Quranic verse which states that "wives are tilths for their husbands", and therefore, they can approach their wives in any sexual manner they choose.

And on that let me remind wives that the Mufti of Kelantan, Mohamad Shukri Mohamad had already warned that "... 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."

I've to admit I'm jealous of Muslims as they have such wonderful priests standing strongly as their Guardians of Men's Sexual Needs.

Ain't sex just wunderbar?