My Guangdong mistress is fuming, FUMING mad over this proposed law.

This is exactly what China needs: another law that nobody will respect and that will be enforced completely selectively.

Marriage is, in fact, a legal contract between two people. It is also a moral contract in which two people are bound to uphold. By creating a law outlawing mistresses is silly, because you already have all the laws surrounding marriage.

Your comment: People in China (and around the world) have been enjoying extra-marital sex since time immemorial. Outlawing such common, long-standing behavior is like outlawing human nature.

What is the point in marriage, then? If you have entered into the contract of marriage, and you enjoy the 'common' thrills...what is the point of it all?

It's attitudes such as yours that has destroyed the institution of marriage around the world...and its a damn shame.

It's amazing that they consider er nai's as a "new problem."

How absolutely ridiculous.

There are a couple of non seq's in your piece:
- Why is the law too broad? Shouldn't a law involving extra-marital sex apply to everyone with spouses? Are you suggesting one law for officials and another for ordinary folk?
- if a law is selectively enforced then it's a bad law? Virtually all law is selectively enforced, and in many cases is subject to political interference. It doesn't happen in the West? How about the recently dropped fraud case in the UK involving a Saudi arms deal. It has more to do with the processes around the law than the law itself.
-The law doesn't belong in the bedroom? Statutory rape, date rape, prostitution all happen 'in the bedroom'. You can debate the relative evils of those acts but they are almost on a continuum on which you could include keeping a mistress.

>>What is the point in marriage, then?

Good question GZ Expat!

Unfortunately you don't even try to answer it -- that would have been amusing! Instead, you follow up with the beautifully grammatical:

>>It's attitudes such as yours that has destroyed the institution of marriage around the world...and its a damn shame.

No, what has destroyed the institution of marriage is that marriage is a bad idea poorly executed. That and the fact that for most of its "life" the "institution" of marriage gave a man complete freedom to abuse his "property" in any way he saw fit.

Marriage is dead. Good riddance.

"Public morals" laws never work (Prohibition, the "war on drugs", prostitution being "illegal") and usually cause far more harm than any debatable "good".

I'm 100% behind Maya ---- this is simply bad law.

Sorry to be a party-pooper, but as much as I enjoy supporting as many women as I can afford, governments do have an obligation to legislate human behavior. In addition, this legislation is key to orderly estate administration. With the increase of the middle class, the court battles between wives and mistresses and their respective children will also be increasing, expensive and a waste of precious judicial resources. Can you imagine millions of such cases clogging the courts' dockets, and becoming a mainstay of Chinese life, as gin was in England in the early 1700's? Not very healthy to a society. And how about all those who would attempt to resolve matters extrajudicially, via gangsters and murder and other mayhem?
Sorry to disagree, especially in this area where my own interests and enjoyments are so at stake, but afraid the law is for the best.

Again with missing the wood for the trees!

Todd L. Platek writes:

>>Can you imagine millions of such cases clogging the courts' dockets

Indeed I can. Which, of course, should prompt a review of the existing laws and systems, not the creation of new laws attempting to crowbar the state into human relationships.

Perhaps a system of Family Courts like many jurisdictions have, with clear guidelines like "best interest of the child trumps all" and/or "common law marriages (ie. keeping a mistress for more than a year) are bigamy".

Perhaps, if you are still pining for the govt. to "go medieval" and try to legislate against love affairs and similar things, you would support draconian "default estate" provisions to (strongly) encourage will-making in China?

Now that would be good bad law, rather than this bad bad law.

Shan, if you think China's relatively few existing statutes can cover such legal complexities, maybe that's an indicator of how slow change may actually occur. The civil law system in China needs massive attention, and simply adding catch-phrases about the best interests of this one or that one won't do the trick. Yes, if someone dies intestate, then there has to be a well-considered estate administration set of statutes. That's not draconian, just the normal development of law to meet the needs of a changing society.

@Shan
I don't see why the idea of Marriage should be nulled. Apart from the mores and values of society and individual beliefs, marriage provides a foundation on which a family is build. Are you going to tell me that children born or adopted into two loving parents are less well off then one where there there are multiple wives/mistress and husbands/studs? I don't think I need to go indepth as to what problems a child will experience in those situations. Marriage is by itself, a great idea; where it goes awry is how people carried it out. I don't believe you should go blatantly in marriage with out some thought and once entered, one should uphold the bargain. It may not be smooth sailing from the getgo, but I do think it's worthwhile. I don't get this quote "That and the fact that for most of its "life" the "institution" of marriage gave a man complete freedom to abuse his "property" in any way he saw fit. Unless you are a extreme feminist, I don't see how you can come up with that. Marriage is an agreement and a broadcast of love between two equal (more or less) partners, and that is what I subscribe to. You are sounding like once a woman is married, she lose control of her former life and be readily abused. A few bad apples shouldn't spoil the whole bunch. You are a little too cynical.