Ma Jun writes a response to Dr. Li Yinhe’s support of a policewoman who was dismissed after it was discovered she ran a swinger’s network with her husband . . . Lady’s swingers ring fuels debate on sex and marriage. Interesting to see how China’s take on such things is cyclic with a tendancy to have more time in the conservative end of the spectrum, this is particulalry interesting since many early communist thinkers espoused the very free love the swinger’s in their “anti-communist, anti-moral” activities are advocating while those self-same early communists were fighting against the same social conservatism that is now the defacto official view. Both sides of the argument in this case are being presented as more extremist than they actually are and the social compromise of actual practice is different. Li’s views are not merely what Ma has presented and they are much more socially responsbile than portrayed. Ma’s own views seem to be of control, and, if taken literally, would imply that premarital sex must also be legally controlled, proscribed, banned, and punished. Ma’s view is that anyone who consents to their partner having sex with others – swinging or polyamory or polygamy or whatnot – is inherently obviously not really in love with that person as true love controls, restricts, and limits freedom. Interesting take. Love is control. While I am not an advocate of unrestrained promiscuity, I do support the notion that informed consenting adults should be allowed to do whatever they wish behind closed doors as long as it is informed, consenting and follows those catchphrases of Safe, Sane, and Consensual. Yes, some of these people will find out they’ve made a grave mistake and that their relationships are damaged beyond repair . . . but they are adults and should be free to make those mistakes . . . if they are free to do so then perhaps they can get information from the community on how to minimize risks and how to make appropriate choices whereas controlled behaviors invariably go underground where they fester into much more pain and loss. Besides, Ma should certainly be aware that many people who behave monogamously also have terrible relationships that lead to awful conditions. Bad choices are not merely the realm of the open lifestyle folks, they are part of the human condition and allowing multiple variations of relationship styles to thrive allows folks with the appropriate dispositions to find the lifestyle that fits them . . . and does not harm society . . . especially if communities and networks are allowed to develop to offer mentoring, support, and safeguards.