Teaching Women to Sex It Up Better Than Prostitutes June 11, 2011

Teaching Women to Sex It Up Better Than Prostitutes

This isn’t graphic, but it’ll disturb you…

In Malaysia, there’s a new group called the Obedient Wives Club. It’s designed to help women “serve their husbands better than a first-class prostitute.”

Inspiring, no…?

“A good or religious wife should also be good in bed,” [vice-president Dr Rohaya Mohamad] told reporters after the launch of the club’s Malaysian chapter at a golf club here yesterday.

She said a husband who was kept happy in the bedroom would have no reason to stray, seek out prostitutes or indulge in other social vices.

“The family institution is protected and we can curb social ills like prostitution, domestic violence, human trafficking and abandoned babies,” she said, adding that she believed these problems stemmed from unfulfilled sexual needs at home.

Wait, you can curb domestic violence by being obedient?! In other words, a disobedient wife deserves to be beaten?

Got it.

k0k bl0k sums it up like this:

… if a man goes out to whore and keep mistresses, it’s because his wife isn’t doing fulfilling her duty as his sex slave! I have long noticed this pattern in very religious societies; it’s always the women who have to shoulder the blame for the failings of men.

Mohamad speaks about the club (in English) in this video below (starting at the 1:18 mark):

Ugh. In case you need any more proof that this is all about pleasing men, it was started by an organization that also founded the Polygamy Club.

(via k0k bl0k)

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • in greece, i have often heard a saying that a proper wife is a lady in public and a whore in bed.

    the ‘obey’ thing isn’t very prominent, other than in a traditional orthodox wedding, where part of the ceremony says that the woman will fear the man, at which time, the woman sometimes steps on her man’s foot to indicate otherwise.

    when i was very young (a long time ago) it wasn’t uncommon for men to habitually hit their wives. i have personal experience of this from my own family. i witnessed a period of time when people began to fight against it, and now i rarely hear of such incidents — although i sometimes do, and i’ve ‘ear’-witnessed beatings.

    these ‘traditions’ are similar in christian and muslim societies — it’s only the effect of enlightenment values that have succeeded in repressing them among christians, whereas muslim societies still have a ways to go.

  • The funny thing is, I actually like this idea. I would totally attend a class taught by a professional escort giving sexual tips and tricks of the trade. I’m always down for learning how to improve my sexual experiences, and those women know a thing or two. I also see nothing wrong with a class that’s “all about pleasing men” because a fair number of us are married to men and actually enjoy doing things that make them happy. If there’s a little trick out there that’s gonna make him jump half a foot off the bed, I wanna know about it. If a male escort wants to teach a similar class geared toward pleasing women sexually (or FxF or MxM, whatever), right on!

    Of course, the problem doesn’t lie with the concept of teaching women how to be better lovers but rather in the way in which it’s being presented. The overtly religious overtones, the implications about being better in bed preventing domestic violence, the labeling of women as “whores”, etc.

  • Ryan

    Love is meaningless, apparently. Men only get married for the hot, steamy sex.

    Actually, that does explain why basically every fundamental Christian I knew in highschool was married less than two years after they graduated.

  • jose

    “A good or religious wife should also be good in bed”

    And apparently a good or religious husband should also be a total prick.

  • Religion has always made it the woman’s fault, from Eve on down.

    Though I hear people discussing this with a “At least that doesn’t happen here” I clearly recall the Clinton Impeachment where every day word on the street was that if Hillary had been better at pleasing her man, he wouldn’t have screwed everything in sight.

    This is one of the major unwritten laws of patriarchy, to keep the woman’s shoulder bowed, keep piling on the blame.

    People don’t stray because they aren’t happy in bed, they do it because they are cheaters. People don’t beat their spouses because they’re not satisfied with their sex life, they abuse because they’re abusers.

    This is all about giving men yet another free pass in their own behavior, that they can blame on women yet again.

  • Robert L.

    The fact that such fundamentalist clubs exist makes me glad I no longer live in Malaysia even if I do live just across the border. That’s secular, tolerant Singapore, though, which suits me just fine and has a 15% non-religious population.

    Still, if it were presented as a means to help both parties achieve fulfillment I wouldn’t be opposed to it. I suspect the wives wouldn’t be too upset either if that were the case. Unfortunately it’s phrased in a very misogynistic way, and that puts people off.

    Kudos to Hemant and Friendly Atheist for placing the spotlight on Malaysia, by the way, because it’s getting worse. Those concerned about the rise of international religious fundamentalism might want to watch that country. Alternatively if you just want a laugh at terrible government feel free to do it too.

  • chicago dyke

    i don’t need the class, but i generally agree with julie. there’s nothing wrong with a course for married people about how to spice up monogamous sex life. indeed, many monogamous couples could probably use one or two. obviously this example is a poor one as it puts all the pressure on the woman and seems completely unconcerned with men learning how to please their indentured baby maker house cleaners, i mean “wives.” and yeah, it’s not a woman’s fault when a man cheats. gosh that’s tired.

    what’s funny to me is that it’s the easiest thing in the world to please a man. i’m surprised by the number of women who don’t understand this. well, not surprised; women often don’t know exactly because they’re raised in patriarchal religious traditions that only teach fear, shame and ignorance about human sexuality to women. but compared to women? men are simple, childlike creatures, sexually speaking. the key word with men: repetition. up and down, in and out, round and round (the prostate, testicles)… it’s really not that hard. back in the days when i did men regularly, i learned that trick early on. find out what he likes best (and that doesn’t take long: it’s always oral, anal, or vaginal) and give it to him until he gets there. sure, sometimes it takes some stamina, and sometimes you get a guy who doesn’t really want you and thus can’t get it up because he’s thinking about another man or a child or something you are not as a woman. but assuming you are a woman with a het man? no, they are not hard to please, at all. actually, imho the reason some men can’t ejaculate or get hard has much, much more to do with diet and health problems, than attraction or skill of their adult female partners. men are affected by factors like stress, poor diet, hell even caffeine or alcohol will make a man unable to perform. it’s social pressure and patriarchal convention that make them blame their female partners and come up with all this BS about “you don’t know how to please me and need to be a virgin whore before i can have an orgasm.’ fear is another big factor. what is it called? “performance anxiety” iirc. which is a fancy way of saying, “she’ll think my penis is smaller than other men she’s known, and she’ll laugh at it, and at me when i come inside of a minute because i lack good control.” so many poor male het lovers can be reduced to that simple fear.

  • Well, CD, that was a lovely little masandrist rant.

  • Shells

    @ CD : Yeah, as a man, I can tell you that my sexual taste is much more complex than what you’re describing.

    We in the atheist community have been trying so hard lately to fight sexism, which has primarily been the sexism of men against women. Please, let’s not make the mistake of allowing it the other way around, either!

  • Robert Thille

    So, um, women should form a club to teach men to work during the day in public, and cook and clean and put the seat down at home? 🙂

  • *ahem* something that Hemant will not learn from public schooling – real prostitution and sex work

    I defer you to Nerd’s Guide to Sex:

    We are the descendants of three billion years of fucking. Our parents fucked to create us. Their parents fucked to create them. Every generation is the result of the fucking of the previous generation. Everything all the way down to bacteria wants to fuck something. Even plants want to fuck. That’s what flowers are. Flowers are the organs that plants use to fuck with. Fucking is the way advanced life reproduces on this planet. Where there is no fucking, life ceases to exist. Life depends on fucking. That’s the way it is.

    – Nerd’s Guide to Sex (by Marc Perkel, founder of the Church of Reality)



    Since Hemant likes to poo-poo on spirituality, perhaps he should learn from a Goddess that used etheogens (god invoking substances) and would give insight to that Atheist Conondrum: What Do Atheists Scream During Sex?


    How Psychedelics Informed My Sex Life and Sex Work
    Annie Sprinkle

    “Few things feel better than getting high and getting laid.” – David Jay Brown, author of “The ABC’s of Erotic Alchemy,” Hustler Magazine, April 2000

    I was invited to speak at the AllChemical Arts Conference–a week-long event about entheogens and creativity, to be held in a resort hotel in Hawai’i in 1999. I was surprised to be invited, because I had not been a particularly outspoken advocate for these substances. Being a sex worker (call girl/porn actress and director), who often did interviews with the media–especially as I evolved into a controversial performance artist and sex educator–I was routinely trying to debunk the myth that all sex workers were hopeless drug addicts. Fortunately, I have never been a drug addict, but indeed I have tried most every popular drug at least three times.
    I was curious about what a conference dedicated to entheogens might be like, and curious about the people who would attend such a conference, so I accepted the invitation to speak. It was as I was preparing my presentation for the illuminati of the psychedelic world that I realized what a profound, and positive impact my psychedelic experiences had had on my life, and in particular, on my sex life. In an aha! moment, it became clear that psychedelics had been perhaps my greatest sex educator.

    Other Drugs
    MDMA / Ecstasy
    Psilocybian Mushrooms

    Conclusion: Sex and Psychedelics

    Clearly my experiences with psychedelics have been educational and beneficial with regard to my own sexuality and my life’s work. From my observations, these psychoactive drugs have not been harmful in any way for me, or for the people I know who have used them. Terence McKenna pointed out that: “The profundity of [hallucinogenic inebriation] and its potential for a positive feedback into the process of reorganizing the personality should have long ago made psychedelics an indispensable tool for psychotherapy.”3
    And I might add, a tool for sex therapy. Oddly enough, I have not found a whole lot written about psychedelics in relation to sex, when to me they seem so totally interconnected.
    From what I have gathered, psychedelics are generally not used much as aphrodisiacs for sexual arousal–although people do report having phantastasmagorical sexual experiences on them. More often the user gains some key information, has a new experience, or sees her/himself from a new perspective, and any of this can greatly inform that person’s sexual life. Just as each sexual experience can potentially teach us something about sex, each drug experience can potentially teach us something about sex. And for that matter, sexual experiences can potentially teach us something about how to take drug trips more effectively. As I became more sexually experienced, I became much better at handling my psychedelic journeys. I learned how to not have expectations, and how to surrender.

  • jose

    About what Julie said. If one day my girlfriend started doing some kinky stuff I don’t know about I would be completely weirded out.

    (…the fuck?) Whoa whoa what are you doing there?
    – Doesn’t that feel good?
    – This is so not like you. What’s this all about?
    – Someone told me you would enjoy it.
    – o_O
    – …no?
    – I enjoy you and me doing this together. How about asking me what I do or do not like?

  • jose

    Please note the dialogue above works equally well if you flip characters so the woman is the first one speaking. It works if it’s two men or two women, too. Love is love, people is people regardless of sexual orientation. You get to know people and trust them by talking to them, not to someone else.

  • JenV

    Rights of a Husband:

    “When the husband calls his wife, she should go immediately to him even if she is busy at her stove.” In other words, no matter how important a task she may be busy with, she should leave it and go to him.

    IOW, at any and all times, make sure you’re hot and ready and awesome in the sack, so you husband won’t beat you, go see a prostitute or have a mistress on the side. Damn women, it’s all your fault…the men have no culpability, as they are most definitely just creatures of biology, and slaves to their sexuality.

    Fuck this bullshit and the horse it rode in on. This whole women servicing men in order to make them happy, even at the women’s expense, not matter what context is just pure evil, and it makes me want to vomit.

  • jose: You’re assuming I wouldn’t tell my husband about the class or discuss the subject material with him and if it sounds like something he’d like to try. Because naturally attending a dirty, naughty sex class is something I’d keep a secret and titter about with my girlfriends over cosmos and then spring on him unawares in the midst of coitus. Seriously?

    Of course we talk about the things we like/don’t like and have completely open communication about sex. That said, there’s nothing wrong with going to an outside source for fresh material and new ideas.

  • Michelle

    ick. This is just so sad. It breaks my heart to see women doing this to themselves. The double ‘victimization’ (for lack of a better word) of being treated like the slaves then being the ones to further propagate such destructive beliefs is just horrible.
    What about the men? Can they ever be happy on their own or responsible for their own actions if women are taking on the role of being all things for them?

  • Meg

    I’m with Julie. The post headline had me cheering for sex positivity. Of course, the content is all about control, obedience, blame, abuse, and manipulation. I vote for less awesome headlines for bad ideas.

  • chicago dyke

    ok, didn’t mean to offend or be sexist; i guess folks are misunderstanding me. men are simpler, that doesn’t make them “lesser” or “worse” or sexually uninteresting or any negative implication, which i certainly didn’t mean. i was simply talking about the difference in the sexual organs and sexual response between males and females, as well as the much more complex social issues relating to what sexual expectations men vs women are raised to have of themselves, and their partners.

    women are taught, in patriarchal societies, that having orgasm, or expecting to have one, or even enjoying or thinking about sex positively, is wrong… for them. men are taught that orgasm is their birthright, that women of all sorts, be they the partner to a man or just a woman walking down the street, are there to please them sexually and required to do whatever it takes to bring a man to orgasm. sure, not all guys are the same. and certainly many men have complex sexuality that requires much more than physical stimulation in order to achieve satisfaction. men can be loving, giving partners and lots of them are. but i thought we were talking about patriarchal religious societies like the post topic. in that sense, i don’t think you all can deny that complex, giving, loving, two way sexuality is not what is posited that women expect from men. similarly, the idea that a class like this exists to teach women to be like ‘whores’ suggests a lack of sexual sophistication on the part of the men who are having their wives be ‘educated’ about this stuff.

    sorry if you guys were offended; we talk like this on the gay blog i read all the time and i guess i’m used to frank sex talk between queers and not slightly more sensitive folks on the atheist blog. my bad.

  • chicago dyke

    and for the record: i am extremely sex-positive and i have very wide ranging experience. i have slept with literally hundreds of men, intergendered folk and women, and while i have not worked as a sex worker, i was offered the job by a very upscale and professional outfit that only employ experienced and sex educated women. again, just because it is usually easier for a woman to bring a man to orgasm than it is the other way around doesn’t make women better, smarter, or sexier sex partners. it’s simply that the female anatomy and psychology relating to orgasm is more complex. sort of like the difference between making say, a cup of tea, or making a bottle of wine. both have value and both have drawbacks.

  • jose

    I’m sorry Julie. A sex class is so alien a concept for me and I understood it as an alternative way to know the other person rather than as a source of fresh ideas to explore together. Maybe if it was a class for couples it could be good…I still don’t see the point though, would we go to a class to know what kind of food we like, or what sort of activities we have fun doing? Why not just, you know, explore each other? I’m probably missing something.

  • CD: No one is offended because you talk about sex frankly, so please get off your high horse. We were offended because you reduced male sexuality to insert, thrust, repeat. It would be the same as if a man reduced female orgasm to find clitoris, apply tongue, repeat. You were dismissive and arrogant and reduced an entire gender to an insulting oversimplification. No one cares about your credentials or how many people you’ve slept with. Simply don’t be so condescending in the future.

    jose: Compare it more to taking a culinary skills or wine/food-tasting class. You might find that you like certain foods better because you hadn’t tried them prepared the right way or simply hadn’t tried them at all before.

  • Luther

    Why oh why do Senators and Representatives seem to get such bad wives?

  • Min

    sort of like the difference between making say, a cup of tea, or making a bottle of wine.

    If you’re implying what I think you’re implying, I know a number of tea connoisseurs who would be offended by that implication.

  • Larry Meredith

    everyone should be good in bed.

    but a spouse that isn’t pleasing you is no excuse for misbehavior, obviously.

    what if treating you spouse as your personal sex slave is your fantasy? is there something wrong with that?

  • I was so excited to see such a positive-looking post… and then, nope, sexist craziness.

    As other people have said, I’ve got no issue with a club or class or what have you to learn more about your partner’s or your own sexuality, but when it reinforces such malicious sexist ideals… Well.

    Case of a decent idea with a flawed execution, and with some completely terrible reasoning behind it, I guess.

  • I’m a simple man. All I need is chicago dyke’s 48×48 pixel image. 😉

  • Alex

    Really Hemant? Comparing polygamy to sexism? And yet we complain when evangelists compare homosexuality to pedophillia. Last time I checked, polygamy hurt no one.

  • Anonymous

    Last time I checked, polygamy hurt no one.

    Uh, no. It’s sexist, emotionally abusive, nastily patriarchal, hard on the children, results in discarded “extra” boys, and frequently comes along with coerced marriage, poverty, and physical and sexual abuse. See FLDS, or:


  • @Alex

    Really Hemant? Comparing polygamy to sexism? And yet we complain when evangelists compare homosexuality to pedophillia. Last time I checked, polygamy hurt no one.

    Polygamy as practiced by Muslims is sexist. I don’t remember women being allowed to have four husbands, do you?

  • Pseudonym

    In other words, a disobedient wife deserves to be beaten?

    Nope. The quoted statement doesn’t say that “a disobedient wife deserves” anything at all.

    What they did say was bad enough to condemn them. We don’t also have to put words in their mouth.

  • @Pseudonym

    Nope. The quoted statement doesn’t say that “a disobedient wife deserves” anything at all.


    One of the pioneers of the club, Mrs. Maznah Taufik said, “Domestic abuse happens because wives don’t obey their husband’s orders.”

  • Jessica

    What about polyandry then?

  • Alex

    Is there a club that teaches men how to better please their girlfriends/wives? Sign me up!

  • Alex

    Polygamy as practiced by Muslims is sexist. I don’t remember women being allowed to have four husbands, do you?

    Well obviously I’m not talking about that particular breed, but polygamy in general. Apoligies if I wasn’t clear on that. Muslim-styley polygamy definately is abusive.

  • JulietEcho

    Hemant, *please* hop back off the bandwagon of lumping “polygamy” all together and equating it with abuse. I’ll go ahead and post the entire part of the article I posted (that you linked to here) that’s relevant:

    “Polyamory? That’s okay, as long as isn’t going on.”

    Underage marriages. Forced marriages. Abusive marriages. Polyamory is just swell, as long as it’s not underage, forced, and/or abusive polyamory! While the reaction based on historical connections is understandable, it’s a non-sequitur. When you find out that someone is marrying the woman of their dreams, you don’t say, “That’s great, as long as you don’t plan on beating your new wife!” There’s a long, horrible history of socially-acceptable violence against women, not to mention the centuries during which they were treated as property. This doesn’t, however, mean that we’re obliged to point out that it’s unacceptable every time we find out about a man and a woman in a romantic relationship. No one should have to clarify that their polyamorous relationship is abuse-free, any more than someone in a relationship with a woman should have to clarify that they don’t plan on treating her like property.
    Some even argue that we should criminalize polyamory, or never acknowledge poly relationships as a normal part of society, because it would benefit abusers who force underage girls to marry them. This is beyond ridiculous – the fact that pedophiles are out there hasn’t led us to outlaw sex, and the fact that thieves are out there hasn’t led us to outlaw property ownership. There are still abusive relationships, pedophiles, and forced arranged monogamous marriages all over the world – are these things okay as long as they only involve two people? Should we outlaw one-on-one marriages so that we aren’t providing a framework for abusive husbands, forced arranged marriages, marital rape, etc? The solution isn’t to penalize polyamorous relationships – it’s to crack down on the abuse of women, whether they’re being abused singly or in groups.

    And you can just replace “polyamory” with “polygamy” in there, and I still stand by it.

  • Pseudonym


    One of the pioneers of the club, Mrs. Maznah Taufik said, “Domestic abuse happens because wives don’t obey their husband’s orders.”

    Still reprehensible, but still nothing which even vaguely resembles “deserves”. That word came from Hemant, not this group.

  • Sinfanti

    It’s interesting how adding religion to the idea of teaching women how to better please their men so they won’t stray makes this a big topic. Have we all forgotten that magazines like Cosmo have articles to this effect every single month?

    And Jeff has a point, CD’s picture is great. What a smile! FYI CD, I’m a man and not the least offended by what you wrote (kinda tame compare to some of the Cosmo I’ve read).

  • I haven’t read the comments yet but don’t any of the Malaysian husbands have similar concerns for their wives: i.e. “A good or religious husband should also be good in bed…She said a wife who was kept happy in the bedroom would have no reason to stray, seek out prostitutes or indulge in other social vices.”

    I don’t know about the rest of you fellas but I like to please my partner sexually. It is much more satisfying and interesting that way. Sex should be fun, not something that you do to keep your partner from cheating. It isn’t supposed to be a chore and if it is then you’re probably doing something wrong.

  • @Pseudonym

    I can argue that that’s what the group is implying with that statement. Also let’s read into the Qur’anic teachings which their philosophy is based on,

    “Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband’s] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance – [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand.”

    Verse 34, Surat An-Nisa’ (The Women), al-Qur’an

    Allah is the one who commands wives to be obedient to their husbands. In the same breadth, he also legitimises the beating of disobedient wives. So yes, I’d go as far as to say that it’s very likely that the group does think that battered wives had it coming to them.


    That’s a false analogy. No one here opposes the idea of sex classes for women. No one think that wives shouldn’t try to please their husbands (and vice versa). The problem with this group’s philosophy is that they blame the failings of men on their wives, including infidelity and domestic abuse.

    Surely, Cosmo made no such mysogynistic statements.

  • What Juliet said: Thanks for schooling Hemant. 😉

  • Sinfanti

    @ James – Point taken. Thanks.

  • Pseudonym

    @James: My point is simple. What they said is bad enough without putting words in their mouth.

    Did they quote that sura? Did they say what they think it means? If not, it’s irrelevant to this discussion, because it’s based on what you assume they are saying, not what they are actually saying.

    Hell, you might even be right that they think that women in some category “deserve” something. But you have no evidence on which to base such a claim.

    This isn’t hard to understand. It’s Critical Thinking 101, in fact. Attack what they did claim, not what you think they claimed.

error: Content is protected !!