In the China Daily today we learn of a web site set up to claim rights for mistresses of Chinese men:

Six months after it began, Zheng Baichun’s website (www.2n88.com), known for defending the rights of
er’nai, or mistresses, was deemed against the spirit of marital law by
a legal scholar, despite the fact that over 600 unfortunate women have resorted
to the website for help, wrote the Procuratorial Daily on Monday.

Zheng, a Beijing-based lawyer,
set up the website in June of this year offering legal services to any unmarried
women who had a stable sexual relationship with a married man who financially
supported them, or er’nai.

According to Zheng, the primary concern of his website is to defend the legal
rights of Chinese mistresses who are often afraid to rely on the law.

Mistresses are a vulnerable group. Many of them are either coerced or
convinced to become mistresses, and are often insulted or even beaten by
ungrateful men, are at the mercy of their wives impulses and suffer from social
discrimination. They are deprived of child support and suffer violations of
their right to property and privacy, Zheng told the paper.

"Compared with wives, who have a variety of channels through which to seek
help, mistresses have a more pathetic situation. They are afraid of claiming
their interests and rights, let alone turning to the court or women’s
federation," Zheng said.

      A couple of things come to mind here.  First, the mistress boom in China is the kind of thing that gives Confucianism a bad name.  The old patriarchal attitudes that authorized a man taking a concubine or second wife (er’nai), or a third or fourth "wife," are obviously still swirling around.  This way of thinking was also a part of the historical context within which Confucianism grew as a social philosophy.  Even those who find within Confucianism a deep vein of humane ideas and practices cannot deny that it was used in the past as an ideological tool to subjugate women.  There needs to be a clear and direct repudiation of gender inequality (and I think the abuse of mistresses falls under the rubric of "gender inequality") and injustice, if Confucianism is to find a place in modern moral philosophy.

     So let me hear all the modern Confucians out there: married gentlemen do not take mistresses; they figure out how to manage their sexuality within their marriages, because, after all, sexuality is not central to a Confucian social identity; the consistent performance of humane action toward each person we encounter is what matters most.

    Now that we’ve cleared that up, there is another notable element of this story: notice how the discourse centers on claiming rights:

"Whatever their role is, they should be entitled to the protection of their
basic rights as citizens," Zheng was quoted as saying. He added that those who
are mistresses solely for the money don’t come to him for help.

…..

Wang Xingjuan, director of a Beijing psychological service center for women
took issue with the name of the website. "Even if the mistresses are entitled to
property and privacy rights, these rights do not originate from the status
itself. Therefore, it is inappropriate to say the website is defending the
rights of er’nai, or mistresses. " Wang said.

  Both sides of the debate agree that er’nai have basic rights as citizens, and this includes property and privacy rights; the big point of difference is whether these rights inhere in the status of er’nai itself or are simply the same sorts of rights that all Chinese citizens enjoy.   

      Whatever you think of this discussion, you have to admit: it sounds classically liberal.  All we need to add is a neutral state arbiter weighing the contested claims and producing a procedurally reproducible outcome and, voila, you have something that John Locke and Adam Smith would recognize….. Now, if we could only work on that "neutral state arbiter" point, we might have a liberal China sooner than we know….